Sterilon Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 2, 1964

147 N.L.R.B. 219 (N.L.R.B. 1964)

STERILON CORPORATION 219
This notice must remain posted for 60 consecutive days from the date of posting,
and must not be altered , defaced, or covered by any other material.
Employees may communicate with the Board 's Regional Office , Transit Building,
Fourth nand Vine Streets , Cincinnati , Ohio, Telephone No. 381-1420 , if they have
any question concerning this notice or compliance with its provisions.
APPENDIX B
NOTICE TO ALL MEMBERS OF LOCAL UNION No. 2058 , UNITED BROTHERHOOD OF
CARPENTERS AND JOINERS OF AMERICA, AFL-CIO, AND TO ALL EMPLOYEES OF
HARGETT CONSTRUCTION COMPANY'
Pursuant to the Recommended Order of a Trial Examiner of the National Labor
Relations Board , and in order to effectuate the policies of the National Labor
Relations Act, as amended , we hereby notify you that:
WE WILL NOT refuse to refer or clear Don Taylor or any other prospective
employee for employment with Respondent Hargett Construction Company,
or any other employer, because such employee is not current in the payment
of his union dues.
WE WILL NOT enter into, perform , maintain , or otherwise give effect to any
arrangement with Respondent Hargett Construction Company, whereby the
payment of union dues is required as a condition precedent to the obtaining,
,as distinguished from the retaining, of employment.
WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner restrain or coerce employees or
or applicants for employment in the exercise of rights guaranteed in Section 7
of the Act.
WE WILL notify Respondent Hargett Construction Company that we have no
objection to its employment of Don Taylor and will, upon .the tender by Don
Taylor of the fee uniformly required of other carpenters seeking referral to a
job, issue to him a work permit and refer him or clear him for employment
on a nondiscriminatory basis.
WE WILL jointly and severally with Respondent Hargett Construction Com-
pany make Don Taylor whole for any loss of pay he may have suffered because
of the discrimination against him.
LOCAL UNION No. 2058 , UNITED BROTHERHOOD OF
CARPENTERS AND JOINERS OF AMERICA, AFL-CIO,
Labor Organization..,
Dated------------------- By-------------------------------------------
(ROBERT RODGERS , Busines8 Agent)
This notice must remain posted for 60 consecutive days from the date of posting,
and must not be altered , defaced , or covered by any other material.
Employees may communicate with the Board 's Regional Office , Transit Building,
Fourth and Vine Streets , Cincinnati , Ohio, Telephone No. 381-1420, if they have
any question concerning this notice or compliance with its provisions.
Sterilon Corporation and United Rubber , Cork, Linoleum and
Plastic Workers of America , AFL-CIO, Petitioner . Case No.
3-RC-1143. June 2, 1964
DECISION AND ORDER DENYING MOTION AND
REQUEST TO CLARIFY CERTIFICATION
On May 8, 1953, the Board certified the United Rubber, Cork,
Linoleum and Plastic Workers of America, AFL-CIO, as the bargain-
ing representative of all production and maintenance employees of the
Employer at its Buffalo, New York, plant, excluding office clerical
employees, professional employees, guards, and supervisors as defined
in .the Act. On December 16, 1963, the Petitioner filed a motion and
147 NLRB No. 37.
220 DECISIONS OF.NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
request to clarify certification of the above unit to include the em-
ployees and the work and duties of employees in the shipping and re-
ceiving department . On January 20, 1964, the Employer filed an
answer in opposition to the Petitioner 's motion in which it requested
that the Board deny the motion.
On January 22,1964, the Board issued an order directing hearing re-
ferring the matter to the Regional Director for the Third Region and
directing that a hearing be held for the purpose of taking testimony
with respect to issues raised by the Petitioner 's motion and request to
clarify certification and the Employer's opposition thereto. A
hearing was held befoer Hearing Officer Hymen Dishner on March 4,
1964. All parties appeared and participated at the hearing. The
Hearing Officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial
error and are hereby affirmed. Thereafter , the Employer filed a brief
in which it denied the assertions of the Union , contended that in any
event the problems raised could only be resolved by a representation
petition and a Board-conducted election , and again requested that the
motion be denied.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, the Board has
delegated its powers in connection with this case, to a three-member
panel [Chairman McCulloch and Members Fanning and Jenkins].
Upon the entire record in this case the Board finds :
The Employer is a New York corporation engaged in the manufac-
ture of disposable hospital supplies . The Petitioner is the current
contractual representative of the certified unit described above. Some
time after 1957 the Employer established a new job classification and
department of shipping and receiving employees. The Petitioner con-
tends that the employees working in the shipping and receiving depart-
ment perform bargaining unit work and come within the scope of the
previously certified unit, and requests clarification of the existing unit
to include them. The Employer contends that the shipping and re-
ceiving function existed at the time of the certification in 1953 and that
the inclusion of the shipping and receiving employees now, 11 years
after the election , should be only through a Board -conducted self-
determination election . The Employer also contends . that there is
no community of interest between the shipping and receiving em-
ployees and the employees in the bargaining unit.
There are seven employees in the shipping and receiving department.
Two are conceded by both parties to be supervisors , three are shippers,
and two are receivers .' All employees in these two categories perform
the usual function connected with shipping and receiving . In the re-
ceiving section , one employee receives the incoming raw stock and pre-
pares it for removal to the raw stock department . The other employee
1 The Employer contends that one of the receivers is a supervisor . In view of our dis-
position of this motion , we need not decide this issue at the present time.
STERILON CORPORATION 221
keeps the records of the raw stock inventory. The duties of the em-
ployees in the shipping section consist of selecting merchandise from
inventory to fill customers' orders and placing it on the shipping dock.
They also notify the various trucklines when the merchandise is to be
picked up and see to it that the bill of lading is signed prior to
shipping.
The record indicates that the receiving and shipping employees
work in and around the production areas. The receiving employees
are supervised by the manufacturing department as are the produc-
tion and maintenance employees, while shipping employees are super-
vised by the sales department. All employees have the same fringe
benefits and the same conditions of employment. There is a certain
amount of interchange among the employees because of illness or
vacations. All employees eat in the same area and punch the same
timeclock. The shipping and receiving employees do not have a,
distinct and homogeneous interest different from other employees in
the unit, but, in fact, have interests and conditions of employment
similar to those employees now represented by the Petitioner. Be-
cause of the evident community of interest we would normally include
such employees in a common unit with production and maintenance
employees. However, in the circumstances of this case, we feel that
these employees cannot be treated as an accretion, but are entitled
to a self-determination election before being added to the existing
bargaining unit.
We base this conclusion on the following factors : The function, but
not the classification, of shipping and receiving was in existence prior
to the Board-conducted election in 1953. At that time the function
was performed by a supervisor in the watch strap manufacturing
division and a stockboy. After the certification this function was
performed by a separate department. The Petitioner made no effort
to represent these employees until approximately 11 years after the
Board certified the production and maintenance unit. Neither the
contract executed pursuant to the certification, nor any subsequently
executed contract, includes the function or classification of shipping
and receiving. In fact, the Petitioner has specifically demanded that
unit employees who transfer to shipping and receiving be removed
from the seniority list.
In view of the foregoing, and upon the entire record, we find that
the motion for clarification raises a question concerning representa-
tion which may not be resolved through a clarification of the existing
unit. The proper procedure is a petition pursuant to Section 9(c)
of the Act seeking an election. We shall therefore grant the Em-
ployer's request that the Petitioner's motion be denied.
[The Board denied the motion and request to clarify certification.]