C. F. Baker & Co., Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Dec 4, 1958

122 N.L.R.B. 316 (N.L.R.B. 1958)

316 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
that certain Respondents violated Section 8(b) (1) (A) and (2) in connection with
the requirement that Legg seek referral through Local 2232, any back pay for
Legg would amount at most to remuneration for 1 day's work. Under the cir-
cumstances set forth wherein Legg refrained from requesting a referral slip of
Rushing, although Legg would have received it, I believe that an award of back
pay to Legg would not effectuate the policies of the Act.
During the hearing the General Counsel offered evidence respecting the hiring
practices of certain employers who are not named in the complaint and with whom
Local 2232 has contractual relations. After appropriate objections , the evidence
was excluded upon the ground that the General Counsel had not shown that those
employers were engaged in commerce. The General Counsel thereupon made
several offers of proof. Subsequently I reversed my ruling to the extent that I
would receive evidence concerning the hiring practices of employers who are rep-
resented in collective bargaining by the management-signatories to the contract
described in section III, A, above, but the evidence was not offered again. In any
event, my recommendations below would not be broadened if the record estab-
lished that the hiring practices herein described are followed by other employers,
the Council, and Local 2232 in the area in which Local 2232 functions.
Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and upon the entire record in the
case, I make the following:
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. The operations of the Company constitute trade, traffic, and commerce among
the several States within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
2. The Respondents are labor organizations within the meaning of Section 2(5)
of the Act.
3. By causing and attempting to cause the Company to discriminate against
employees in violation of Section 8(a)(3) of the Act, Local 2232 and the Council
have engaged in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8(b)(2)
thereof.
4. By restraining and coercing employees in the exercise of the rights guaran-
teed in Section 7 of the Act, Local 2232 and the Council have engaged in unfair
labor practices within the meaning of Section 8(b) (1) (A) thereof.
5. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair labor practices affecting com-
merce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
6. The International has not engaged in unfair labor practices as alleged in the
complaint.
7. Except by their requirement affecting the conduct of millwright foremen
employed by the Company, Local 2232 and the Council have not engaged in
unfair labor practices as alleged in the complaint.
[Recommendations omitted from publication.]
C. F. Baker & Co., Inc. and International Union, United Auto-
mobile, Aircraft & Agricultural Implement Workers of
America (UAW), AFL-CIO, Petitioner. Case No. 1-RC-5316.
December 4, 1958
DECISION AND DIRECTION
Pursuant to a stipulation for certification upon consent election, an
election by secret ballot was conducted under the direction and super-
vision of the Regional. Director for the First Region, on August 29,
1958, among certain employees of the Employer. At the conclusion
of the election, a tally of ballots was furnished the parties. The tally
shows that, of the approximately 41 voters, 40 cast ballots, of which
18 were for the Petitioner, 17 were against the Petitioner, and 5 were
challenged.
122 NLRB No. 47.
C. F. BAKER & CO., INC. 317
As the challenged ballots were sufficient in number to affect the
results of the election, the Regional Director investigated the chal-
lenges, and thereafter, on October 8, 1958,, issued and duly served on
the parties a report on challenged ballots in which he found that the
challenges were without merit and recommended the opening and
counting of the ballots of Catherine Carboneau, Florence Ablondi,
Clyde E. Smith, Jr., Ralph Piccirillo, and Edwin Rose and the
issuing of a revised tally of ballots to the parties. The Petitioner filed
timely exceptions to the Regional Director's report.
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 Leedom and -Members Bean and Fanning].
The Board has considered the Regional Director's report and the
Petitioner's exceptions thereto, and upon the entire record in this
case finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the Act.
2. The Petitioner is a labor organization within the meaning of
the Act, claiming to represent certain employees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the represen-
tation 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 stipulated and we find that all production and main-
tenance employees of the Employer at its Fralningham, Massachusetts,
plant, excluding executives, office clerical employees, professional
employees, guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act, constitute
a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within
the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
5. In the absence of any exception 1 thereto, we adopt the Re-
gional Director's recommendation .that the Employer's challenges, to
the ballots of Ralph Piccirillo and Edwin Rose be overruled and
that their ballots be opened and counted.
The Petitioner excepts to the Regional Director's recommendation
that the challenges to the ballots of Catherine Carboneau, Clyde E.
Smith, Jr., and Florence Ablondi be overruled, but does not raise any
substantial or material issues with respect to his factual findings. The
Petitioner challenged these ballots on the grounds that these three
employees were supervisors within the meaning of the Act.
Carboneau and Ablondi are classified as forelady and assistant
forelady respectively in the packaging department, consisting of
seven employees. Commensurate with their years of service, they
3 Although the Petitioner excepts to one of the Regional Director 's factual findings
with respect to Edwin Rose, it does not except to the recommendation that his ballot
should be counted . Moreover, the facts not excepted to fully support the Regional
Director ' s finding that Rose is eligible to vote.
318 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR- RELATIONS BOARD
receive a higher rate of pay than the other female employees in the
department, but less than the male employees therein. Neither has
the power to hire or fire, or to make effective recommendations as to
personnel action. Both work along with the other employees in the
department. Their direction of these employees does not (require the
use of independent judgment but involves merely the routine trans-
mission of orders from higher supervision and the making of routine
assignments. As Carboneau and Ablondi do not possess any of the
statutory indicia of supervisory, authority, we hereby adopt the Re-
gional Director's finding that they are not supervisors and his recom-
mendation that the challenges to their ballots be overruled.
Smith is classified by the Employer as foreman of the roller room.
Smith works with the five other employees in this department and
also spends about half his time driving a truck. Smith receives a
higher hourly rate than other employees but is second in seniority.
Instructions from the superintendent are relayed by Smith to the
other employees. Smith exercises no independent judgment and does
not have the power to hire or fire or to make effective recommenda-
tions as to personnel action. Under the circumstances, we adopt the
Regional Director's finding that Smith is not a supervisor and his
recommendation that the challenge to Smith's ballot be overruled.
[The Board directed that the Regional Director for -the First Re-
gion shall, within ten (10) days from the date of this Direction, open
and count the ballots of Catherine Carboneau, Florence Ablondi,
Clyde E. Smith, Jr., Ralph Piccirillo, and Edwin Rose, and cause to
be served upon the parties a supplemental tally of ballots, including
the count of the ballots described above.]
Ready Mixed Concrete & Materials, Inc.' and Local #669, Con-
crete Products and Material Yard Employees, Petitioner.
Case No. 11-RC-1169. December 4, 1958
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a hearing. was held before Jerry B. Stone, hear=
ing 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 a South Carolina corporation which was
charted and commenced business operations on November 1, 1957.
'f The Employer's name appears as corrected at the hearing.
122 NLRB No. 43.