Arkansas City Flour Mills

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 20, 1950

88 N.L.R.B. 1293 (N.L.R.B. 1950)

In the Matter of ARKANSAS CITY FLOUR MILLS, EMPLOYER and AMERI-
CAN FEDERATION OF GRAIN MILLERS, AFL, PETITIONER
Case No. 17-RC-617.-Decided March 20, 1950
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before Martin Sacks,
hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are
free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.,
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor
Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with
this case to a three-member panel [Members Reynolds, Murdock, and
Styles].
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 em-
ployees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9
(c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The parties agree that an appropriate unit should consist of all
production and maintenance employees at the Employer's Arkansas
City, Kansas, plant, including truckers and loaders, but excluding
office employees and supervisors. The Employer contends, and the
Petitioner denies, that 12 persons classified as foremen 2 are super-
'The hearing officer referred to the Board the Employer's motion to dismiss the peti-
tion. The substance of the motion is (1) that the Regional Director with knowledge of
certain coercive tactics of union adherents failed to investigate and determine whether an
election would reflect a free choice of the employees and (2) that the hearing officer refused
to admit evidence of the said coercive tactics.
We find no merit in the first contention because these are administrative matters which
are not litigable at a hearing. We are administratively satisfied that the Regional Direc-
tor has conformed with the Act and the Board Rules and Regulations. See Grocers'
Biscuit Company, Inc., 85 NLRB 603. Point two is equally without merit because it is
well established that evidence of unfair labor practices is not admissible in representation
proceedings. See Bonwit Teller, Inc., 84 NLRB 414, and cases there cited. In this con-
nection, it is noted that the Employer has not filed unfair labor practice charges. The
motion is hereby denied.
2 Packing and loading foremen ; foreman of the feed mill ; foreman of the sack depart-
ment ; elevator foremen ; and head millers.
88 NLRB No. 223. 1293
1294 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
visors. Also the Employer would exclude laboratory assistants from
the unit as office employees and the Petitioner would include them
as production employees. Further, the Employer and the Petitioner
take no definite position with respect to the inclusion or exclusion
of watchmen.
The Employer is engaged in the manufacture of flour and feed.
The production and maintenance at the plant involved is under the
general supervision of a superintendent. The latter devotes about
one-half of his time to the Arkansas City plant, and the other half
to another plant of the Employer at Higginsville, Missouri. All 12
foremen in dispute are immediately and directly answerable to the
superintendent. When the latter is away the foremen are completely
and severally responsible for the operation of their respective depart-
ments. The foremen have authority to hire and fire employees.
Accordingly, we find that the packing and loading foremen, the
foreman of the feed mill, the foreman of the sack department, the
grain elevator foremen, and the head millers 3 are supervisors and
shall exclude them from the unit.
The laboratory assistants work in the laboratory under the direction
of the chief chemist.4 The laboratory is located on the second floor
of the Employer's office building. The assistants run tests for the
protein and moisture contents of wheat and they also perform other
periodic routine tests concerning certain chemical contents of the
flour. These employees require no professional or technical training
and they have none. These jobs are filled mostly by high school grad-
uates who generally work for short periods and then go to college.
They receive about 20 cents an hour less than other employees. We
shall include them in the unit.'
The watchmen regularly punch ADT clocks and protect the Em-
ployer's property against damage. They perform no other func-
tions. We shall, therefore, exclude them from the unit hereinafter
found appropriate.6
We find that all the production and maintenance employees at the
Employer's Arkansas City, Kansas, plant, including truckers and
loaders and laboratory assistants, but excluding office clerical employ-
ees, watchmen, guards, professional employees, packing and loading
foremen, the feed mill foreman, the sack department foreman, grain
elevator foremen, head millers, and all other supervisors within the
meaning of the Act, constitute a unit appropriate for purposes of
collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
8 Valier d Spies Milling Company, 78 NLRB 324.
4 The parties stipulated to exclude the chief chemist.
5 See Stokely Foods, Inc ., 83 NLRB 795.
6 See Section 9 (b) (3) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended.
ARKANSAS CITY FLOUR MILLS, 1295
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the
purposes of collective bargaining with the Employer, an election by
secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than
30 days from the date of this Direction, under the direction and super-
vision of the Regional Director for the Region in which this case was
heard, and subject to Sections 203.61 and 203.62 of National Labor
Relations Board Rules and Regulations, among the employees in the
unit found appropriate in paragraph numbered 4, above, who were
employed during the payroll period immediately preceding the date
of this Direction of Election, including employees who did not work
during said payroll period because they were ill or on vacation or
temporarily laid off, but excluding those employees who have since quit
or been discharged for cause and have not been rehired or reinstated
prior to the date of the election, and also excluding employees on strike
who are not entitled to reinstatement, to determine whether or not they
,desire to be represented, for purposes of collective bargaining, by
American Federation of Grain Millers, AFL.