800 River Road Operating Co. v. National Labor Relations Board, 846 F.3d 378

Union petitioned to represent Woodcrest unit; March 9, 2012 election certified 122–81 for union with two challenged ballots; Woodcrest filed 12 timely objections and submitted an offer of proof to the NLRB Regional Director.
Regional Director set two objections for hearing (alleging supervisory solicitation of union authorization cards and pro-union promotion); ten objections were dismissed.
Three-day representation hearing produced testimony from ten witnesses largely contradicting Woodcrest’s proffered claims; Woodcrest requested subpoenas for six subordinates of supervisor Israel Vergel de Dios and sought to call eight already-subpoenaed witnesses; Hearing Officer denied the six subpoenas and refused to hear eight subpoenaed witnesses without a proffer of direct knowledge.
Hearing Officer permitted leading questions and some probing of Vergel de Dios but denied treating him as a hostile witness; Woodcrest walked out of the hearing before presenting remaining witnesses.
Hearing Officer recommended overruling Woodcrest’s objections; the Board affirmed (acknowledging error in not issuing six subpoenas but deeming it harmless) and later issued an unfair labor practice order after Woodcrest refused to bargain; Woodcrest sought judicial review.

Issue	Woodcrest's Argument	NLRB/Union's Argument	Held
Whether denial of subpoenas for six subordinates prejudiced employer	Denial deprived central evidence of supervisor coercion and was reversible error	Error acknowledged but harmless given lack of corroborating testimony and employer conduct (walkout)	Denial harmless; no reversible prejudice; Board affirmed
Whether refusal to permit eight subpoenaed witnesses to testify was an abuse of discretion	Hearing Officer imposed an improper "vetting" requirement that precluded witnesses who exercised Johnnie’s Poultry rights	Hearing Officer reasonably required basic proffer of relevance after two days of largely uncorroborated testimony	No abuse of discretion; refusal reasonable absent proffer; harmless due to employer conduct
Whether Hearing Officer erred in refusing to treat Vergel de Dios as hostile witness	Employer wanted hostile designation to allow leading impeachment questioning	Hearing Officer allowed leading and extensive questioning; rules of evidence are not controlling in NLRB proceedings	No abuse of discretion; questioning permitted was sufficient
Whether Board abused discretion in affirming Hearing Officer despite acknowledged procedural error	Board’s affirmance was cursory and failed to address key errors, warranting remand/new election	Board provided adequate analysis; error was harmless and employer failed to prove prejudice	Board did not abuse discretion; enforcement granted

Randell Warehouse of Ariz., Inc. v. NLRB, 252 F.3d 445 (D.C. Cir.) (courts give wide deference to Board on representation issues)
N. of Market Senior Servs., Inc. v. NLRB, 204 F.3d 1163 (D.C. Cir.) (very limited review and heavy burden to overturn certification)
Boire v. Greyhound Corp., 376 U.S. 473 (U.S. 1964) (procedural route for judicial review of Board certification decisions)
Int'l Transp. Serv. Inc. v. NLRB, 449 F.3d 160 (D.C. Cir.) (Board discretion has limits; courts must review reasoning)
NLRB v. McClatchy Newspapers, Inc., 964 F.2d 1153 (D.C. Cir.) (set-aside where legal standard misapplied or not given ordinary meaning)
Ozark Auto. Distribs., Inc. v. NLRB, 779 F.3d 576 (D.C. Cir.) (harmless-error framework in reviewing Board evidentiary rulings)
United States v. Coumaris, 399 F.3d 343 (D.C. Cir.) (error is harmless unless it affected outcome)
Salem Hosp. Corp. v. NLRB, 808 F.3d 59 (D.C. Cir.) (no prejudice when excluded evidence would not compel contrary result)
Huthnance v. District of Columbia, 722 F.3d 371 (D.C. Cir.) (factors for assessing prejudice include closeness of case and mitigation steps)
ManorCare, LLC v. NLRB, 823 F.3d 81 (D.C. Cir.) (Board must adequately explain departures from its precedent and factual analysis)