1943 - National Labor Relations Board

52 " Eighth Annual Report of the National Labor Relations Boardthe Board considers the record made and determines whether or notthe election should be set aside. Typical instances of conduct requiringthat an election be set aside are activity of supervisory employeeson behalf of one of the unions, threats or intimidation by supervisorsduring the period preceding the election, anti-union propaganda distributedto the employees by the employer, and prohibited electioneeringor physical coercion by a union involved. The Board has also setaside an election where one of the labor organizations involved distributedsample ballots bearing the name of the Regional Director,thereby giving rise to the erroneous impression that the Board waslending its support to one of the contestants." Where an election isset aside because of interference, the Board' as a general rule providesthat when it is advised by the Regional Director that circumstances aresuch as to permit a free election, it will order a new election to be held.However, where if found that the employees may have been misledby the manner in which a union's name appeared upon the ballot, theBoard set aside the election and promptly ordered another.42Since early in the administration of the Act the Board has uniformlyheld, in conformity with the rule prevailing in political elections, thata "majority" means a majority of the eligible voters participating inthe election; it has therefore certified a union even though the unionhas not received a majority of the total number of eligible votes.However, this rule is qualified by the requirement that a representativenumber of eligible employees participate. Where less than amajority of the eligibles participated but a substantial number votedand all of those eligible were given adequate opportunity to vote, theBoard certified the union receiving a majority of the votes cast.43However, where three employees were eligible to vote and only oneemployee voted and cast his ballot for the union, the Board held thatthe result was not representative and refused to certify."The Board also, through its Regional Directors, frequently conductsconsent elections on terms which have been agreed to by the employerand the unions involved. These elections are of two types: those providingfor certification of the results by the Board, and those merelyproviding for a report by the Regional Director of the results to theparties. While the Board's experience has indicated that an electionis generally the most effective and satisfactory method of resolvingrepresentation disputes in cases where the parties agree to certificationon the basis of evide nce of representation introduced into therecord or on the basis of a check of membership records or cards againstthe employer's pay roll, the Board may and does certify without conductingan election.Matter of Sears Roebuck & Company. 47 N. L. R. B. 291.41 matter of Douglas Aircraft Company (El Segundo Division), 51 N. L. R. B. 161; Matter of Certain TeedProducts Corp., 49 N. L. R. B. 360.43 Matter of Central Dispensary & Emergency Hospital, 46 N. L. R. B. 437.44 Matter of KendaU Coal Company, 41 N. L. R. B. 395.