The applicant union sought to set aside a representation vote, alleging that the intervener union made misleading statements to employees regarding the potential loss of jobs and changes to the bargaining unit scope if the applicant were certified.
The Board found that the statements made by the intervener's president were within the permissible bounds of electioneering and did not amount to campaign trickery that would impair the employees' ability to express their true wishes.
The application for certification was dismissed as the applicant did not receive majority support.
