Opinion ID: 715784
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Local 131's New Election Petition and Local 100's Second Employee Petition

Text: 12 On April 2, 1991, after the expiration of Local 100's sixty-day insulated period, Local 131 again filed an election petition with the NLRB seeking to represent Katz's employees. On April 4, Local 131 sent Katz's a telegram claiming that Local 131 had been designated by Katz's employees as their majority representative. Katz's co-owner Austin scheduled a meeting for April 11, the day after the expiration of the extension agreement, with a commissioner of the New York State Mediation Board to verify Local 131's majority status by examining the authorization cards Local 131 had collected in January. 13 On April 9, Tim Lynch of Local 100 visited Katz's to secure employee support for Local 100 and to discourage Local 131 from its organizing campaign. Lynch again told the employees that Katz's and Local 100 had reached a contract. According to Lynch, they were instructed that it did not contain a pay raise, that a strike would be called if they did not approve it, that Local 131 would not adequately represent them, and that if the employees selected Local 131, they might lose their pension benefits. Lynch obtained nineteen signatures on a second employee petition stating the following: 14 We, the undersigned members of Local 100 employed at Katz's Delicatessen have approved the recently negotiated contract between Katz Deli and Local 100. This was ratified by a majority of us on Saturday, March 30, 1991. 15 A committee of workers selected by us participated in the negotiation meetings and we were fully informed every step of the way. 16 We are in no way interested in any other labor organization representing us, other than H.E.R.E. Local 100. 17 According to the Katz's employees who testified on behalf of their employer, Lynch never presented them with a written contract, never explained its terms, told them that Local 131 was a ghost union, and threatened them with loss of their jobs and their pensions if they did not sign in support of Local 100.