Dan Dee Central Ohio Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Oct 23, 1953

106 N.L.R.B. 1303 (N.L.R.B. 1953)

DAN DEE CENTRAL OHIO CORPORATION 1303
were privileged under Section 8 (c) of the Act, but that
taken in context with other activities on the part of the
Employer these letters exceeded the privilege of free speech;
that, in any event, Section 8 (c) of the Act does not prevent
the Board from finding in a representation case that an
expression of views, whether or not protected by Section
8 (c), has interfered with the employees' free choice in an
election so as to require that such election be set aside; and
that the Employer had by these letters interfered with the
employees' free choice in the election of August 8.
The Employer excepted to the hearing officer's findings
with respect to its letters of July 30 and August 2, conten-
ding that: (1) The letters were merely answering the Pe-
titioner's "sales campaign"; (2) the letters were privileged
under Section 8 (c) of the Act; and (3) they, therefore, did
not interfere with the employees' free choice of a bargaining
representative in the election.
We find merit in the Employer's exceptions. We agree
with the hearing officer that, standing alone, the aforesaid
letters were privileged under Section 8 (c) of the Act. More-
over, we do not find that such letters, even if considered in
their context, interfered with the employees' freedom of
choice. In any event, we would not, in appraising the effect
of such letters, regard as material any independent coercive
conduct by the Employer. We, therefore, find that these
letters do not warrant setting aside the election.
In view of our above findings, we hereby overrule the
Petitioner's objections to conduct affecting the results of
the election. As the Petitioner failed to secure a majority
of the valid ballots cast, we shall certify the results of the
election.
[The Board certified that a majority of the valid ballots
was not cast for Local 312, United Furniture Workers of
America, CIO, and that the said labor organization is not
the exclusive representative of the employees of the Employer
in the unit heretofore found by the Board to be appropriate]
Member Murdock took no part in the consideration of the
above Supplemental Decision and Certification of Results.
DAN DEE CENTRAL OHIO CORPORATION and TRUCK DRIV-
ERS UNION LOCAL 413, INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD
OF TEAMSTERS, CHAUFFEURS, WAREHOUSEMEN &
HELPERS OF AMERICA, AFL, Petitioner. Case No. 9-RC-
2035. October 23, 1953
DECISION AND ORDER
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Morgan C.
Stanford , hearing officer . The hearing officer's rulings made
at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby
affirmed.
106 NLRB No. 227.
1304 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds that:
No question affecting commerce exists concerning the rep-
resentation of employees of the Employer within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act, for the
following reasons:
The Employer is engaged in the wholesale distribution of
potato chips, pretzels, popcorn, etc., at Columbus, Ohio. During
1952, the Employer made purchases of about $583,000, none
of which was made from sources outside the State of Ohio.
During the same period, the Employer's sales amounted to
about $782,870.89, all of which were made within the State of
Ohio.
Except for ice cream cones , the Employer purchases all of
its items from Dan Dee Pretzel & Potato Chip Company at
Cleveland, Ohio.' The latter is a manufacturing corporation
and one over which the Board, under present jurisdictional
critieria, would assert jurisdiction.'
The record shows that the president of the Employer is
also the president of Dan Dee Pretzel & Potato Chip Company.
The vice president of the latter is treasurer of the Employer
and both corporations have common stockholders.3 The book-
keeping for the Employer, as well as for the three other sales
corporations, is done by Dan Dee Pretzel & Potato Chip Com-
pany and the latter formulates the sales policy for the Employer
and the other sales corporations. However, the Employer, as
well as the other sales corporations, establish their own labor
relations policies. There is no interchange of employees be-
tween Dan Dee Pretzel & Potato Chip Company and the Employer
or any other of the corporations. Each corporation is separ-
ately incorporated and is a separate and distinct entity. None
of the corporations are subsidiaries of the others. An
employee's seniority at one corporation is not considered if
he goes to work at another one of the corporations. The book-
keeping services performed by Dan Dee Pretzel & Potato Chip
Company is charged to .the other corporations. Each corpora-
tion does its own hiring and firing. There is no standard policy
on bonuses, vacations, wages, or insurance.
From the foregoing, it is clear that the Employer, consid-
ered as a separate and independent enterprise , is engaged in
a business local in nature over which the Board would not
normally assert jurisdiction.4 Because the additional evidence
in the record is insufficient to warrant the conclusion that the
Employer, in fact, functions as an integrated part of a larger
iBecause Dan Dee Pretzel & Potato Chip Company does not manufacture ice cceam cones,
the Employer purchases them from a local Columbus firm. Purchases of ice cream cones
during 1952 amounted to only $2,600
2During 1952 its out-of-State purchases were in excess of $180,000 and its out-of-State
sales were in excess of $100,000.
3 The same relationship as pointed out above between the Employer and Dan Dee Pretzel &
Potato Chip Company, also exists between the latter and each of three other sales corporations,
namely, Dan Dee Northern Ohio Corporation, Dan Dee Eastern Ohio Corporation, and Dan Dee
West Virginia Corporation.
4Federal Dairy Co., Inc., 91 NLRB 638.
K W B MANUFACTURING COMPANY 1305
interstate enterprise consisting of several companies, all of
which constitute a single employer, we find that it would not
effectuate the policies of the Act to assert jurisdiction in
this case.5
[The Board dismissed the petition.]
5 See Chestnutt 's Stores Inc ., of Lufkin, Texas, 100 NLRB 490; see also Toledo Service
Parking Company, 96 NLRB 263.
K W B MANUFACTURING COMPANY and LOS ANGELES JOINT
BOARD, AMALGAMATED CLOTHING WORKERS OF AMER-
ICA, Petitioner. Case No. 21-RC-3212. October 27, 1953
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Leo J. Kloos.,
hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the
hearing are free from prejudicial error' and are hereby
affirmed.
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds:
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the mean-
ing of the Act.
2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent
certain employees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the
representation of employees of the Employer within the mean-
ing of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The main issue in this case relates to the scope of the
unit. The Petitioner requests two separate units, one limited
to the cutters and their apprentices, the other generally in-
cluding all other production and operating employees. Local
125, United Garment Workers of America, AFL, herein called
Local 125, and the Employer urge a single unit of all employees.
Local 36, United Garment Workers of America, AFL, herein
called Local 36, did not explicate a fixed position on the scope
of the unit but seemed to indicate that it desired either to join
the cutters with the production employees or to keep them in
a separate but multiemployer group.
The Employer is a California corporation and is engaged
at its Los Angeles, California, plant in the manufacture of
washable service garments.
The cutters perform the traditional cutting operations of
the garment industry. It is not disputed that they exercise the
traditional skill of their craft. The bulk of the remaining
employees are machine operators who make up the garments.
In addition there are bundle boys and girls. One of these works
entirely in the production area, making bundles when neces-
sary, and the other three sort cloth in the cutting department,
make bundles and deliver them to the production department.
There is also a shipping department. The shipping. employees
106 NLRB No. 238.