106 N.L.R.B. 1129 (N.L.R.B. 1953)

Cote Brothers, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsSep 16, 1953

106 N.L.R.B. 1129 (N.L.R.B. 1953)

COTE BROTHERS , INCORPORATED 1 129 4467 was in the process of renewing its compliance , and it did so on May 29, 1953. Thus, the Local again achieved compliance after the agreement was made and before the petition was filed. We find that the circumstances are like those in New Idea, Division of Avco Mfg. Co., 106 NLRB 1104, and that the agree- ment is now a bar to this proceeding for the reasons stated in that case. [The Board dismissed the petition.] Member Rodgers took no part in the consideration of the above Decision and Order. COTE BROTHERS , INCORPORATED and BAKERY AND SALES DRIVERS AND HELPERS , LOCAL 686, INTERNA- TIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS , CHAUFFEURS, WAREHOUSEMEN & HELPERS OF AMERICA , AFL, Peti- tioner . Case No. 1-RC-3199 . September 16, 1953 DECISION AND ORDER Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held on April 23, 1953, before Leo J. Halloran, hearing officer . A further hearing was held on remand on June 3, 1953, and June 12, 1953, for the purpose of taking additional testimony with respect to the scope of baking company units represented by the Petitioner. Contrary to the Employer ' s contention , the hearing officer's rulings made at the hearings are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.' Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds: 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. 2. The Petitioner claims to represent certain employees of the Employer. Although it is not conceded by the Employer, the Petitioner is a labor organization as defined in the Act because it exists for the purpose of engaging in collective bargaining with employers regarding wages, hours, and other conditions of employment.' 3. No question affecting commerce exists concerning the representation of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act: 'The Employer contends that it did not receive the Petitioner's request for recognition. The Employer. also challenges the adequacy of the Petitioner's showing of interest. It is well established that the filing of the petition constitutes a sufficient demand for recognition and that showing of interest is an administrative matter . American Fruit Growers , Incorporated, 101 NLRB 740. 2 Balboa Pacific Corporation, 88 NLRB 1505. 106 NLRB No. 178. 1130 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD The Petitioner seeks to represent a unit which the Board found appropriate in September 1951,3 namely , driver-sales- men, van drivers , spare drivers , and display man operating out of the Employer's Manchester, New Hampshire, plant. The Employer contends that the only appropriate unit is one that also includes the driver-salesmen employed at its relay stations in Laconia , NewHampshire , and Lowell , Massachusetts. In the alternative, the Employer requests a further hearing before another hearing officer. Except for a brief period after the Petitioner won a consent election for the Lowell driver- salesmen in June 1943 ,4 there is no evidence of subsequent collective bargaining among any of the employees involved he rein. The Employer is engaged in the baking of bread, rolls, and other products at its plant in Manchester, New Hampshire. As already noted, the Employer has in addition relay stations in Lowell and Laconia, which are about 26 and 42 miles, re- spectively, from Manchester. All driver-salesmen sell and deliver the baked goods to customers on their routes. Those sought by the Petitioner pick up goods at the bakery itself and have their routes in and around Manchester . The remaining driver - salesmen operate from the relay stations which are serviced by van drivers who transport goods from Manchester. The Employer's labor policies are formulated by its office in Manchester where payroll records are kept and checks are prepared for all employees . The driver - salesmen receive a commission with a guaranteed minimum which is somewhat higher for those working at Lowell. For the most part, how- ever, the Employer ' s driver-salesmen work under the same terms and conditions of employment . While the driver-sales- men at the relay stations and Manchester have separate immediate supervisors , they are all under the ultimate supervision of the head of the sales force in Manchester who has sole authority over hiring . There is some interchange of driver-salesmen , principally as temporary replacements for those who are ill or on vacation. Once or twice a year all driver-salesmen attend sales meetings in Manchester. It is clear from this record that the Employer's sales organization operates as an integrated whole and that the interests and conditions of work of the Lowell and Laconia driver-salesmen are closely allied with those of the driver- salesmen in Manchester . ' While the driver-salesmen for some baking companies represented by the Petitioner have not been bargained for on the basis of overall units, the record discloses that the two other firms with baking plants in Manchester have had a history of employer-wide collec- tive bargaining. In these circumstances, we conclude that the 3Case No. 1-RC-2289. Not reported in printed volumes of Board Decisions. The Petitioner lost the election directed in that case. 4Case No. 1-R-1480. 5 See Holsum Bakers, Inc., 102 NLRB 1495, and cases cited therein. GENERAL METALCRAFT, INC., OLYMPIA DIVISION 1 131 Manchester unit requested by the Petitioner is inappropriate. Although a company-wide unit is appropriate , the Petitioner does not have a sufficient showing of interest to justify an election for such a unit.' Accordingly , we shall dismiss the petition. [The Board dismissed the petition.] Member Murdock took no part in the consideration of the above Decision and Order. 6 Chesty Foods incorporated, 98 NLRB 1185. GENERAL METALCRAFT, INC., OLYMPIA DIVISION,' Peti- tioner and INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAM- STERS, CHAUFFEURS, WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS, LOCAL 378, AFL, AND BROTHERHOOD OF PAINTERS, DECORATORS, AND PAPERHANGERS, LOCAL NO. 743, AFL, AND SHEET METAL WORKERS INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION, LOCAL NO. 150, AFL. Case No. 19-RM-112. September 17, 1953 DECISION AND ORDER Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Rachel Storer, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and. are hereby af- firmed. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds: 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. 2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent certain employees of the Employer.' 3. The Employer petitions for an election in a unit of all production and maintenance employees at its plant near Olympia, Washington, excluding tool and die makers, ma- chinists, and janitors who are separately represented. The Unions contend the petition should be dismissed on the ground that three separate craft units, rather than the single unit proposed by the Employer are appropriate. At the Olympia plant, the Employer is engaged in the manu- facture of sheet metal products, comprising in the main cabi- nets, shower stalls, and lockers. Operations are performed in one 2-story building, and production is largely on an assembly line basis. Materials flow from the shear room in order to the The Employer's name appears as amended at the hearing. 2 The Unions are herein referred to individually as the Teamsters, the Painters, and the Sheet Metal Workers. 106 NLRB No. 177.