Greco Steel Products, Inc., 06-RC-350334 (Regional Election Decision)
The case centered on a challenge to a union election at an iron works company, where the employer argued the vote should be set aside because a local union official had promised an employee a fee waiver to reinstate his union membership. The Board had sent the case back to determine a narrow question: whether that official, Rich Danko of Local 3, was acting as an agent of the International Union, the Petitioner, when he made the promise.
The employee testified that he called Danko because someone had told him Danko was the person to contact about restoring his suspended union book. During that call, Danko promised a waiver of the reinstatement fee. The employee could not say who had directed him to call Danko, and no one asked him to clarify. There was no evidence Danko identified himself as speaking for the International Union, and no evidence that similar promises were made at any organizing meetings the International Union held at Local 3’s facility, including one meeting Danko briefly attended.
Applying common law agency principles, the Regional Director found the employer had not met its burden of proving Danko had actual or apparent authority to act on the International Union’s behalf. There was no showing the International Union directed or authorized Danko to make the promise, and no evidence of any statements by the International Union that would have led the employee to reasonably believe Danko was authorized to speak for it on this issue. Because international unions are not automatically liable for the conduct of their locals, and the vague, unrebutted testimony did not fill that gap, the objection to the election was overruled. The International Union was certified as the exclusive bargaining representative of the unit, with crane operators’ ballots remaining challenged pending resolution of their eligibility.
Significant Cases Cited
Carbon Fuel Co. v. Mine Workers, 444 U.S. 212 (1979): International unions are not liable for the conduct of their local unions based solely on the relationship between them.
Millard Processing Services, 304 NLRB 770 (1991): The party asserting an agency relationship bears the burden of proving it, and sets out the test for apparent authority.
Sunset Line & Twine Co., 79 NLRB 1487 (1948): Established that the burden of proving agency status rests on the party claiming the agency relationship exists.
NLRB v. Donkin’s Inn, 532 F.2d 138 (9th Cir. 1976): Apparent authority requires a manifestation by the principal that gives a third party a reasonable basis to believe the agent is authorized to act.
Service Employees Local 87 (West Bay Maintenance), 291 NLRB 82 (1988): Both required conditions for apparent authority, a manifestation by the principal and a reasonable belief by the third party, must be satisfied together.
Peoples Natural Gas Company, LLC, 06-RC-392467 (Regional Election Decision)
A regional director has directed a self-determination election to allow five Measurement, Control and Communications Technicians employed by Peoples Natural Gas Company to decide whether to join an existing 900-person bargaining unit represented by Utility Workers Union of America Local 612.
The union sought to add the technicians, who install, maintain, and repair SCADA equipment that allows remote monitoring and control of gas pressure and valves throughout the company's service area in western Pennsylvania, to its existing unit of service, maintenance, and technical employees. The company opposed the petition, arguing the technicians did not share a sufficient community of interest with unit employees.
Applying the Board's Armour & Co. and Globe Machine & Stamping Co. framework, the director first found the technicians form a distinct, identifiable voting group because they make up an entire department with common supervision, even though the group is small. She then turned to whether they share a community of interest with the existing unit, weighing factors including departmental organization, supervision, skills and training, interchange, job overlap, contact with unit employees, functional integration, and terms and conditions of employment.
Several factors were found neutral or only slightly weighed against a shared community of interest, including separate departmental organization and supervision (given that the existing unit itself contains diverse subgroups with different supervisors and functions), the technicians' specialized electronics skills, and the absence of interchange between the groups. Bargaining history was deemed irrelevant since the technicians had never been represented.
The director found that employee contact, functional integration, and similar terms and conditions of employment weighed in favor of a shared community of interest. She noted the technicians spend 20 to 25 percent of their time working at the same locations as unit employees, particularly Station Engineers and GM&R Technicians, and that their work is interdependent: Station Engineers rely on the technicians to repair the computer controls that operate compressor stations, and various installation and repair tasks require both groups to complete sequential steps using each other's work. She rejected the company's argument that sequential rather than simultaneous work shows an absence of integration, finding instead that such sequential dependency is itself evidence of functional integration. The technicians also receive comparable hourly pay, similar home-start arrangements including company vehicles and equipment, and use the same timekeeping system as unit employees, with differences in benefits attributed to collective bargaining and given little weight.
Weighing all factors together, the director concluded the technicians share a sufficient community of interest with the existing unit and ordered a secret-ballot election to be held on October 26, 2026, allowing them to choose whether to be represented by the union.
Significant Cases Cited
Armour & Co., 40 NLRB 1333 (1942): Established, along with Globe Machine, the doctrine allowing an incumbent union to add unrepresented employees to its unit through a self-determination election.
Warner-Lambert Co., 298 NLRB 993 (1990): Held that petitioned-for employees may be added to an existing unit if they constitute an identifiable, distinct voting group and share a community of interest with unit employees.
Wheatland Electric Coop., Inc., 357 NLRB No. 16 (2026): Set out the multi-factor community-of-interest test for self-determination elections and clarified that functional integration exists where employees must work together and depend on one another.
Walt Disney Parks & Resorts, U.S., Inc., 373 NLRB No. 99 (2024): Held that diversity within an existing unit is relevant and reduces the weight given to differences in departmental organization or specialized skills of petitioned-for employees.
Public Service Co. of Colorado, 365 NLRB 1017 (2017): Held that differences in terms and conditions of employment resulting from collective bargaining are entitled to little weight in the community-of-interest analysis.
DP World Contract Logistics US Inc., 07-RC-358624 (Regional Election Decision)
A regional director has directed that a secret ballot election be held among employees of DP World Contract Logistics US Inc. at its Detroit facility, allowing workers to choose between representation by the UAW, by Local 299 of the Teamsters, or no union at all. The election was scheduled for October 19, 2026, with two voting windows at the facility's cafeteria.
The decision resolved a procedural dispute over whether the Teamsters local should be allowed into the case. After the local moved to intervene, the acting regional director granted that motion and asked both parties to brief the potential impact of Carlson Furniture Industries on the proceeding. Having reviewed those supplemental briefs, the regional director determined that the reasoning in her earlier September 14, 2026 decision still supported moving forward to an election, citing Dura Art Stone, Inc. in support of that conclusion.
The order also laid out the standard mechanics governing the vote: eligibility rules for current employees, strikers, and replacement workers; the employer's obligation to furnish a voter list in a specified format by October 2, 2026; and requirements for posting and electronically distributing notice of the election to employees. The order warned that failure to comply with the list and posting requirements could be grounds for setting aside the election if timely objections are filed, though a party responsible for its own noncompliance cannot rely on that failure as a basis for objection.
Significant Cases Cited
Carlson Furniture Industries, 157 NLRB 851 (1966): Addressed the standard for allowing a rival union to intervene in a representation proceeding.
Dura Art Stone, Inc., 340 NLRB 977 (2003): Supported proceeding to an election despite questions about the composition or participation of parties in the case.
City of Fenton, 07-WH-382442 (Unpublished Board Decision)
The Board certified the Police Officers Labor Council as the bona fide representative, for purposes of Section 7(b) of the Fair Labor Standards Act, of a unit of certified Sergeants, Lieutenants, and the Dispatch Supervisor employed by the City of Fenton. The Petitioner had filed its request with Region 7, and the Regional Director’s investigation confirmed that the Petitioner is already recognized as the unit’s exclusive collective-bargaining representative under a current agreement running from July 2024 through June 2028. After the Regional Director issued a Notice to Show Cause and no party responded, the Board found no basis to deny the request and issued the certification. The decision notes that this FLSA certification does not by itself establish the union’s right to recognition as exclusive bargaining representative under the NLRA.
Significant Cases Cited
County of Alameda, 322 NLRB 614 (1996): A certification of a union as bona fide for FLSA Section 7(b) purposes does not establish the union’s right to recognition as exclusive bargaining representative under the NLRA.