## Facts

- Honeyville Grain, Inc., a Utah corporation, operated a Rancho Cucamonga, California facility employing full- and part-time truck drivers.
- Local 166 of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters sought to represent a unit of Honeyville’s full- and part-time truck drivers at that facility.
- Five days before the election, at one union meeting, two union agents referenced the owners’ Mormon faith and asserted that Honeyville contributed significant funds to the Mormon Church and missionaries, suggesting money should go to employees instead.
- The religious references occurred at one of approximately ten union meetings held during the campaign.
- The record contained no evidence about the bargaining unit’s religious composition.
- In the representation election, 23 of 32 eligible voters voted for union representation.
- Honeyville objected to the election, arguing the remarks were an improper appeal to religious prejudice that destroyed required election “laboratory conditions.”
- The NLRB overruled the objections and certified the union.
- Honeyville refused to bargain with the certified union; the NLRB found an unfair labor practice under NLRA § 8(a)(5) and (1) and ordered Honeyville to bargain.
- Honeyville petitioned for review, and the NLRB cross-applied for enforcement.

## Issues

1. Whether union agents’ remarks about the owners’ Mormon faith and related contributions constituted a sustained or inflammatory appeal to religious prejudice requiring the election to be set aside.
2. Whether substantial evidence supported the NLRB’s certification decision and resulting unfair labor practice order, such that enforcement was warranted under NLRA § 10(e) and (f).

## Decision

- The court denied Honeyville’s petition for review and granted the NLRB’s cross-application for enforcement.
- The court held the Board reasonably concluded the remarks were isolated and not a sustained or inflammatory appeal to religious bias.
- Because the certification was upheld, Honeyville’s refusal to bargain supported the unfair labor practice finding and the bargaining order.

## Legal Principles

- Courts review NLRB election-related determinations with substantial deference and will set aside certification only for legal error or lack of substantial evidence.
- The objecting party bears a heavy burden to show campaign conduct impaired employees’ free choice to the extent the election cannot stand.
- References to religion in an election campaign do not automatically invalidate results; the question is whether there was a sustained or inflammatory appeal to prejudice likely to distort employee choice.
- When a union is properly certified, an employer’s refusal to bargain generally constitutes an unfair labor practice under NLRA § 8(a)(5) and (1), supporting a remedial bargaining order.

## Conclusion

The Tenth Circuit enforced the NLRB’s bargaining order, concluding that a single meeting’s references to the owners’ Mormon faith, framed as commentary on alleged use of company funds, did not amount to a sustained or inflammatory appeal to religious prejudice sufficient to overturn the election.


Honeyville Grain, Inc. v. NLRB, 444 F.3d 1269 (10th Cir. 2006)