Opinion ID: 2995649
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Mechanic’s Cards

Text: We find that, unlike the Union’s unconditional reduction of initiation fees and dues, its offer of Mechanic’s cards to River City employees, when several (if not all) of those employees had not completed the requisite courses or exams, violated the dictates of Savair and effectively bought employee endorsements during its election campaign. 414 U.S. at 277. The Union’s Standard Agreement is unambiguous. In order to become a fully qualified Mechanic (and receive a Mechanic’s Card), an individual must have successfully completed the required NEIEP courses, and [have] passed a Mechanic’s Examination administered by the NEIEP Director’s Office. IUEC Standard Agreement, p. 51. While it is difficult to quantify the value of receiving a Mechanic’s card without having to attend classes or take an exam, we ask [a]re the articles sufficiently valuable and desirable in the eyes of the person to whom they are offered, to have the potential to influence that person’s vote? Nestle Ice Cream Co. v. NLRB, 46 F.3d 578, 583 (6th Cir. 1995). The NLRB has refused to certify elections where, during the course of an election campaign, the benefit offered to employees appeared to be of far less value. See, e.g., Owens- Illinois, Inc., 271 N.L.R.B. 1235, 1236- 37 (gift of union jackets); Wagner Elec. Corp., 167 N.L.R.B. 532, 533 (1967) (union’s gift of life insurance coverage is a tangible economic benefit and is most ’unusual’); Mailing Services, Inc., 293 N.L.R.B. 565 (1989) (free medical screenings given by union to employees during the election campaign found to be impermissible). In this case, the NLRB hearing officer, whose findings were subsequently adopted by the Board, determined that no election violation had occurred because the benefits the Union extended to River City employees were not conditioned upon their support of the Union. This finding fails to consider the fact that the gift in this case was far different from removing a barrier to employees joining the Union. By granting the River City employees the immediate privileges attendant upon a Mechanic’s card (i.e., ability to work as a full Mechanic in practically any IUEC controlled site), the Union opened up an entire class of jobs to these individuals. In this sense, the extension of Mechanic’s cards, without the obligation to fulfill training and examination requirements, moves beyond the reduction of initiation fees or dues. River City employees were affirmatively given access to more lucrative jobs at a far lesser cost. At the very least, this gift, in the context of a hotly contested election campaign, smacked of a ’purchase’ of votes because the Union[ ] had no responsibility to provide these Mechanic’s cards. Nestle Ice Cream Co., 46 F.3d at 584. Furthermore, it appears that River City employees could have perceived (quite rightly) that they were receiving ’something for nothing,’ and [that] the ’something’ was quite valuable. Id. (internal citations omitted). The Board has consistently stated that, during an election to determine representation, voting is to occur in a laboratory in which an experiment may be conducted, under conditions as nearly ideal as possible, to determine the uninhibited desires of employees. In re General Shoe Corp., 77 N.L.R.B. 124, 127 (1948). In the instant case, where representation was decided by one vote and gifts of substantial value were offered by the Union as part of its campaign, we find that laboratory conditions did not exist. In light of the above, we conclude that the NLRB did not act reasonably in certifying the Union as the bargaining agent of River City’s employees. Furthermore, we find that the Board’s factual findings that the Union did not interfere with employees’ free choice in the election by improperly offering gifts is not supported by substantial evidence in the record as a whole.