85 N.L.R.B. 277 (N.L.R.B. 1949)

Clearfield Cheese Co., Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsJul 19, 1949

85 N.L.R.B. 277 (N.L.R.B. 1949)

In the Matter of CLEARFIELD CHEESE COMPANY, INC., EMPLOYER and AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GRAIN MILLERS, LOCAL UNION No. 128, AFL, PETITIONER Case No. 17-RC-4401.-Decided July 19, 19/19 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before Charles F. McCoy, 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 Gray]. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds : 1.. The business of the Employer : The Employer, a Pennsylvania corporation, is engaged in the proc- essing of cheese products at its Clinton, Missouri, plant. The Employer commenced operations at this plant in October 1948. During the past year the Employer has purchased for processing, cheddar cheese valued in excess of $100,000, about 50 percent of which was purchased outside the State of Missouri. Recently, however, most purchases have been from within the State. During the same period, the Employer sold cheese products valued in excess of $100,000, of which approximately 50 percent was shipped to points outside the State of Missouri. Practically all sales are made to wholesale grocers, who do business in other States as well as in Missouri. We find, contrary to the contention of the Employer, that it is en- gaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act.' 2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain em- ployees of the Employer 2 i Cf. Matter of Phoenix Pie Company , 79 N. L. It . B. 754; Matter of S. W . Evans d Son, 81 N. L. R. B. 161. 2 Although the Employer refused to stipulate that the Petitioner is a labor organization, the record shows that Local No. 128 holds a charter from its parent organization , American Federation of Grain Millers , which in turn holds an international charter from the American Federation of Labor, and clearly is a labor organization within the meaning of the Act. 85 N. L . R. B., No. 50. 277 278 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 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 following employees constitute an appropriate unit for the purposes of collective bargaining, within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act : All production and maintenance employees, excluding office em- ployees, buyers, salesmen, and supervisors as defined in the Act.3 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 pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of this Direction of Election, including employees who did not work during said pay-roll 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 rein- stated 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 bargain- ing, by American Federation of Grain Millers, Local Union No. 128, AFL. 2 There is some question as to whether or not Employer 's two truck drivers and janitor should be included in the unit. Because the duties and interests of these employees appear to be allied with those of the other employees in the production and maintenance group, we shall include them in the unit.