The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) denied Fred Meyer Stores, Inc.'s Request for Review of the Regional Director’s Decision and Certification of Representative. The Board rejected the Employer’s argument that the Regional Director lacked the authority to issue the decision and certification without a Board quorum, citing Satellite Healthcare (Santa Rosa), 374 NLRB No. 25 (2026). The Board also noted that the Employer had already filed a separate request for review of the Regional Director's Decision and Direction of Election and could not raise additional arguments regarding that decision in the current request, in accordance with Section 102.67(i)(1) of the Board's Rules and Regulations.

The Board affirmed the Regional Director's refusal to enforce three subpoenas. This decision was based on two grounds. First, the Employer failed to properly serve the subpoenas. Two subpoenas were not served at all prior to the hearing, and the third was served on the final business day before the hearing, late in the afternoon. Crucially, this third subpoena was not accompanied by the required witness fees and mileage, which are mandatory for parties at whose instance a witness appears in a representation proceeding, pursuant to Section 102.66(j) of the Board's Rules and Regulations. The Board has previously held that subpoenas lacking these required fees are "defective on their face," as established in Rolligon Corp., 254 NLRB 22 (1981), and General Shoe Corp., 122 NLRB 1619 (1959).

Even if the subpoenas had been properly served, the Board found that their enforcement would still have been appropriately denied. The Employer claimed the subpoenaed individuals would testify that the pharmacy manager instructed employees to vote for the Union. However, the Employer's counsel had previously stated at the objections hearing that these individuals would testify that the pharmacy manager encouraged employees to attend union meetings and expressed concern about potential trouble due to her organizing activities. The Board found this proffered testimony to be duplicative of the pharmacy manager's own testimony. Furthermore, the Board determined that this evidence would not establish objectionable prounion conduct under Harborside Healthcare, Inc., 343 NLRB 906 (2004). The Board concluded that enforcing these subpoenas would have amounted to an impermissible "fishing expedition," and therefore, the Regional Director did not abuse his discretion by refusing to enforce them, as also held in SR-73 and Lakeside Avenue Operations LLC d/b/a Powerback Rehabilitation, 365 NLRB 1188 (2017).

Significant Cases Cited

• Satellite Healthcare (Santa Rosa), 374 NLRB No. 25 (2026): The Board rejected the Employer's argument that the Regional Director lacked authority to issue a decision and certification of representative in the absence of a Board quorum.
• SR-73 and Lakeside Avenue Operations LLC d/b/a Powerback Rehabilitation, 365 NLRB 1188 (2017): The Board affirmed that Regional Directors have discretion to close the record and refuse subpoena enforcement and that such refusal was not an abuse of discretion when a subpoena was found to be a "fishing expedition."
• Harborside Healthcare, Inc., 343 NLRB 906 (2004): This case likely established standards for objectionable prounion conduct that the Regional Director's decision was based upon.
• Rolligon Corp., 254 NLRB 22 (1981): The Board held that subpoenas are defective on their face if they are not accompanied by the required witness fees and mileage.
• General Shoe Corp., 122 NLRB 1619 (1959): This case affirmed a hearing officer’s revocation of subpoenas due to the failure to tender witness fees and mileage.

This summary was generated using Google's Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite. It could contain errors.