Question: The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local Unions 605 and 985, AFL-CIO ("the union") have represented a bargaining unit comprised of MP&L's service and maintenance employees since 1938. The most recent collective bargaining agreement concerning these employees is for the term of October 15, 2003, until October 15, 2005. That agreement does not include MP&L's storeroom and warehouse employees. In January 2004, the union petitioned the NLRB for certification as bargaining representative of these storeroom and warehouse employees. MP&L opposed the petition, urging that the Board's contract bar rule barred the election required for the union to be certified. MP&L contended that the contract bar rule must be applied to employees intentionally excluded from an existing collective bargaining agreement. The regional director rejected MP&L's contention. The Board affirmed this decision. An election was held, and a slim majority of the storeroom and warehouse employees voted to be represented by the union. The NLRB certified the results of the election. To obtain judicial review of the Board's decision to permit a representation election, MP&L refused to bargain with the union on behalf of the newly represented employees. The union filed an unfair labor practice charge with the Board. How should the Board have ruled on this challenge by MP&L? See NLRB v. Mississippi Power & Light Co. [769 F.2d 276 (5th Cir. 1985)].