Coast Drum and Box Co.Download PDFNational Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsOct 30, 195196 N.L.R.B. 1135 (N.L.R.B. 1951) Copy Citation COAST DRUM AND BOX COMPANY 1135 reason of the failure of the Congress of Industrial Organizations to have complied with the requirements of section 9 (f), (g), or (h) of the aforesaid Act prior to December 22, 1949, or by reason of the failure of the American Federation of Labor to have complied with the provisions of section 9 (f), (g), or (h) of the aforesaid Act prior to November 7, 1947:.. . This amendment, as the Committee Reports expressly state,5 was designed in part to protect, against charges of unfair labor practice, parties who acted in reliance upon certificates issued by the Board under circumstances such as those present here. In view of the foregoing amendment, we find no merit in the petition herein and shall accordingly deny it. Order IT IS ORDERED that the petition of John Cavicchia be, and it hereby is, denied. MEMBERS REYNOLDS and MURDOCK took no part in the consideration of the above Supplemental Decision and Order. 5 Sen. Rep. No. 646 on S. 1959, 82d Cong., 1st Sess. (1951), p. 2; H. Rep. No. 1082 on S. 1959, 82d Cong., 1st Sess. (1951), pp. 1-2. COAST DRUM AND Box COMPANY and T. F. MARTIN , PETITIONER, and Box MAKERS , NOVELTY AND SPECIALTY , WOODWORKERS UNION, LOCAL 3036, UNITED BROTHERHOOD OF CARPENTERS AND JOINERS OF AMERICA, AFL. Case No. 90-RD 53. October 30, 1951 Decision and Order Upon a petition for decertification duly filed, a hearing was held before Nathan R. Berke, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act, the National Labor Relations Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member panel [Chair- man Herzog and Members Reynolds and Murdock]. 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 Petitioner asserts that the Union is no longer the repre- sentative of certain employees of the Employer, as defined in Section 9 (a) of the Act. The Union is a labor organization recognized by the 96 NLRB No. 178. 1136 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Employer as the exclusive bargaining representative for the employees designated in the petition. 3. No 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, for the following reasons : T. E. Martin, the Petitioner herein, was employed as a foreman in a subsidiary corporation of the Employer until 1942. Since that date, he has worked as a machine operator in the tub cover department of the Employer. As part of his duties, he trains new employees-from two to five in number-and directs their work until they are able to operate their own machines. The evidence is undisputed that he has the authority to make effective recommendations regarding the reten- tion or the discharge of new employees.' Moreover, he has attended meetings of foremen pertaining to the work of his department and has substituted for the foreman of the department during the latter's absence. We find that the Petitioner is a supervisor within the meaning of the Act, and is therefore ineligible to represent the Employer's em- ployees in this proceeding.2 We shall for this reason . dismiss the petition., Order IT Is HEREBY ORDERED that the petition filed herein be, and it hereby is, dismissed. 1 The Employer's manager testified that he would accord great weight to such recom- mendations. 2 Clyde J. Merris, 77 NLRB 1375. See also Great Atlantic l Pacific Tea Co., 86 NLRB Si. 8 We find it unnecessary therefore to consider the other issues raised in this proceeding. W. F. & JOHN BARNES COMPANY and INTERNATIONAL UNION, UNITED AUTOMOBILE , AIRCRAFT & AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA (UAW-CIO), PETITIONER. Case No. 13-R(ir-'2091. Octo- ber 30, 1951 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 Richard C. Swander, 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 Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-meinber panel [Members Houston, Murdock, and Styles]. 96 NLRB No. 186. Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation