Armour and Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 9, 1940

25 N.L.R.B. 238 (N.L.R.B. 1940)

In the Matter of ARMOUR AND COMPANY and UNITED PACKINGHOUSE
WORKERS LOCAL INDUSTRIAL UNION No. 347 OF THE PACKINGHOUSE
WORKERS ORGANIZING COMMITTEE, AFFILIATED WITH THE C. I. O.
Case No. R-1866-Decided July 9, 1940
Jurisdiction : meat distributing industry.
Activities of wholesale meat market which is integral part of organization
engaged in interstate commerce and which ships 3 per cent of its sales out
of the State and receives all of its products either from sources outside the
State or from packing plants within the State which in turn receive the major
part of their products from outside the State, held to affect commerce within
the meaning of the Act.
Investigation and Certification of Representatives : existence of question: re-
fusal to accord recognition to union; election necessary.
Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : production and maintenance em-
ployees excluding supervisors, chauffeurs, and clerical workers
Mr. Walter C. Kirk, of Chicago, Ill., for the Company.
Mr. John J. Brownlee, of Chicago, Ill., for the P. W. O. C.
Mr. William Mooney, of Chicago, Ill., for the Union.
Miss Grace McEldonney, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On January 6, 1940, United Packinghouse Workers of America,
Local Industrial Union No. 347, of Packinghouse Workers Organizing
Committee, affiliated with the C. I. 0., herein called the Union, filed
with the Regional Director for the Thirteenth Region (Chicago,
Illinois) a petition alleging that a question affecting commerce had
arisen concerning the representation of employees of the Armour
Wholesale Market of Armour and Company, Chicago, Illinois, herein
called the Company, and requesting an investigation and certification
of representatives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act. On May 10, 1940,
the National Labor Relations Board, herein called the Board, acting
pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the Act and Article III, Section 3, of
National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as
25 N. L. R. B., No. 27.
238
1
ARMOUR AND Coi\IPANY 239
amended, ordered an investigation and authorized the Regional Di-
rector to conduct it and to provide for an appropriate hearing upon
due notice.
Pursuant to notice duly served upon the Company and the Union,
a hearing was held on May 31, 1940, before Robert R. Rissman, the
Trial Examiner duly designated by the Board. The Company, the
Union, and Packinghouse Workers Organizing Committee, herein
called the P. W. O. C., a labor organization representing the Union,
were represented by counsel and participated in the hearing. Full
opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and
to introduce evidence bearing on the issues was afforded all parties.
At the opening of the hearing counsel for the Company' objected to
the proceedings on the ground that the Trial Examiner had acted
as attorney for the Board in the preliminary investigation of the case.
The objection was overruled. The Company also filed a pleading
designated as an answer, in which it (1) denied that its name and
address were as alleged in the petition; (2) admitted that it was
engaged in the distribution of meat and meat products, but alleged
that such activities did not constitute its entire business; (3) admitted
that the total number of employees of the Company and its subsidiaries
was approximately as alleged in the petition; (4) admitted that it had
a place of business in Chicago, operating under the name of Armour
Wholesale Market, but denied that the number of production and
maintenance employees in the alleged appropriate -unit and the num-
ber of such employees who had designated the petitioner as their
representative for collective bargaining were as alleged in the petition;
(5) alleged that another labor organization' claimed to represent some
of the employees in the proposed unit; 1 and (6) denied that a question
affecting commerce within the meaning of the Act had arisen, because
the Armour Wholesale Market neither procured from points without
the State nor shipped to points without the State any substantial
amount of merchandise. For these reasons the Company moved that
the petition be dismissed. The Trial Examiner made no ruling on
the motion. It is hereby denied. Without -objection, the petition
was amended to correct the name and address of the Company 2, and
to change the description of the bargaining unit alleged to be
appropriate.3
, International Brotherhood of Teamsters , Chauffeurs , Stablemen and Helpers of Amer-
ica, Affiliated with the A F of L ., had a contract covering chauffeurs employed by the
market Since the petition was amended to exclude chauffeurs from the proposed unit,
the Brotherhood is not an interested party in the present proceeding.
2 The correct name ' and address of the Company are Armour and Company, Armour
Office Building , 4301 South Racine Avenue , Chicago, Illinois, instead of Armour & Company,
Morris General Office Bldg , Union Stock Yards, Chicago , Illinois, as stated in the petition
8In the petition the unit was descubed as "all production and maintenance employees
of Armour Wholesale Market, 42nd & Packers Avenue , U. S Yards, Chicago, Illinois,
excluding supervisors and clerical ." At the hearing the description was amended to read
"excluding supervisors, chauffeurs , and clerical workers."
240 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL' LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
During the course of the hearing the Trial Examiner made several
rulings on motions and on objections to the admission of evidence.
'The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner, and finds
that,no prejudicial errors were committed. The rulings are hereby
affirmed.
Pursuant to leave granted by the Board, the Company filed a brief
which has been duly considered, in which it renewed its contentions
that the Company was not engaged in interstate commerce at its
Wholesale Market to the extent necessary to confer jurisdiction upon
the Board, and that it was a denial of due process of law for the attor-
ney who had investigated the Company's interstate activities for the
Board to sit as Trial Examiner, call witnesses for the Board, rule on
objections to evidence, and otherwise prepare the record.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY 4
Armour and Company is an Illinois corporation with its principal
office and place of business in Chicago, Illinois. Directly and through
subsidiaries it operates some 30 meat-packing plants, 300 wholesale
meat-distributing houses, and various related enterprises located
throughout the United States. A substantial. amount of the livestock
and raw materials purchased by the Company and its subsidiaries and
more than 50 per cent of the finished products sold by them are
shipped in interstate commerce.
Only one of the meat-distributing plants of the Company, known
as the Armour Wholesale Market and herein called the Market, is
involved in this proceeding. Through the Market, located in the
Union Stock Yards in Chicago, the Company sells and distributes
meat and meat products to its dealer trade in Chicago. During the
fiscal year ending October 28, 1939, it thus distributed some 70,000,000
pounds of meat and packing-house products, of which approximately
19 per cent had been shipped to the Market from places outside the
State of Illinois, 'and 81 per cent had been supplied by the Chicago
packing plant of the Company or by other plants located in Illinois.
Approximately 3 per cent of its sales were shipped out of the State.
The Company contends that no substantial part of the products
handled in the Market are shipped to it from outside the State or
shipped by it to points in other States, and that the Company is,
therefore, not engaged in interstate commerce in so far as its activities
'The facts stated herein are derived from a stipulation entered into by the Company
and the Board.
ARMOUR AND COMPANY 241
at the Market are concerned. From the facts given above, it appears,
however, that practically all of the products handled by the Market
in the past fiscal year were either received directly from outside the
State or were supplied by the Company's Chicago packing plant
which in turn received the major part of its cattle, calves, hogs, and
sheep from outside Illinois.-5 The interstate sales of the Market, too,
although they constituted only 3 per cent of its total sales, cannot be
regarded as unsubstantial either in volume or in value in view of the
total amount of business transacted. It is clear, therefore, that the
Market is not only an integral part of an organization which as a
whole is engaged in interstate commerce, but the Market activities in
themselves are such as to affect commerce within the meaning of the
Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
United Packinghouse Workers Local Industrial Union No. 347 of
the Packinghouse Workers Organizing Committee, is a labor' organi-
zation affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations. It
admits to membership employees of the Company at the Armour
Wholesale Market.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On December 11, 1939, the P. W. O. C. wrote to the Company stat-
ing that the Union represented a majority of the production and
maintenance workers at the Market, and requesting a meeting to ne-
gotiate a bargaining agreement. The Company made no written
reply to the letter, and gave no indication whether the request would
be granted. At the hearing counsel for the Company admitted that
recognition as the exclusive bargaining agent of the employees in the
proposed unit had not been granted to the Union.
We find that a question has arisen concerning the representation of
employees of the Company.
IV. TIIE EFFECT OF THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION UPON
COMMERCE
We find that the question concerning representation which has
arisen, occurring in connection with the operations of the Company
described in Section I above, has a close, intimate, and substantial re-
lation to trade, traffic, and commerce among the several States and
tends to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce
and the free flow of commerce.
IIt was stipulated that 60 percent of the cattle, 40 percent of the calves. 00 percent
of the hogs, and 80 percent of the sheep used by the packing plant originated outside
Illinois.
242 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
V. 7 HE APPROPRIATE UNIT
In its petition the Union described the appropriate unit as "all
production and maintenance employees of Armour Wholesale Mar-
ket, 42nd & Packers Avenue, U. S. Yards, Chicago, Illinois, exclud-
ing supervisors and clerical." The Company, alleged in its answer
that the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Stable-
men and Helpers of America, affiliated with the A. F. of L., claimed
to represent chauffeurs employed in the Market. The petition was
therefore amended, without objection, to exclude chauffeurs. We see
no reason for not finding this unit to be appropriate.c
We find that all production and maintenance employees of the Com-
pany employed at the Armour Wholesale Market, excluding super-
visors, chauffeurs, and clerical workers, constitute a unit appropriate
for the purposes of collective bargaining, and that said unit will insure
to employees of the Company the full benefit of their right to self-
organization and to collective bargaining and otherwise effectuate the
policies of the Act.
VI. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
In support of its claim to represent employees in the proposed
unit, the Union presented to the Regional Director a petition with
67 signatures of persons referred to in the body of the petition as
"employees of the Armour Wholesale Market and Morris Packing-
house Market," authorizing the P. W. 0. C. to act as their bargaining
agency. Counsel for the Company objected to the use of this pe-
tition on the ground that it was a joint petition of employees of
two markets, whereas only employees of the Armour Wholesale Mar-
ket were involved in the present proceeding. The objection was over-
ruled since the Regional Director had compared the signatures with
the Market pay roll for the period ending May 11, 1940, on which
53 employees were listed, and had found that 38 of the names on the
petition appeared on the pay roll. We find that the question con-
cerning representation can best be resolved by means of an election
by secret ballot.
The Union and the Company asked that the current pay roll be
used to determine eligibility to vote if the Board should order an
At the hearing a portion of the Armour Wholesale Market pay roll of May 25,
1940 , giving the names, plant numbers, and social security numbers of employees engaged
in maintenance and production work, and showing their individual occup.itions, was,
introduced in evidence by the Union for the purpose of showing the classes of employees
to be included in the unit The Company stipulated that the list contained the names
of all employees under those descriptions who were workine for the Market dining the
week ending May 25, and made no objection to the appropriateness of a unit composed
of such employees.
ARMOUR AND COMPANY 243
election. In accordance with our usual practice we shall direct that
employees eligible to vote shall be those within the appropriate unit
during the-pay-roll period immediately preceding the Direction of
Election herein.
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and upon the
entire record in the proceedings, the Board makes the following:
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. A question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the repre-
sentation of employees of Armour and Company, Chicago, Illinois,
within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of
the National Labor Relations Act.
2. All production and maintenance employees of the Company
employed at the Armour Wholesale Market, excluding supervisors,
chauffeurs, and clerical workers, constitute a unit appropriate for
the purposes of collective bargaining, within the meaning of Sec-
tion 9 (b) of the Act.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National
Labor Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Re-
lations Act, 49 Stat. 449, and pursuant to Article III, Section 8, of
National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2,
as amended, it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation authorized by the Board
to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining
with Armour and Company, Chicago, Illinois, an election by secret
ballot shall be conducted as early as possible but not later than
thirty (30) days from the date of this Direction of Election, under
the direction and supervision of the Regional Director of the Thir-
teenth Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National
Labor Relations Board, and subject to Article III, Section 9, of
said Rules and Regulations, among all production and maintenance
employees of the Company employed at the Armour Wholesale Mar-
ket, Chicago, Illinois, who were employed during the pay-roll period
next preceding the date of this Direction of Election, including-em-
ployees who did not work during such pay-roll period because they
were ill or on vacation and employees who were then or shall have
since been temporarily laid off, but exluding supervisors, chauffeurs,
and clerical workers, and any employees who shall have since quit
or been discharged for cause, to determine whether or not they de-
244 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
sire to be represented by United Packinghouse Workers, Local In-
dustrial Union No. 347 of the Packinghouse Workers Organizing
Committee, affiliated with the C. I. 0., for the purposes of collective
bargaining.
MR. EDWIN S. SMITH took no part in the consideration of the
above Decision and Direction of Election.