Opinion ID: 185101
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Mixed manual-mail balloting

Text: 28 According to S 11336.1 of the Board's Case handling Manual, in a  'mixed' manual-mail election ballots should not be mailed to those [employees] on layoff status unless all parties agree. The Company argues that the Board abused its discretion by mailing ballots, over the Company's objection, to seasonal employees who were not employed on the date of the election. 29 We note first that the Case handling Manual does not bind the Board; it is intended merely to provide guidance to the Board's staff. See Kwik Care Ltd., 82 F.3d at 1126. Therefore, the relevant question is whether, quite apart from the Manual, the Board acted unreasonably. The answer is obvious: Having decided to include in the representation election seasonal employees who were eligible under the special formula validly adopted in this case, the Board reasonably determined that mail was the only effective way to reach employees who were not in the Sitka area when the election was held, about three months after the peak season. Had the Board upheld the Company's objection to the mail ballots then it would have denied 41 otherwise eligible seasonal employees the chance to vote. The Board's use of the mixed balloting system was a reasonable attempt to avoid the predictably substantial disenfranchisement that would otherwise have occurred. We therefore reject the Company's challenge on this issue.