Armour and Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 22, 1940

25 N.L.R.B. 739 (N.L.R.B. 1940)

In the Matter of ARMOUR AND CobIPANY and UNITED CONDENSERY
WORKERS OF UNITED CANNERY, AGRICULTURAL PACKING & ALLIED
WORKERS OF AMERICA, LOCAL 24 (C. I. 0.)
Case. No. R-1917.Decided July 22,1940
Jurisdiction : dairy products industry
Investigation and Certification of Representatives : existence of question: re-
fusal to accord recognition to union ; election necessary.
Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : employees of the Company at one
of its divisions excluding the superintendent, foremen, office employees, and
field men
Mr. James DeWitt, of Milwaukee, Wis., for the C. I. O.
Mr. Henry Christofferse•n, of Chippewa Falls, Wis., for the
A. F. of L.
Mr. Walter C. Kirk, of Chicago, Ill., for the Company.
Mr. Leonard Lindquist„ of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On April 15, 1940, United Condensery Workers of United Cannery,
Agricultural Packing & Allied Workers of America, Local 24 (CIO),
herein called the C. I. 0., filed with the Regional Director for the
Twelfth Region (Milwaukee, Wisconsin) a petition alleging that a
question affecting commerce had arisen collcerninb the representation
of employees of Armour and Company,' Bloomer, Wisconsin, 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 June 12, 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
amended, ordered an investigation and authorized the Regional Di-
'Incorrectly designated as "Armour & Co." in the petition and the notice of hearing
The title of the case was amended at the hearing to designate the Company correctly.
25 N L R B., No 82.
739
740 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
rector to conduct it and to provide for an appropriate hearing upon
due notice.
On June 17 , 1940, the Regional Director issued a,notice of hearing,
copies of which were duly served upon the Company and upon the-
C. I. O. Pursuant to the notice, a hearing was held on June 24, 1940,
at Bloomer, Wisconsin, before Jacob I. Karro, the Trial Examiner
duly designated by the Board. At the hearing, General Drivers - &
Helpers Union, Local 662, affiliated with the American Federation of
Labor, herein called the A. F. of L., claiming to represent employees
directly affected by the investigation, moved that it be alloy=ed to inter-
vene. This motion was granted by the Trial Examiner without ob-
jection, and by consent of the parties the A. F. of was allowed to
file its written,petition to intervene after the conclusion of the hearing.
The Company and the A. F. of L., represented by counsel, and the
C. I. O., represented by a union official, 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 the
parties. During the course of the hearing , the Trial Examiner made
several rulings on motions and on objections to the admission of evi-
dence. The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner and
finds that no prejudicial errors were committed . The rulings are
hereby affirmed. During the hearing, the Company moved to dismiss
the petition . on the ground that there was no showing that a question
had arisen concerning representation . The Trial Examiner did not
rule on this motion and referred it to the Board for action. The
motion is hereby denied.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
The Company , a Delaware Corporation , is a subsidiary - of Armour,
and Company , an Illinois Corporation , also herein referred to as the
Company. At its Bloomer , Wisconsin , condensery , here involved,
the Company produces an annual output of evaporated milk valued at
$2,500,000, 98 per cent of which represent shipments to destinations
outside the State of Wisconsin . The Company also produces a small
amount of butter for local consumption . The principal raw materials
used by the Company are milk and cream, all of which is obtained
within the State of Wisconsin , and cans, boxes , solder, and- labels,
which materials are obtained from sources outside the State of Wis-
consin. At the time of the hearing, the Company employed approxi-
mately 95 production workers at its Bloomer condensery.
ARMOUR AND COMPANY
II. TIIE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
741
United Condensery Workers of United Cannery, Agricultural
Packing & Allied Workers of America, Local 24 (CIO), is a labor
organization affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations,
and General Drivers & Helpers Union, Local 662, is a labor organi-
zation affiliated with the American Federation of Labor. Both or-
ganizations admit to membership employees of the Company at its
Bloomer condensery.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNiNO REPRESENTATION
The C. I. O. has bargained with the Company on behalf of its mem-
bers since the latter part of 1939. James DeWitt, an official of the
C. I. 0., testified that on April 1, 1940, he sent, by registered mail, a
communication to the Chicago; Illinois, offices of the Company, stating
that the C. I. O. represented a majority or the employees of the Com-
pany at its Bloomer condensery; requesting that the C. I. O. be recog-
nized as exclusive bargaining agent for such employees; and asking
that a reply to this.request be submitted by April 10.2 No response
to this communication was received by the C. I. 0., and on April 15
'it filed the petition herein. At the hearing, counsel for the Company,
also representing the Chicago offices of the Company, neither ac-
knowledged nor denied- that this letter was received by the Company.
Under the circumstances we are satisfied that DeWitt, as representative
of the C. I. 0., requested the Company to recognize the C. I. O. as
exclusive bargaining agent of the employees at its Bloomer condensery
and that by failing to respond to this request, the Company, in effect,
denied it.
The C. I. O. asserted that it represented a majority of the employees
in the appropriate unit, and there was introduced in evidence a writ-
ten statement by^tlie Regional Director, reporting that the C. I. O. had
submitted to hint 43 signed application cards, dated between October
13 and December 6, 1939; that the signati Tres on these cards. appeared
to be genuine, original signatures; and that 41 of the signatures were
names appearing on the Company's pay roll of June 22, 1940.
At the hearing, the A. F. of L. submitted to the Trial Examiner 12
signed application cards dated June 22, 1940, and the Trial Examiner
reported that all of the names on these cards corresponded with names
on the Company's pay roll of June 22, 1940. Norman Kleist,-official
of the A. F. of L., testified that 50 employees of the Company signed
cards applying for membership in the A. F. of L. in 1937, and that
'At the hearing, Dewitt identified an alleged cop} of this communication, together
Nxith a receipt for its registration , and a return receipt from the addressee thereof which
was stamped "Armour and Company " and was dated April 2, 1940 ; all of which proof
was admitted in evidence over the objection of counsel for the respondent.
25.10i --42-vol 2'--48
742 DECISIONS OF NAIIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
in 1937 and part of 1938 the A. F. of L. bargained with the Company
in behalf of its members.
We find that a question has arisen conc^n-mng representation of em-
ployees of the Company at its Bloomer condensery.
IV. THE 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
relation 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. ,
V. THE APPROPRIATE. UNIT
At the hearing, the parties stipulated that the appropriate unit
should consist of all the employees at the Bloomer condensery, ex-
clusive of the superintendent, foremen, and office employees. The
labor organizations involved also agreed that the two employees of
the Company known as field men should be excluded from the unit,
while the Company contended that one of the field men, Matt Flat-
land, should be included in the unit. The two field men solicit the
purchase of raw milk from farmers and check the quality of the raw
milk. Flatland, about 4 or 5 weeks out of the year. also drives a-
truck while the regular drivers are on vacation. During the sunliner
months, Flatland also directs the receipt *of incoming milk on the
platform outside of the plant, lines up the drivers, and in the event
that individuals bring milk directly to the plant, he receives and un-
loads it. We do not believe that these extra duties, incidental to Flat-
land's regular employment as a field man, warrant his inclusion in
the appropriate unit while the other field man is by agreement of all
parties to be excluded therefrom. In the Company's pay-roll list of
June 22, 1940, which was introduced in evidence, the two field inen
are included in the classification of supervisory and office employees.
They are paid on a salary basis while all other workers in the pro-
posed unit other than the chemist are paid on an hourly basis. In
accord with the desires of the two labor organizations, we shall
exclude the field men from the appropriate unit.
We find that all the employees of, the Company at its Bloomer
condensery, excluding the superintendent, foremen, office employees,
and field men, constitute a unit appropriate for purposes of col-
lective 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 will otherwise effectuate the policies of
the Act.
AP^MOUR' AND COMPANY 743
V1. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
In Section III, above, we have noted the conflicting claims of the
two labor organizations as to majority representation in the appro-
priate unit. We find that the question concerning representation
which has arisen can best be resolved by an election by secret ballot,
and we shall direct the holding of such an election. -
During the hearing, the Company and the C. I. O. agreed that if
an election was to be held, eligibility to vote should be determined
by the pay roll immediately preceding the date of the election, and
while the A. F. of L. requested the pay-roll date of June 22, 1940, it
offered no substantial reason why the more recent date agreed to by
the Company and the C. I. O. would be improper. In accordance with
our usual practice we find that those eligible to vote in the election
shall be the employees in the appropriate unit who are employed by
the Company at its Bloomer condensery during the pay-roll period
immediately preceding the date of our Direction of Election herein,
including employees 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 excluding those who
shall have since, quit or been discharged for cause.
Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and upon the entire
record in the case, 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, Bloomer, Wiscon-
sin, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7)
of the National Labor Relations Act.
2. All the employees of the Company at its Bloomer, Wisconsin,
condensery, excluding the superintendent, foremen, office employees,
and field men, constitute a unit appropriate for the purpose of col-
lective bargaining, within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the
National Labor Relations 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 Rela-
tions Act, 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 a part of the investigation ordered by the Board
to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining
with Armour and Company, Bloomer, Wisconsin, an election by secret
744 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ballot shall be conducted as soon 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 for the Twelfth
Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National Labor Rela-
tions Board, and subject to Article III, Section 9, of said Rules and
Regulations, among all the employees at the Bloomer, Wisconsin,
condensery of the Company who were employed during the pay-roll
period immediately preceding the date of this Direction of Election,
including employees who did not work during such pay-roll period
because they were ill or on vacation, and employees who were then
or have since been temporarily laid off, but excluding the superin-
tendent, foremen, office employees, and field men, and those who shall
have since quit or been discharged for cause, to determine whether
they desire to be represented by United Condensery Workers of United
Cannery, Agricultural Packing & Allied Workers of America, Local
24 (CIO), affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, or
by General Drivers & Helpers Union, Local 662, affiliated with the
American Federation of Labor, for the purposes of collective
bargaining, or,by neither.
MR. WILLIAM M. LEISEB5ON took no part in the consideration of
the above Decision and Direction of Election.