Fairmont Creamery Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Oct 8, 1942

44 N.L.R.B. 941 (N.L.R.B. 1942)

In the Matter Of FAIRMONT CREAMERY Co. and UNITED MINE WORKERS
, OF AMERICA, DISTRICT 50
Case No. R- `?58.Decided October 8, 1.9 ?
Jurisdiction : dairy products storage and distributing industry.
Investigation and Certification of Representatives : existence of question: con-
flicting claims of rival representatives; election necessary. I
Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : all employees including clerical em-
ployees but excluding executives, supervisors who do no manual-labor, sales-
men, temporary employees, and specifically named employees whose work would
appear to be confidential and directly related to the problems of labor relations
Mr. C. B. Evinger, of Omaha, Nebr., and Mr. George F. Boynton, of
Hamden, Conn., for the Company.
Mr. Samuel E. ngo ff, of Boston, Mass., Mr. Edward McCreven, and
Mr. John Ulichney, of New Haven, Conn., for District 50.
Mr. Harold V. Feimmnaric, Cllr. Matty Ruoppolo, and Mr. John Pisano,
of New Haven, Conn., for the Teamsters.
Miss 31elvern R. Krelow, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon petition duly filed by United Mine Workers of America, Dis-
trict 50, herein called District 50, alleging that a question affecting
commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of
Fairmont Creamery Co., New Haven, Connecticut, herein called the
Company, the National Labor Relations Board provided for an appro-
priate hearing upon due notice before Jack Davis, Trial Examiner.
Said hearing was held at New Haven, Connecticut, on September 2,
1942. The Company, District 50, and International Brotherhood of
,Teamsters and Chauffeurs, Local 433, AFL, herein called the Team-
sters, appeared, participated, and were afforded full opportunity to be
heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evi-
dence bearing on the issues. The Trial Examiner's rulings made at
the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirlned.
44 N. L. R. B., No. 179.
941
942 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL` LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF TIIE COMPANY
I
Fairmont Creamery Co., a Delaware corporation, having its prin-
cipal place of business at Omaha, Nebraska, owns and operates a
variety of plants throughout the country. This proceeding involves
the Company's New Haven, Connecticut, plant, where it is engaged in
the cold storage and distribution of perishable food products, such Its
butter, cheese, eggs, poultry, frozen foods, and dried milk. During
the 6 months preceding the hearing, the Company received at its New
Haven plant finished and unfinished products valued at approximately
$1,000,000, practically all of which was shipped to the plant from
points outside the State of Connecticut. During the same period 'the
Company made sales of its products to retailers, institutions, whole-
salers, schools, etc., less than 1 percent of which'products was shipped
to points outside the State of Connecticut. The Company concedes
that it is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the 'National
Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
United Mine Workers of America, District 50, is a labor organiza-
tion admitting to membership -employees of the Company:
International Brotherhood of Teamsters and Chauffeurs, Local 433,
is a labor organization affiliated with the American Federation of
Labor, admitting to membership employees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
District 50 and the Teamsters claim to represent the employees in the
Company's New Haven, Connecticut, plant. The Company refuses to
recognize either organization until the Board makes a,determination
as to the appropriate unit and certifies a representative.
A report prepared by the' Regional Director and, introduced into
evidence, at the hearing indicates that District 50 represents a sub-
stantial number of employees of the Company in the unit hereinafter
found to be appropriate.'
' The Regional Director reported that District 50 submitted 48 authorization cards, all
dated in July and August 1942 ' Of the 48 cards presented , 44 bear apparently genuine
signatures of persons whose names appear on the Company's pay roll of August 10. 1942.
The Regional Director further reported that the Teamsters presented 15 application-for-
membership cards , 1 dated in August 1942; 14 undated All 15 cards bear apparently
genuine signatures of persons whose names appear on the Company 's pay roll of August
10, 1942. Nine employees signed cards with both organizations . There are approximately
45 employees in the unit hereinafter found to be appropriate.
FAIRMONT CREAMERY CO. 943
- We find that a question affecting commerce has 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.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
District 50 and the Teamsters' contend that all employees at the
Company's New Haven, Connecticut, plant, including clerical em-
ployees, but excluding executives, supervisors who do no manual labor,
confidential employees, salesmen, and temporary employees consti-
tute an appropriate unit. The unions agree that Geraldine Santillo
and Donald B. Wolfe should be excluded as confidential employees.
They further agree that the following employees should be excluded
also : George Boynton, plant manager ; George Pryde, credit manager ;
Truman Gilbert, sales manager; Andrew F. Gorske, office manager;
Edward P. Griswold, plant superintendent; Thomas Smith, chief engi-
neer; and Wilbur Nanfeldt, foreman of the poultry department. The
Company contends that all employees, excluding supervisory em-,
ployees, confidential employees, outside salesmen, and temporary, em-
ployees constitute an appropriate unit. It further contends that the
clerical employees should be excluded as confidential employees.
The parties also disagree as to whether or not certain employees
come within the classification of supervisory employees. The unions
claim that John Allis, Roland Sauvage, and Marcel Stacoffe are gang
leaders engaged in manual labor and should be included. The Com-
pany desires their exclusion.
John Allis is one of six employees in the cold storage department.
These employees are engaged in loading and unloading trucks; and
packing and stacking merchandise in the cold-storage room. Allis
is paid on a salary basis and the other employees are paid on an
hourly rate. Allis is engaged in the same type of work as that of
the other employees 75 percent of the time. He gives orders to other
employees; however, they may consult Allis or go directly to Plant
Superintendent Griswold. Allis has the right to recommend dis-
ciplinary action or the discharge of any employee in his department.
Office Manager Gorske, however, does all the hiring in, the plant.
Allis, while testifying, stated that he considers himself a "straw
boss"; that the employees in his department take their, orders-from'
him; and that he receives his orders from Griswold. We conclude
that Allis is a supervisory employee and we shall exclude him from
the ' unit.
Roland Sauvage is the foreman of the egg department, which
includes two other employees whose duties consist of candling eggs.
Sauvage is engaged in manual labor about 50 percent of the time.
He does some candling for inspection and, when necessary, also
r
944 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
candles eggs for orders. He keeps a record of stock on hand, recom-
mends buying, and does some buying. He is on a salary basis and
the other employees in the department are paid on an hourly basis.
His pay is about 25 percent more than that of the other employees.
He has the right to recommend disciplinary action or the discharge
of any employee'in his department. When the frozen packin,gde-
partment is operating; Sauvage performs similar duties in that de-
partment. We find that Sauvage is a supervisory employee and we
shall exclude him from the unit.
Marcel Stacoffe has charge of the shipping department, where he
receives orders from the order department and sees that the mer-
chandise is properly packed and shipped to customers, by truck or
by express. Stacoffe supervises the work of an assistant shipper and
of eight drivers, and four employees who pack the orders. When
necessary he engages in the same duties as those of the employees
in his department., He is paid on a salary basis and the other em-
ployees are paid on an hourly rate. His pay is about 25 percent more
than that of the others. He has the right to recommend disciplinary
action or the discharge of any employee in his department. We con-
clude that Stacoffe is a supervisory employee and we shall exclude'
him from the unit.
Geraldine Santillo is classified as a confidential secretary. Donald
B. Wolfe is listed as the chief accountant and paymaster. The in-
formation which these employees might receive while engaged iri their
work would appear to be confidential and directly' related to the
problems of labor relations. We find that Geraldine Santillo and
Donald B. Wolfe are confidential employees and accordingly we shall
exclude them from the unit.
The Company requests the exclusion of the following persons on
the ground that they are confidential employees:
Thelma Bauer takes orders over the telephone. She has access to
contract cards which represent sales in larger volume at a price which
is based on volume, which is normally less than the standard-price.
Dorothy Buller and Dorothy Oertel handle the accounts receivable
ledger. They post all sales, all remittances, and all credits in the
ledger. They are classified as bookkeeper-s. Alexandria Conlon is a
switchboard operator. Harry Coulombe operates the commercial cold-
storage record. In this record he makes entries of all merchandise
coming in for storage. The Company claims, therefore, that he has
knowledge of the quantity of stock of any stockroom. Gracie Gilbert
and Lucy Marcantognini work together. They sort sales tickets and
make a run-off and recap on tickets by items. It is claimed by, the
Company that these employees have knowledge of the total daily and
monthly sales. Clifford E. Hall is a storage-entry clerk; he makes
FAIRMONT CREAMERY CO. 945
entries of all incoming and outgoing merchandise. The Company
contends that he has, therefore, knowledge of the dollar value of the
Company's stock. Norman Manderville is an order clerk. Occasion-
ally he helps in the shipping department. Roderick McDonald is the
cashier and accounts-payable clerk. He records the daily receipts and
pays all,bills for any merchandise or supplies purchased. He handles
all the money coming in, prepares and deposits it in the bank. Cath-
erine McLaughlin's duties are similar to those of Thelma Bauer and
Norman Manderville. The information which the above-named per-
sons may possess in no instance relates directly to the problem of labor
relations. The possession of important information is of itself insuf-
ficient to justify exclusion from the right to collective bargaining.2 We
shall, therefore, include these employees in the unit.
We find that all employees at the Company's New Haven, Connec-
ticut, plant, including clerical employees, but excluding executives (in-
cluding George Boynton, George Pryde, Truman Gilbert, Andrew F.
Gorske, Edward P. Griswold, Thomas Smith, and Wilbur Nanfeldt),,
supervisors who do no manual labor (including John Allis, Roland
Sauvage, and Marcel Stacofe), salesmen, temporary employees,
Geraldine Santillo, and Donald B. Wolfe constitute a unit appropriate
for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Sec-
tion 9 (b) of the Act.
0
V. THE DETER3IINXTION OF REPRESENTATIVES
We shall direct that the question concerning representation which,
has arisen be resolved by an election by secret ballot among the em-
ployees in the appropriate unit who were employed during the pay-
roll period immediately preceding the date of our Direction of Election
herein, subject to the limitations and additions set forth in the Direc
ti on.
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 t
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Fairmont Cream-
ery Co., New Haven, Connecticut, an election by secret ballot shall be
conducted as early as possible but not later than thirty (30) days
fromAhe date of this Direction, under the direction and supervision
2Matter of Creamery Package Manufacturing Company ( Lake Mills Plant) and Steel:
Workers Organizing Committee, C 1 0, 34 N . L. R B 108
487498-42-vol . 44-^--60
'946 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
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, Section 9, of said Rules and Regulations, among the em-
ployees 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
period because they were ill or on vacation or`in the active military
service or training-of the United States, or temporarily laid off, but
excluding employees who have since quit or been discharged for cause,
to determine whether they desire to be represented by District 50,
United Mine Workers of America, or by International Brotherhood
of Teamsters and Chauffeurs, Local 433, AFL, for the, purposes of
collective bargaining, or by neither.
MR. GERARD D. REILLY tOOk 110 part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Direction of Election.
0