Armour and Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsApr 30, 1946

67 N.L.R.B. 1010 (N.L.R.B. 1946)

In the Matter of NEW YORK BUTCHERS DRESSED MEAT COMPANY, DIVISION OF ARMOUR. AND COMPANY and UNITED PACKING HOUSE WORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO, LOCAL 49A Cases Nos. 2-R-5980, 2-R-6&08, and 2-R-6,?09. Decided April 30, 1916 Mr. Peter F. Curran, of New York City, for the Company. Mr. Lemuel Ward, of New York City, for the CIO. Mr. Roger Blair, of New York City, for the Brotherhood. Mr. John K. Lapham, of New York City, for the IBEW. Mr. A. Sumner Lawrence, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS STATEMENT OF THE CASE Upon petitions duly filed by United Packing House Workers of America, CIO, Local 49A, herein called the CIO, alleging that ques- tions affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of New York Butchers Dressed Meat Company, Division of Armour and Company, New York City, herein called the Company, the National Labor Relations Board provided for an appropriate consolidated hearing upon due notice before John J. Cuneo, Trial Examiner. The hearing was held in New York City, on March 4, 1946. The Company, the CIO, Brotherhood of Firemen, Oilers, Main- tenance Mechanics & Helpers, Local 56, herein called the Brotherhood, and International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 3, herein called the IBEW, appeared and participated.' All parties were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues. The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. All parties were afforded an oppor- tunity to file briefs with the Board. Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following : ^ Local 30 of the International Union of Operating Engineers, AFL, herein called the Engineers, although notified of the proceedings, did not intervene nor appear at the hearing. 67 N. L. R. B, No 124. 1010 NEW YORK BUTCHERS DRESSED MEAT COMPANY 1011 FINDINGS OF FACT 1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY Armour and Company, an Illinois corporation with its principal office and place of business in Chicago, Illinois, operates approximately 30 meat packing plants throughout the United States, including a plant in New York City, the only one involved in this proceeding, which plant is operated under the name and style of New York Butchers Dressed Meat Company. The Company is engaged at its New York City plant in slaughtering, processing, selling, and dis- tributing beef, cattle, sheep, lamb, and calves. For the annual period ending on or about October 31, 1945, which is a representative period in the Company's business, the Company purchased for use at its New York City plant livestock amounting to more than 100,000,000 pounds, of which 95 percent was shipped to its New York City plant from points outside the State of New York. During the same period, the Company's finished products from its New York City plant amounted to more than 100,000,000 pounds, of which approximately 10 percent was shipped to points outside the State of New York. The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED United Packing House Workers of America, Local 49A, is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress' of Industrial Organizations, admitting to membership employees of the Company. Brotherhood of Firemen, Oilers, Maintenance Mechanics & Helpers, Local 56, and International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 3, are labor organizations affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, admitting to membership employees of the Company. III. THE QUESTIONS CONCERNING REPRESENTATION The Company has refused to grant recognition to the CIO as ex- vlusive bargaining representative of certain of its employees until the CIO has been certified by the Board in an appropriate unit. A statement of a Board agent, introduced into evidence at the hear- ing, indicates that the CIO represents a substantial number of em- ployees in the several units which it claims to be appropriate.' 2 The Field Examiner reported that the CIO had submitted 36 cards dated between July and October 1945, with 7 undated , from among a total of 45 employees in the claimed over-all unit of maintenance employees , that the CIO had submitted 8 cards dated in Oc- tober 1945 , from among a total of 11 employees in the claimed unit of garage workers ; and that the CIO had submitted 17 cards dated between August and October 1945, with 9 undated, from among a total of 21 employees in the claimed unit of watchmen. 1012 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD We find that questions affecting commerce have arisen concerning the representation of employees of the Company, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. TV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT; THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES The CIO seeks three distinct units under separate petitions relating to various groups of the Company's employees.3 In the first instance, the CIO requests a unit consisting of all maintenance employees, ex- cluding watchmen, garage workers, chauffeurs, truck drivers, and supervisory employees. Under its second petition, the CIO urges a unit of garage workers, excluding supervisory employees. The last unit sought by the CIO consists of watchmen, whom the CIO desires to have merged with its existing units of production employees. So far as the proposed units of garage workers and watchmen are con- cerned, neither the IBEW nor the Brotherhood is interested therein or opposed to the claim advanced by the CIO. However, both the IBEW and the Brotherhood object to the proposed unit of maintenance employees and urge the recognition of separate units for certain craft maintenance classifications coextensive with existing contracts herein- above referred to. In the case of the IBEW, the unit sought is limited to a single craft of electricians and electricians' helpers 4 The Brotherhood, on the other hand, seeks a multiple craft unit comprising substantially all the remaining craft maintenance employees, consist- ing of blacksmiths, steam fitters, machinists, tinsmiths, millwrights, scalemen, rail and brakemen, carpenters, plasterers, bricklayers, tile setters, masons, painters, welders, firemen, oilers, boiler washers, and temperature men, excluding supervisory employees, and operating engineers. Operating engineers are the only craft maintenance em- ployees not claimed by the Brotherhood and are presently represented by the Engineers under an existing contract with the Company. The Company takes no position with respect to any of the units other than the proposed unit of watchmen which it claims is inappropriate be- cause watchmen are a part of management. With respect to the question of the propriety of an over-all main- tenance unit, or the separate recognition for purposes of collective The Brotherhood and the IBEw rely upon existing contracts with the Company as proof of their interest in the unit which each claims to be appropriate . The interest of the Engineers is also indicated by a contract with the Company covering craft employees within its jurisdiction . There is, however , no contention that such contracts are a bar to the present proceedings. ' The groups herein concerned are outside the scope of units comprising all production employees covered by agreements between the Company and the CIO, and established as a result of prior Board proceedings See Matter of New York Butchers Dressed Meat Com- pany, Division of Armour and Company of Delaware , 45 N. L R. B 816; Matter of New York Butchers Dressed Meat Company, Division of Armour and Company, 56 N. L. R. B. 1066. 4 The record discloses that the Company does not employ electricians ' helpers. NEW YORK BUTCHERS DRESSED MEAT COMPANY 1013, bargaining, of the several craft groups currently represented by the IBEW, the Brotherhood, and the Engineers, respectively, it appears that an over-all unit based upon a common maintenance function, over- all supervision,-3 and substantial organization by the CIO among the several craft groups," would not be inappropriate. On the other hand, the propriety of finding separate bargaining units for the employees claimed by the craft organizations herein is indicated by the fact that since about January 15, 1942, both the IBEW and the Brotherhood have had bargaining agreements with the Company which agreements are currently in effect and coextensive with their respective units as claimed in the present proceedings. Moreover, the CIO stated at the hearing that it was agreeable to the holding of separate elections among employees in the maintenance group. In addition thereto, the IBEW and the Brotherhood both indicated at the hearing that they had no objection to the holding of elections within their respec- tive group with the CIO appearing on the ballot in such elections and thus apparently agree that should the CIO win such elections, the employees concerned therein may become part of an over-all main- tenance unit. Under the circumstances, we are of the opinion that the several craft maintenance groups may either remain separate bar- gaining units in accordance with the recent bargaining history of the Company, or be included in a single over-all maintenance unit .7 Ac- cordingly, we shall direct separate elections among the craft employees claimed by the IBEW, the Brotherhood, and the Engineers, respec- tively; the employees in each of these groups shall choose whether they desire to be represented by the CIO, or by the craft organization concerned, or by neither. Upon the results of these elections will depend in part the determination of the appropriate unit or units. If the CIO is chosen as the bargaining representative of the em- ployees in each of the three groups, we shall find a single unit ap- propriate; if; however, the CIO does not win the elections in all three voting groups, each group shall constitute a separate and distinct unit. There remains for consideration the proposed units of garage work- ers and watchmen, respectively. Since no organization other than the CIO is seeking to represent garage workers and the record indicates that garage workers form 5 A11 the maintenance employees herein concerned are under the common over -all super- vision of the master mechanic who reports directly to the plant superintendent. e A check conducted by the Trial Examiner discloses that the CIO submitted 3 designa- tions dated October 1945, from among a total of 4 employees in the unit claimed appropri- ate by the IBEW ; that the CIO submitted 26 designations , the majority of which are dated between July 9, 1945 , and October 22, 1945, from among a total of 37 employees in the unit claimed appropriate by the Brotherhood ; and that the CIO submitted 2 designa- tions dated July 14, 1945, from among a total of 4 employees in the group covered by the contract between the Company and the Engineers. 7 See Matter of Armour and Company , 64 N. L. R. B. 290. 1014 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD an identifiable homogeneous group having a community of interests apart from those of the craft maintenance employees hereinabove referred to, we are of the opinion that garage workers may properly constitute a separate appropriate unit. We find that all garage work- ers, excluding the foreman and all supervisory employees with author- ity to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or effectively recommend such action, con- stitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act. So far as watchmen are concerned, it appears that such employees, although uniformed, are not armed, deputized, nor militarized; that they are paid on an hourly basis and enjoy the same conditions of employment as the production employees. As noted above, the Company contends that its watchmen are a part of management and hence incapable of forming the basis of an appropriate unit. For reasons which we have set forth in prior decisions, we find no merit in the Company's contentidn.8 The Company's watchmen are essen- tially plant watchmen whose duties relate primarily to the preserva- tion of company property. In the absence of evidence that the pres- ent watchmen have substantial monitorial functions with relation to other employees, we see no compelling reason why they should not be included with the production employees for purposes of collective bargaining as requested by the CIO. We shall, therefore, direct that a separate election be held among the watchmen to determine their desires with respect to the matter. If at such election the watchmen select the CIO, they will have thereby indicated their desire to be included with the production employees and the CIO may accordingly bargain for them as part of the production group now represented by the CIO. We shall at this time make no final determination with respect to the appropriate unit or units for employees in each of the voting groups set forth below pending the outcome of elections which we shall direct : 1. All maintenance electricians employed by the Company at its New York City plant, excluding the master mechanic, mechanic fore- man, and all other supervisory employees with authority to hire, pro- mote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or effectively recommend such action; 2. All maintenance mechanics and helpers employed by the Com- pany at its New York City plant in the crafts of blacksmiths, steam fitters, machinists, tinsmiths, millwrights, scalemen, rail and brake- men, carpenters, plasterers, tile setters, masons, painters, welders, 8 See Matter of Ford Motor Company, 48 N. L R. B. 413, and cases cited therein ; Mat- ter of Pittsburgh Equitable Meter Company , 61 N. L. R. B. 880. NEW YORK BUTCHERS DRESSED MEAT COMPANY 1015 firemen, oilers, boiler washers, and temperature men, excluding the master inechanic, the steam fitter foreman, and all other supervisory employees with authority to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or effectively recom- mend such action ; 3. All maintenance operating engineers employed by the Company at its New York City plant, excluding the chief engineer and all other supervisory employees with authority to hire, promote, discharge, dis- cipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or effec- tively recommend such action; 4. All watchmen employed by the Company at its New York City plant, excluding the watchman foreman, the foreman of the service department, and all other supervisory employees with authority to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or effectively recommend such action. We shall direct separate elections among the employees in the appro- priate unit and voting groups set forth above, who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of the Direction of Elections herein, subject to the limitations and additions set forth in the Direction. DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS 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 9, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3, as amended, it is hereby DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa- tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with New York Butch- ers Dressed Meat Company, Division of Armour and Company, New York City, elections by secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible but not later than thirty (30) days from the date of this Direction of Elections, under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Second Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Article III, Sections 10 and 11, of said Rules and Regulations, among the employees in the appropriate unit and voting groups referred to in Section IV, above, who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of this Direction, including employees who did not work during said pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation or temporarily laid off, and including employees in the armed forces of the United States who present themselves in person -it the polls, but excluding those employees who have since quit or been 1016 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD discharged for cause and have not been rehired or reinstated prior to the date of the elections, to determine : 1. Whether the employees in the electricians' group described in Section IV, above, desire to be represented by International Brother- hood of Electrical Workers, Local 3, AFL, or by United Packing House Workers of America, CIO, Local 49A, for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by neither; 2. Whether the employees in the group of maintenance mechanics and helpers described in Section IV, above, desire to be represented by Brotherhood of Firemen, Oilers, Maintenance Mechanics & Helpers, Local 56, AFL, or by United Packing House Workers of America, CIO, Local 49A, for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by neither; 3. Whether the employees in the group of maintenance operating engineers described in Section IV, above, desire to be represented by International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 30, AFL,9 or by United Packing House Workers of America, CIO, Local 49A, for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by neither; 4. Whether or not the employees in the group of watchmen described in Section IV, above, desire to be represented by United Packing House Workers of America, CIO, Local 49A, for the purposes of collective bargaining; 5. Whether or not the employees in the unit of garage workers found appropriate in Section IV, above, desire to be represented by United Packing House Workers of America, CIO, Local 49A, for the purposes of collective bargaining. 0 Although, as indicated above, the Engineers did not intervene or appear at the hearing, we shall, in view of its existing contract , accord it a place on the ballot provided, that within 5 days from the service upon it of the Board 's Decision and Direction of Elections, the Engineers indicates in writing to the Regional Director that it desires to participate in the election.