09/05/2025: Region Dismisses Representation Case to Pursue Bargaining Order
Another application of Cemex.
Everyday Mechanical Corp., 29-RC-335432 (Regional Election Decision)
This regional election decision addresses a representation petition filed by Plumbers Local Union No. 1 against Everyday Mechanical Corp. The Union initially sought recognition as the exclusive bargaining representative for plumbers and helpers at the employer's Glendale, New York location. After the employer refused recognition, the Union filed its petition on February 8, 2024.
The NLRB conducted an election on March 15, 2024, resulting in 4 votes for the Union, 3 votes against, and 1 challenged ballot that was sufficient to affect the election results. The Union subsequently filed multiple unfair labor practice charges against the employer, alleging violations of Section 8(a)(1) and (3) of the National Labor Relations Act.
On May 19, 2025, the Regional Director issued a Consolidated Complaint, finding merit to the charges that the employer had committed serious unfair labor practices during the critical period before the election. These violations included telling employees unionizing would be futile, creating the impression of surveillance, threatening job loss and benefit reductions, cutting hours of pro-union employees, and other coercive actions.
The Regional Director applied the Board's recent Cemex decision, which established that even a single violation that interferes with employee free choice warrants a remedial bargaining order. The Regional Director determined that the employer's "severe and pervasive violations" undermined the reliability of the election and justified dismissal of the representation petition. The decision also cites NLRB v. Gissel Packing Co., noting that a majority of employees had designated the Union as their representative before the employer's unfair labor practices began.
The Regional Director ordered the petition dismissed subject to reinstatement pending final disposition of the unfair labor practice cases. Parties were given until August 1, 2025, to file requests for review with the NLRB.
Significant Cases Cited
Cemex Construction Materials Pacific, LLC, 372 NLRB No. 130 (2023): Established that employer unfair labor practices interfering with employee free choice will result in a remedial bargaining order.
NLRB v. Gissel Packing Co., 395 U.S. 575 (1969): Authorized bargaining orders as a remedy when serious unfair labor practices make a fair election unlikely.
Rieth-Riley Construction Co., Inc., 371 NLRB No. 109 (2022): Described the Board's practice of merit-determination dismissals when unfair labor practices would taint the representation process.
Starbucks Corp., 372 NLRB No. 156 (2023): Supported dismissal of petitions when bargaining orders are warranted.
Big Three Industries, Inc., 201 NLRB 197 (1973): Established precedent for dismissing representation petitions when bargaining orders are deemed appropriate.