Crescent City Ice Manufacturing Co., Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Sep 3, 1946

70 N.L.R.B. 1090 (N.L.R.B. 1946)

In the Matter of CRESCENT CITY ICE MANUFACTURING CO., INC., EM-
PLOYER and INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS , LOCATE
226, 226A, 226C, A. F. L., PETITIONER
Case No. 15-R-1684.-Decided September 3, 1946
Messrs..Paul J. Ganuckeau, A. P. Miceli, and James-E. Morgan,, of
New Orleans, La., for the Employer.
Messrs. Robert Faget and Robert Soule, of New Orleans, La., for
the Petitioner.
Messrs. Herman C. Gray and Ernest Scott, of New Orleans, La.,
for the Intervenor.
Mr. Benj. E. Cook, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a, petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at New
Orleans, Louisiana, on June 27, 1946, before T. Lowry Whittaker,
Trial Examiner. The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hear-
ing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations
Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
Crescent City Ice Manufacturing Co., Inc., is a Louisiana corpora-
tion, having its principal office and place of business in New Orleans,
Louisiana, where it is engaged in the manufacture of ice. Substan-
tially all of the materials and supplies used by the Employer are pur-
chased in the city of New Orleans. The ice annually manufactured
by the Employer is valued at approximately $300,000, 75 percent of
which is used in the icing of railroad cars and ships.
The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
70 N. L. It. B., No. 90.
1090
CRESCENT CITY ICE MANUFACTURING CO., INC.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
1091
The Petitioner , International Union of Operating Engineers, Local
226, 226A , 226C is a labor organization affiliated with the American
Federation of Labor, claiming to represent employees of the Employer.
Transport Workers Union of America , Local 206, herein called Inter-
venor, is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress of Industrial
Organizations , claiming to represent employees of the Employer.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Employer refuses to recognize the Petitioner as the exclusive
bargaining representative of employees of the Employer until the
Petitioner has been certified by the Board in an appropriate unit.
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the
representation of employees of the Employer , within the meaning of
Section 9 ( c) and Section 2 (6) and ( 7) of the Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The parties agree generally that all production and maintenance
employees , excluding office and supervisory employees , constitute an
appropriate unit. They are in disagreement , however, as to the super-
visory status of the chief engineer (Jackson), the head ice checker
(Riggs) and the head mechanic (Hurstell) ; the Employer and the
Petitioner would include , and the Intervenor would exclude, them.
The Employer and the Petitioner also would exclude casual employees,
and the Intervenor would include them.
Chief engineer (Jackson), head ice checker (Riggs), and head
mechanic (Hurstell) :
The record discloses that prior to September 1945, these employees
had the authority to hire and discharge, but that thereafter such
authority was withdrawn from them and vested solely in the general
manager. At the time of the hearing , there were approximately 50
production and maintenance employees under the combined direction
of these department heads, each of whom receives substantially more
per hour than his highest paid subordinate. The general manager
spends only 25 percent of his time in the plant and while the depart-
ment heads are hourly paid, their attendance is not confined to any
particular shift and they are subject to call at all time . Despite the
general manager's testimony that power to discharge and hire was
withdrawn from Jackson, Riggs, and Hurstell , it nevertheless appears
that these employees have retained the authority to make effective
recommendations concerning the status of employees in their respective
departments . We are of the opinion that Jackson, Riggs, and Hurstell
fall within the Board 's customary definition of supervisory employees
and we shall exclude them from the unit.
712344-47-vol. 70-70
1092 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Casual employees: The Employer utilizes the services of casual em-
ployes to ice and load refrigerator cars and ships. They are paid on
a tonnage basis and while some of this work is performed throughout
the year, the peak season is from April to October. The record dis-
closes that some of the car icers have followed this work for successive
seasons over a period of many years. These employees did not' par-
ticipate in a consent election held on May 17, 1945,1 and-were not cov-
ered by the subsequent contract between the Employer and the Inter-
venor? Although the record does not disclose that these casual em-
ployees have interests or duties which would of necessity prevent their
inclusion in the present bargaining unit, in the absence of any com-
pelling circumstances warranting a departure therefrom, we shall
adhere to our usual practice and not disturb the contract unit estab-
lished as the result of collective bargaining between the Company and
the Intervenor. We shall, therefore, exclude casual employees 3
We find that all production and maintenance employees of the Em-
ployer, but excluding office employees, car icers, casual employees, chief
engineer, head ice checker, head mechanic, and all or any other super-
visory employees with authority to hire, promote, discharge, discipline,
or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or effectively
recommend such action, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes
of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining with Crescent City Ice Manufacturing
Co., Inc., New Orleans, Louisiana, 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, under the direction and supervision of the
Regional Director for the Fifteenth Region, acting in this matter as
agent for the National Labor Relations,Board, and subject to Article
III, Sections 10 and 11, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and
Regulations-Series 3, as amended, among the employees in the unit
found appropriate 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
The election was held pursuant to agreement between the Employer and the Intervenor ;
the Intervenor won the election.
2 In the contract entered into between the parties on June 20 , 1945, the Employer agreed
to give preference to the Intervenor ' s members in hiring car leers . However , this clause
of the contract was never enforced and these employees were not considered a part of the
unit ; nor did they participate in the benefits of collective bargaining.
a See Matter of Irwin Auger Bit Company, 68 N. L. R B. 447.
t
CRESCENT CITY ICE MANUFACTURING CO., INC. 1093
because they were ill or on vacation or temporarily laid off, and in-
cluding employees in the armed forces of the United States who present
themselves in person at the polls, but excluding those employees who
have since quit or been discharged for cause and have not been rehired
or reinstated prior to the date of the election, to determine whether
they desire to be represented by International Union of Operating
Engineers, Local, 226, 226A, 226C, A. F. L., or by Transport Workers
Union of America; Local 206 C. I. 0., for the purposes of collective
bargaining, or by neitlier.
MR. JAMES J. REYNOLDS, JR., took no part in the consideration of the
above Decision and Direction of Election.
0