During a certification hearing, the applicant union sought to cross-examine the representative of the objecting employees about his duties and responsibilities to challenge the voluntariness of a statement of desire.
The respondent objected, arguing the parties had already agreed the representative was an employee in the bargaining unit.
The Board overruled the objection, holding that while such an agreement creates a rebuttable presumption that the employee does not exercise managerial functions, it does not preclude evidence regarding how other employees perceived the representative's duties and how that perception affected the voluntariness of their signatures.
