Hueneme Wharf & Warehouse Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 10, 1942

39 N.L.R.B. 636 (N.L.R.B. 1942)

In the Matter Of HUENEME WHARF & WAREHOUSE COMPANY and
INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, CHAUFFEURS,
WAREHOUSEMEN & HELPERS OF AMERICA, LOCAL 186, AFL
Case No. R-3504.-Decided March 10, 1942
Jurisdiction : warehousing industry.
Investigation and Certification of Representatives : existence of question: refusal
to accord recognition to petitioning union; contract with defunct representative,
no bar; seasonal pay roll directed to determine eligibility; election necessary.
Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : all employees engaged in warehousing
operations, including the cleaning, sacking, and shipping of beans, but excluding
all supervisory, clerical, and office employees and plant watchmen; agreement
as to.
Mr. Herbert G. Lyttle, of Port Hueneme, Calif. for the Company.
Mr. J. G. McLean, of Ventura, Calif., for the Teamsters.
Mr. Jess Sanchez, of Oxnard, Calif., for Citrus Workers.
Mrs. Augusta Spaulding, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On December 10, 1941, International Brotherhood of Teamsters,
Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers of America, Local 186, AFL,
herein called the Teamsters, filed with the Regional Director for the
Twenty-first Region (Los Angeles, California) a petition alleging that
a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representa-
tion of employees of Hueneme Wharf & Warehouse Company, Port
Hueneme, California, herein called the Company, and requesting an
investigation and certification of representatives pursuant to Section
9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called
the Act. On January 16, 1942, the National Labor Relations Board,
herein called the Board, acting pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the Act
and Article III, Section 3, of National. Labor Relations Board Rules
and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, ordered an investigation and
authorized the Regional Director to conduct it and to provide for an
appropriate -hearing upon due notice.
39 N. L. R. B., No. 116.
636
HUENEME WHARF & WAREHOUSE ' CO1V 'ANY 637
On January 22, 1942, the Regional Director issued a notice of
hearing, copies of which were duly served upon the' Company and the
Teamsters, and upon Agricultural and Citrus Workers Union, Local
No. 22342, A. F. L., herein called the Citrus Workers, a labor organiza-
tion formerly claiming to represent employees of the Company
directly affected by the investigation. Pursuant to notice, a hearing
was held at Los Angeles, California, on February 3, 1942, before
Charles M. Ryan, the Trial Examiner duly designated by the Chief
Trial Examiner. The Company and the Teamsters were represented
and participated in the hearing.' Full opportunity to be heard, to
examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence
bearing on the issues was afforded both parties. During the course
of the hearing, the Trial Examiner made several rulings on' motions
and on objections to the admission of evidence. The Board has
reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner and finds that no prejudi-
cial errors were committed. The rulings are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Hueneme Wharf & Warehouse Company is engaged in receiving,
storing, cleaning, and shipping beans belonging to its customers. Its
principal office and plant is located at Port Hueneme, California.
The beans handled annually by the Company are valued at approx-
imately $600,000. During the year 1939, 95 percent of such beans
were shipped by the Company to points outside California. The
Company admits that the volume of its business at the present time
is substantially the same as it was in 1939.
H. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehouse-
men & Helpers of America, Local 186, is a labor organization affiliated
with the American Federation of Labor, admitting to membership
employees of the Company.
Agricultural and Citrus Workers Union, Local No. 22342, was a
labor organization affiliated with the American Federation of Labor,
admitting to membership employees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On December 9, 1941, the Teamsters asked the Company for recog-
nition as bargaining agent of the Company's employees: At a con-
The former business representative of the Citrus Workers entered his appearance for the Citrus Workers
and testified at the hearing.
638 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ference held on December 19, 1941, between their representatives, the
Teamsters notified'the Company that it represented a majority of the
Company's employees. Citing a contract between the Company and
the Citrus Workers on behalf of the same employees, the Company
refused to bargain with the Teamsters without legal advice. On
December 23, 1941, the Teamsters notified the Company that all its
warehouse employees were then members of the Teamsters and
requested a bargaining conference. The Company did not reply to
this letter.
On January 2, 1941, the Board certified the Citrus Workers as sole
bargaining agent for the Company's employees.2 On February 28,
1941, the Company entered into a contract with the Citrus Workers,
in which it recognized that organization as sole bargaining agent of
such employees. - The contract provided that it should remain in full
force and effect until May 31, 1943, and that it should be automatically
renewable thereafter from year to year unless it should be terminated
by 30 days' notice prior to the expiration of any contract year.
The Citrus Workers- included in its membership not only warehouse
employees of the Company but also pickers and other field employees
of other companies.in the locality. In the summer and fall of 1941
there was great dissatisfaction among the members of the Citrus
Workers, due in part to the inclusion of warehouse and field employees
in the same local union. Dues were unpaid and the disorganization
of the local seemed imminent. In October 1941 the Teamsters,
learning that the Citrus Workers was about to be dissolved, organized
the Company's employees. On November 17, 1941, employees of the
Company who were members of the Citrus Workers voted to surrender
the charter of their local union to the American Federation of Labor,
herein called the A. F. of L., and to form a local union directly affili-
ated with International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs,
Warehousemen & Helpers of America. On November 19, 1941,
pickers and other field employees, who were also members of the
Citrus Workers, joined with employees of the Company in voting to
surrender the charter of the Citrus Workers to the A. F. of L. They
further decided to apply for a charter for a new local, the member-
ship in which should be restricted to pickers and field employees.
Employees of the Company affiliated with the Teamsters, the peti-
tioner in this proceeding. On November 20, 1941, the Citrus Workers,
by a letter to the Teamsters, "assigned" its contract with the Company
to the Teamsters. The A. F. of L. accepted the surrender of the
charter of the Citrus Workers, and the Citrus Workers thereupon
ceased, to exist as a labor organization.'
2 Matter of Hueneme Wharf & Warehouse Company and Agrtcultural and Citrus Workers, Local 22342, -
A.F.L,28N L R B 136.
3 The A. F. of L , in accordance with their request, subsequently granted a charter for a new local to pickers
and field employees formerly affiliated with the Citrus Workers.
HUENEM'E WHARF & WAREHOUSE COMPANY 639
The Company contends that its contract with the Citrus Workers
"assigned" on November 20, 1941,. to the Teamsters operates as a
bar to this proceeding. We find no merit in this contention. The
contract contemplated that the Citrus Workers would continuously
represent the employees, but this organization has disbanded, and the
A. F. of L. has accepted the surrender of its charter, leaving the
employees without a bargaining agent either to administer the terms
of the present contract or to negotiate a new contract. Whether or
not the employees are bound by the terms of the contract with the
Citrus Workers until May 31, 1943, it is clear that, under the circum-
stances here presented, they are entitled to select a new bargaining
agent at this time if they so desire. We find that the contract is
not a bar to a present determination of representatives.
The statement of the Trial Examiner read into the record at the
hearing discloses that the Teamsters represents a substantial number
of employees in the appropriate unit.'
We find that a question has arisen concerning the representation
of employees of the Company.
IV. THE EFFECT OF THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
UPON COMMERCE
We find that the question concerning representation which has
arisen, occurring in connection with the operations of the Company
described in 'Section I above, has a close, intimate, and substantial
relation to trade, traffic, and 'commerce among the several States and
tends to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce
and the free flow of commerce.
V. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Company and the Teamsters agree, and we find, that all
employees of the Company engaged ;n warehousing operations, includ-
ing the cleaning, sacking, and shipping of beans, but excluding all
supervisory, clerical, and office employees and plant watchmen, con-
stitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining.5
We further find that said unit will insure to employees of the Company
the full benefit of their right to self-organization and to collective
bargaining and will otherwise effectuate the,policies ,of the Act.
4 The Teamsters submitted to the Trial Examiner 63 authorization cards, all dated December 9, 1941,
bearing names of employees on the Company' s pay roll of December 10, 1941. There are 91 employees
listed on this pay roll.
6 In the prior representation proceeding , cited in footnote 2 above, the parties agreed , and the Board found.
the same unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining
448105-42-vol 39-42
640 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
VI. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
We find that the question concerning representation which has
arisen can best be resolved by an election by secret ballot.
The Company is engaged in seasonal work. The peak season is
during the winter months. The Company and the Teamsters agreed
at the hearing that any pay roll between December 10, 1941, and
February 3, 1942, would be an appropriate pay roll to determine the
eligibility of employees to vote if the Board directed an election.
Since it appears that the pay-roll period immediately preceding Feb-
ruary 3, 1942, is a pay roll representing the full complement of the
Company's employees,, we shall direct that those eligible to vote in
the election shall be employees in the appropriate unit who were
employed during that pay-roll period, subject to the limitations and
additions set forth in our Direction of Election.
On the basis of the above findings of fact and upon the entire
record in the case, the Board makes the following:
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. A question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the repre-
sentation of employees of Hueneme Wharf & Warehouse Company,
Port Hueneme, California, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and
Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
2. All employees of Hueneme Wharf & Warehouse Company, Port
Hueneme,, California, engaged in warehousing operations, including
the cleaning, sacking, and shipping of beans, but excluding all super-
visory, clerical, and office employees and plant watchmen., constitute
a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the
meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
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 Re-
lations Act, 49 Stat. 449, and pursuant to Article III, Section 8 of
National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2,
as amended, it is hereby.
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation ordered by the Board
to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining
with Hueneme Wharf & Warehouse Company, Port Hueneme, Cali-
fornia, 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 of Election, under the direction , and supervision of the
Regional Director for the Twenty-first 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 all
HUENEME WHARF & WAREHOUSE COMPANY 641,
employees of the Company engaged in warehousing operations and the
cleaning, sacking, and shipping of beans, who were employed during
the pay-roll period immediately preceding February 3, 1942, includ-
ing employees who did not work during such pay-roll period because
they were ill or on vacation or in the active military service or train-
ing of the United States, or temporarily, laid off, but excluding super-
visory, clerical, and office employees, plant watchmen, and employees
who have since quit or been discharged for cause, to determine whether
or not they desire to be represented by International Brotherhood of
Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers of America, Local
186, AFL, for the purposes of collective bargaining.
CHAIRMAN MILLIS took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Direction of Election:
0