Calpine Containers

National Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsAug 27, 1980

251 N.L.R.B. 1509 (N.L.R.B. 1980)

CALPINE CONTAINERS 1509 Calpine Containers, a California Corporation and General Teamsters, Warehousemen and Helpers Union, Local 890, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, Petitioner. Case 32-RC- 830 August 27, 1980 DECISION ON REVIEW BY CHAIRMAN FANNING AND MEMBERS JENKINS AND TRUESDALE On October 29, 1979, the Acting Regional Di- rector for Region 32 issued a Decision and Direc- tion of Election in the above-entitled proceeding, finding appropriate Petitioner's requested unit of all full-time and regular part-time production and maintenance employees, including warehousemen, laborers, boxmakers, and lettuce box strappers, at the Employer's Salinas, California, facility; exclud- ing, all truckdrivers and forklift operators em- ployed outside of the production area, office cleri- cal employees, and statutory guards and supervi- sors. Pertinent parts of the Acting Regional Direc- tor's Decision and Direction of Election are at- tached hereto as an appendix. Thereafter, pursuant to Section 102.67 of the National LaborRelations Board Rules and Regulations, Series 8, as amended, the Employer requested review of the Regional Di- rector's decision, alleging that the only appropriate unit is one of all nonsupervisory employees. By telegraphic order dated April 10, 1980, the Board granted the request for review. Petitioner filed a brief. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the Na- tional Labor Relations Board has delegated its au- thority in this proceeding to a three-member panel. The Board has considered the entire record in this case and makes the following findings: The Employer is a California corporation en- gaged in warehousing and assembling boxes used in packing agricultural products. The Salinas, Califor- nia, facility involved in this proceeding has a pro- duction area adjoined by both an office and a shop area, and several open or closed storage areas on the plant premises. Changing economic conditions and advanced technology have resulted in extensive changes in the Employer's operation. In the 1940's approxi- mately 75 skilled craftsmen were employed to make wooden boxes. At that time the Employer maintained two collective-bargaining relationships. The craftsmen were first represented by a box- makers union, and later by Carpenters Local 925, while Petitioner represented truck and forklift driv- 251 NLRB No. 199 ers. The bargaining relationship with the Carpen- ters ceased around 1976-77 when wooden box- makers were no longer employed. Corrugated cardboard boxes that could be as- sembled in the fields, as needed, gradually replaced presassembled wooden boxes. Accordingly, from 1972 to 1977 the Employer shifted the emphasis of its operation to warehousing and distributing unas- sembled, precut, corrugated, cardboard boxes, and to supplying and servicing various equipment. This work was performed by a steady work force of two to three employees represented by Petitioner. During the winter months these employees cleaned and generally maintained the facility and its equip- ment. In August 1978 the Employer again entered into manufacturing by purchasing two machines to as- semble precut corrugated boxes. During the summer of 1979, the first full season with the new equipment, about 14 unskilled, seasonal employees were employed. They fed empty cartons into a gluing machine, and then removed them and bound or "strapped" them for storage or shipping. Some of these employees have occasion to use a forklift to remove the strapped stacks from the production area to a storage area. Unlike the employees repre- sented by Petitioner, two of whom are employed year round and maintain this equipment in the off season, almost all the unskilled production employ- ees are laid off every fall and told to reapply next season when they will receive preference for rehir- ing. Petitioner seeks to represent these seasonal, un- skilled production and maintenance employees in a unit apart from the employees that it has represent- ed for the past several years. The Acting Regional Director found the request- ed unit appropriate. He reasoned that the Board ac- cords substantial weight to bargaining history and is reluctant to disturb an existing unit where, as here, it is not repugnant to Board policy or so con- stituted as to hamper employees in fully exercising their statutory rights. Fraser & Johnston Company, 189 NLRB 142, 151, fn. 50 (1971). In making this determination the Acting Regional Director con- cluded that, although the skills and duties of the production employees have changed significantly since the introduction of the mechanized box as- sembly process, these changes have not impacted on the employees historically represented by Peti- tioner. Thus, the Acting Regional Director found the "truck and forklift drivers" perform their work outside the production area and, unlike the produc- tion employees, they do not operate the glue ma- ' During the most recent contract with the Carpenters, which expired sometime in 1976 or 1977, only one wooden boxmaker was employed CALPINE CONTAINERS 1510 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD chine or regularly stack or strap boxes. The Acting Regional Director also relied on the facts that the wage rates of the production employees are in excess of 50 percent lower than those of the em- ployees in the drivers' unit, and the seasonal pro- duction employees do not have any health and welfare benefits like those negotiated by Petitioner in the past for the drivers. The Employer argues that only a unit of all non- supervisory employees, including truckdrivers and forklift operators, is appropriate. We find merit in the Employer's contention. Corrugated box production at the Employer's fa- cility is a highly integrated operation in which em- ployees frequently interchange jobs. For example, almost all employees drive one of the five forklifts to remove and stack finished boxes from the assem- bly line. Previously, when the Employer's oper- ation used skilled boxmakers, it had only one fork- lift for loading and unloading trucks, and a single forklift operator who also drove a truck. Further, unlike the past when the truckdriver lacked skills to produce wooden boxes, it now takes just a few hours of training to learn to produce cardboard boxes. This production function is occasionally per- formed by the drivers in the off season. Thus, we find, contrary to the Acting Regional Director, that technological changes have impacted on all employees by allowing for interchange of unskilled jobs. In these circumstances, a bargaining history in separate units of drivers and skilled craftsmen can only be accorded slight weight in determining an appropriate unit here. Additional reasons compel us to find appropriate only a unit of all employees. The truckdrivers and forklift operators outside the production area, whom Petitioner seeks to exclude from its request- ed unit, have neither working conditions nor a community of interest distinct from other employ- ees. All employees punch a timeclock, are super- vised by the Employer's "warehouse manager," and are maintained on one plantwide seniority list. Further, all employees are paid hourly, with one exception whose placement in the petitioned-for unit was stipulated to by the parties. Finally, all employees have the same break periods and eat lunch together while production is halted. The truckdrivers, neither of whom are over-the-road drivers, join the lunch hour when they are on the premises. Accordingly, we find that the following employees of the Employer constitute a unit appro- priate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act: All full-time and regular part-time truckdrivers and forklift operators, and production and maintenance employees, including warehouse- men, laborers, boxmakers, and lettuce box strappers, employed by the Employer at its Sa- linas, California facility; excluding office cleri- cal employees, guards and supervisors as de- fined by the Act. The Board has been administratively advised that the Acting Regional Director for Region 32 has impounded ballots from an election conducted at an appropriate time among the employees in the unit requested by Petitioner. In addition, the ballots of the truckdrivers and forklift drivers outside of the production area were voted under challenge and were similarly impounded. Thus, the Regional Director need only open the challenged ballots, commingle them with the unchallenged ballots, and count all of the ballots. Accordingly, this case is remanded to the Re- gional Director for Region 32 for the purpose of opening and counting the ballots in the unit as specified herein. CHARIMAN FANNING, dissenting: For reasons stated by the Acting Regional Di- rector, I would not distrub the long-established bargaining history in the existing unit of truck- drivers and forklift operators outside the produc- tion area. In agreement with the Acting Regional Director I find that technological changes in the Employer's operation have not impacted on these employees so as to require their inclusion in an overall unit. Thus, the truckdrivers and forklift op- erators outside the production area receive wages and benefits different from those of production and maintenance employees, and perform their duties away from the production area. Significantly, these employees' duties have not changed despite the technological innovations in the operation. APPENDIX The Employer is a California corporation with facilities located throughout the State of California, including one located in Salinas, California, where it is engaged in the business of warehousing and as- sembling boxes for use in the packing of agricultur- al products. For many years, the Employer's busi- ness consisted primarily of wooden box-making. During this period, the Employer maintained two collective bargaining relationships. The craftsmen employed to make the boxes were represented first by a box-makers union and later by Carpenters Local 925. The truckdrivers and forklift drivers were represented by Petitioner. The Employer's last contract with Carpenters Local 925 expired ap- proximately two years ago and since that date the Employer has ceased to employ wooden box- CALPINE CNTAINERS 1511 makers. The Employer's most recent contract with Petitioner expired July 31, 1979. After phasing-out the wooden boxmaking oper- ation, the Employer re-entered the manufacturing business in 1978 with the purchase of two machines and commenced the mechanized assembly of pre- cut corrogated boxes. The Employer now employs on a seasonal basis up to 16 unskilled employees in this operation who feed empty cartons to a ma- chine and then remove the cartons and bind them in stacks for storage or shipping. Some of these employees also have occasion to remove the bound stacks from the production areas to a storage area with a forklift. Petitioner contends that the three employees it presently represents (two truckdrivers and a fork- lift driver who also performs certain repair work in the shop) constitute an appropriate unit and that the remaining production and maintenance employ- ees which it now seeks to represent also constitute a separate appropriate unit. The Employer con- tends that the only appropriate unit is a unit com- prised of both the drivers and forklift operator and the production and maintenance employees. The record reflects that the Petitioner has historically represented two truckdrivers and a forklift operator in a unit hereinafter called the drivers' unit. Of the employees in this unit one has been employed by the Employer since 1947 and drives a truck nearly every day during the season from the Employer's Salinas facility to various lo- cations in the Bay Area. A second employee in this unit, who has been employed by the Employer since 1970, also drives a truck but spends most of his time loading and unloading with a forklift. He regularly assists the full-time driver in loading the trucks. Both have Class I Drivers Licenses. The third employee in this unit spends about half of his time repairing staple guns and stitching machines in a shop maintained by the Employer and the re- maining time loading and unloading trucks with a forklift. A small portion of this person's time is spent moving pallets in the production area. Unlike the production area employees, however, the driv- ers' unit employees referred to above do not oper- ate the glue machine or regularly perform stacking or strapping duties in connection with the Employ- er's assembly machines. In addition, the wage rates of the production employees are in excess of 50 per cent lower than those of the employees in the driv- ers' unit; similarly, the production employees do not enjoy any health and welfare benefits while Pe- titioner's past contract with the Employer required such benefits for the employees it represents. It is well established that the Board accords sub- stantial weight to prior bargaining history and is reluctant to disturb an existing unit so long as the unit is not repugnant to Board policy or so consti- tuted as to hamper employees in fully exercising their statutory rights. Fraser & Johnston Co., 189 NLRB 142, 151, fn. 50 (1971). There is no evidence to suggest that the existing unit in the instant case is repugnant to Board policy nor is there any evi- dence that it is so constituted as to hamper the em- ployees' exercise of their rights. The Employer contends the prior bargaining history in this matter is irrelevant because the Employer's operation has radically changed and must be seen as in essence a new entity for purposes of unit determination. It is clear from the record that the skills and duties of the current production employees have changed significantly since the introduction of the mecha- nized box assembly process, but there is no evi- dence that these changes have impacted on the three employees in dispute. Their duties and the skills required to perform them have remained the same and they continue to perform their work in locations outside the regular production area. Ac- cordingly, in view of the long standing prior sepa- rate bargaining history, the difference in job duties and skills, the discrepancies in wage and benefit levels, and the fact that the balance of work per- formed by the drivers' unit employees is not per- formed in the production area, it is concluded that the existing unit should not be disturbed and that the remaining production and maintenance unit, as described herein, is an appropriate unit for the pur- poses of collective bargaining. CALPINE CONTANERS