union, but the NLRB reversed, saying, “Placing a ‘Vote Yes’ sign on a wild animal does not transform
otherwise unprotected ‘gooseplay’ into activity protected by the National Labor Relations Act.”
Source: NACCO Materials Handling Group, Inc., 331 NLRB No. 164 (August 25, 2000)
E. Threats of Reprisal or Force
Employers cannot discriminate in employment to encourage or discourage union membership. An
employer who tells employees, for example, that they will all be discharged if they engage in union
activity, has interfered with their rights. Similarly, an employer who interrogates employees about their
activities or spies on them while they attend union meetings has engaged in unlawful interference.
Problems often arise, however, in determining whether antiunion arguments by an employer are
legitimate or whether they contain veiled threats.
F. Promise of Benefit
Although threats of force or reprisal are clearly unlawful in union campaigns, the rationale behind the
prohibition against promises of benefit is not as intuitively obvious. In a dispute that reached the U.S.
Supreme Court, Exchange Parts sent its employees a letter shortly before a representation election
that spoke of “the empty promises of the union” and “the fact that it is the company that puts things in
your envelope.” After mentioning a number of benefits, the letter said, “The union can’t put any of
those things in your envelope—only the company can do that.” In the representation election two
weeks later, the union lost, but the outcome was challenged in court. Eventually the Supreme Court
ruled that the employer’s actions constituted an unfair labor practice reasoning that “well-timed
increases in benefits” provide a clear message that those who provide advantages are the same
people who can withdraw those benefits should their wishes not be followed.
Buying Votes?
An Atlantic City, New Jersey, limousine service held a union election-day raffle for a TV/VCR. The
NLRB ruled, 3–2, that the raffle was an unfair labor practice that might reasonably be interpreted to
be a reward that would influence voting. A new election was ordered. The NLRB order banned
election-day raffles, but minor “gifts” such as food, drinks, and buttons would be considered
case-by-case if an objection were lodged.
Source: Atlantic Limousine, 331 NLRB No. 134 (2000)
Legal Briefcase: Multi-Ad Services v. NLRB 255 F.3d 363 (7th Cir. 2001)
G. Union Persuasion
Unions, like employers, are restricted in the type of preelection persuasion they employ. In cases
involving promises of benefits made by the union, the NLRB has been more reluctant to set aside
elections than it has when such promises have been made by management. The Board’s reasoning is
that employees realize that union preelection promises are merely expressions of a union platform, so
to speak. Employees recognize that these are benefits for which the union intends to fight. Employers,
on the other hand, really do hold the power to confer or withdraw benefits.
H. Remedies for Election Misconduct