Ivory Pine Co. of California

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Nov 10, 1953

107 N.L.R.B. 19 (N.L.R.B. 1953)

IVORY PINE COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA 19
to the first question, indicating their wish to be included in
a unit with the nonprofessional employees, they will be so
included. Their votes on the second question will then be
counted together with the votes of the nonprofessional voting
group (b) to decide the representative for the whole salaried
unit. If, on the other hand, the majority of the employees in
the professional voting group (a) vote against inclusion, they
will not be included with the nonprofessional employees.
Their votes on the second question will then be separately
counted to decide which union, if either, they want to rep-
resent them in a separate professional unit. If a majority
vote for one of the competing labor organizations in one
or more of the alternative units as described above, the
Regional Director conducting the elections is instructed to
issue a certification or certifications of representatives for
such unit or units.
[Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication.]
IVORY PINE COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA and OPERATING
ENGINEERS , LOCAL NO. 3, INTERNATIONAL UNION OF
OPERATING ENGINEERS , AFL, Petitioner . Case No. 20-
RC-2354. November 10, 1953
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before Albert
Schneider, 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
meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
2. The labor organization involved claims to represent
certain employees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the
representation of employees of the Employer within the
meaning of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The appropriate unit:
The Petitioner requests a unit of all production and main-
tenance employees employed at the Employer's logging opera-
tion near Kings Canyon National Park, California. The Em-
ployer contends that the appropriate unit should include the
logging operations and its sawmill plant at Dinuba, California,
with certain exclusions. The Employer also contends that
certain men engaged in falling, limbing, and bucking opera-
tions at the logging camp are not its employees but employees
of an independent contractor.
The Employer' s logging operations are carried on some 50
miles from the mill site at Dinuba. Each operation is separately
107 NLRB No. 9.
20 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
supervised by its own superintendent. The mill works on a
yearly basis; the logging operation is on a seasonal basis from
May to December. The hours of operation and job classifica-
tions are different for each. Hiring takes place at either point.
There are only a few transfers during the season to the
woods operations although many men apply for and obtain
jobs at the mill after the logging operation has ended. The
record discloses that a substantial number of logging em-
ployees live near the logging site, a considerable distance
from the mill.
Although the Board has recognized that logging and mill
employees may be grouped in a single unit,' it has also
held that either group, when not closely integrated with the
other, may constitute a separate unit in the absence of any
bargaining history and where no union seeks to represent
both groups in a single unit." Accordingly, on the basis of
the present record, we find that a unit limited to logging
employees is appropriate.
The Employer contends that certain men primarily en-
gaged in falling, limbing, and bucking are not its employees
but those of an independent contractor and should be excluded
from the unit. The evidence shows that when these men are
not so engaged, they work part time for the Employer as
choke setters, hook tenders, and brush pilers. Although
these men when working for the contractor are subject to
the latter's right of discharge the contractor himself works
under instructions from the Employer's logging superinten-
dent who supervises the entire logging operations. The Em-
ployer pays these men their wages, makes all social-security
and workmen's compensation deductions, guarantees them
the Federal minimum hourly wage rate, and keeps all records
pertaining thereto. The contractor, whose relationship to the
Employer is the subject of an oral agreement, is paid at a
specific rate per thousand feet cut, after which deductions
are made for the wage payments and taxes as indicated above.
In view of the foregoing, we believe that sufficient facts
are not presented in this record to warrant a finding that
the relationship of an independent contractor exists.3 The
fallers, limbers, and buckers are therefore included in the
unit of the Employer's employees.
We find that all production and maintenance employees
engaged in the logging operations of the Employer near
Kings Canyon National Park, California, including fallers,
limbers, and buckers, but excluding cooks and camp helpers,
office and clerical employees, guards, watchmen,4 all super-
1 Weyerhaeuser Timber Company, 87 NLRB 1076.
2 Hamilton Bros. Logging Company, 89 NLRB 1549.
9J G Howard Lumber Company, 93 NLRB 1230; H. J. Davenport d/b/a Enterprise Lumber
& Supply Co., 96 NLRB 784
4 The record shows there are no men regularly employed as watchmen at the logging
operation.
UNITY MANUFACTURING COMPANY 21
visors as defined in the Act, and all employees at the Employer's
mill at Dinuba, California, constitute a unit appropriate for the
purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section
9 (b) of the Act.5
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
5 Petitioner would exclude truckdrivers . As the record indicates that a regular classification
of truckdrivers does not exist , and that when truckdriving is done it is only occasionally and
intermittently and that any qualified employee may do it, we shall make no unit determination
for this category . Cities Service Refining Corp ., 94 NLRB 1635.
UNITY MANUFACTURING COMPANY, Petitioner and LOCAL
743, INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS,
CHAUFFEUR , WAREHOUSEMEN & HELPERSOF
AMERICA, AFL. Case No . 13-RM-173. November 10, 1953
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND CERTIFICATION
OF RESULTS OF ELECTION
Pursuant to a Decision and Direction of Election issued
herein on August 5, 1953 , 1 an election by secret ballot was
conducted on August 26, 1953, under the direction and super-
vision of the Regional Director for the Thirteenth Region. At
the conclusion of the election , a tally of ballots was issued and
served upon the parties , in accordance with the Rules and
Regulations of the Board . The tally shows that the Union failed
to receive a majority of the valid ballots cast in the election.
On September 1, 1953, the Union filed objections to conduct
affecting the results of the election . After an investigation, the
Regional Director issued his report on objections , in which he
recommended that the objections filed by the Union be over-
ruled. Thereafter , the Union filed exceptions to the Regional
Director ' s report, renewing , in substance , the contentions set
forth in the objections.
Upon the entire record in the case, including the Union's
objections, the Regional Director ' s report , and the Union's
exceptions , the Board finds:
The facts , as detailed in the Regional Director ' s report, are
undisputed . On August 21, 1953, 5 days before the election,
the Employer distributed a handbill to employees urging them
to vote "no" in the election . The statement in the handbill
which is in issue here reads as follows : "Both the Labor Board
and the Court said the Union was wrong in trying to force
you to join." The Union contends that this statement in-
correctly states the position of the National Labor
Relations Board and, as a result , was highly prejudicial
1Not reported in printed volumes of Board Decisions.
107 NLRB No. 10.