Danny Danenberg

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 16, 1953

103 N.L.R.B. 714 (N.L.R.B. 1953)

714 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
tion of a collective-bargaining representative.2 We therefore adopt
the recommendation of the Regional Director and find that the Em-
ployer thereby interfered with the employees' freedom of choice in_
the election.
Accordingly, we shall set aside the results of the election and shall
direct a new election at such time as the Regional Director advises is
appropriate.3
Order
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the election of December 4, 1952, among
the employees of Scripto, Inc. (Ordnance Division) at its Atlanta,
Georgia, plant be, and it hereby is, set aside.
2 See Sparkletts Dr3nleing Water Corporation, 100 NLRB 1296 As employees are not
required to look behind the plain meaning of coercive words, we find no relevance in the
Employer 's contention that it had noncoercive reasons for making these statements. See
Teleeliron, Inc , 93 NLRB 474, Western Cotton Oil Company, 95 NLRB 1433
3In view of our disposition herein, we find it unnecessary to, and do not , pass upon the
various other grounds urged by the Intervenor , and found by the Regional Director, as a
basis for setting aside the election.
DANNY DANENBERG 1 and UNITED FRESH FRUIT & VEGETABLE WORKERS
LIU #78, CIO, PETITIONER
DANNY DANENBERG and TRUCKDRIVERS , WAREHOUSEMEN & HELPERS,
LOCAL UNION No. 898; INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS,
CHAUFFEURS , WAREHOUSEMEN & HELPERS OF AMERICA, AFL,
PETITIONER . Cases Nos. 21-RC-2296 and 21-RC-2911. March 16,
1953
Decision , Order, and Direction of Election
Upon separate petitions duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the
National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held in the above con-
solidated cases 2 before H. C. Bumgarner, hearing officer. The hear-
ing 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-
member panel [Members Houston, 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 Act.3
1 The petition and other tormal papers in this proceeding are amended to show the
correct name of the Employer.
2 On January 29, 1953, the Regional Director , pursuant to Section 102.64 ( b) of the
Board's Rules and Regulations, Series 8, consolidated the proceedings in the above cases.
3 Stanislaus Implement and Hardware Company, Limited , 91 NLRB 618.
103 NLRB No. 74.
DANNY DANENBERG 715
2. The labor organizations involved herein claim to represent cer-
tain employees of the Employer.
3. In Case No. 21-RC-2926, the Petitioner seeks to represent the
Employer's packing shed employees. In Case No. 21-RC-2942, the
Petitioner requests a unit of truck and tractor drivers employed dur-
ing the produce harvest season . The Employer contends that both
groups of workers are "agricultural laborers" and not "employees"
within the meaning of Section 2 (3) of the Act, and therefore the
Board has no jurisdiction over them.
The Employer owns and operates two adjacently situated packing
sheds near El Centro, California. Here, over a December to April
season, the Employer dry packs lettuce and cabbage harvested on
the Employer's farms, which are located up to 6 miles from the sheds.
The sheds and their connecting railroad spur represent an investment
of at least $45,000 by the Employer. During the harvest season for
lettuce and cabbage, the sheds employ about 60 workers, roughly 25
percent of whom work on the Employer's farms the remainder of the
year. In this relatively small shed and farm operation, the Em-
ployer has no separate supervision or payroll for shed and farm
employees. However, the shed employees are higher paid, receiving
wages comparable to those paid by other packers in the area.
On these facts, and on the record as a whole, we conclude that the
Employer's packing sheds constitute a separate commercial enterprise
and that the packing shed employees are "employees" within the mean-
ing of the Act 4 We find, therefore, that in Case No. 21-RC-2926
a 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 truck and tractor drivers whom the Petitioner seeks to repre-
sent in Case No. 21-RC-2942 are the additional drivers that are hired
for the produce harvests. The Employer's testimony indicates that
although extra drivers are hired during these harvests he makes no
attempt to assign these drivers to hauling only produce from field
to shed. Consequently, most, if not all, of the Employer's drivers
work interchangeably between the harvest hauling and farming opera-
tions which continue through the produce harvest seasons. In the
absence of evidence that any of the Employer's drivers spends a sub-
stantial amount of his time in hauling produce to and from the packing
sheds, we find that the Employer's drivers are engaged in an agricul-
tural operation and are not employees within the meaning of the Act .5
We shall therefore order the dismissal of the petition in Case No.
21-RC-2942.
4 Colorado River Farms, 99 NLRB 160; Imperial Garden Growers , 91 NLRB 1034.
5 Holtville Alfalfa Mills, Inc., 98 NLRB 1183.
716 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
4. We find that the following employees of the Employer at his
2 packing sheds located 2 miles southeast of El Centro, California,
constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining
within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act: All packing shed em-
ployees, but excluding clerical employees, guards and watchmen,
drivers, the assistant foreman, and all supervisors as defined in the Act.
5. The Employer's packing sheds are in operation between Decem-
ber and April. Following our customary practice in seasonal indus-
tries, we shall direct that the election be held at or near the peak of
employment, on a date to be determined by the Regional Director,
among the employees in the appropriate unit who are employed during
the payroll period immediately preceding the date of the issuance of
the notice of election. If the Regional Director finds that a repre-
sentative number of employees will not be employed at any period in
the near future during which an election can be held, he may defer the
election until at or about the peak of employment during the next
season.
Order
IT Is ORDERED that the petition in Case No. 21-RC-2942 be, and it
hereby is, dismissed.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this
volume.]
INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER COMPANY, WEST PULLMAN WORKS and
CHICAGO JOURNEYMEN PLUMBERS LOCAL UNION 130, UA, AFL,1
PETITIONER
INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER COMPANY, WEST PULLMAN WORKS and
DIE c&'1 TOOLMAKERS LODGE No. 113, INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF
MACHINISTS,2 PETITIONER
INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER COMPANY, WEST PULLMAN WORKS and
CHICAGO DISTRICT COUNCIL OF CARPENTERS, A. F. L.,3 PETITIONER
INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER COMPANY, WEST PULLMAN WORKS and
INTERNATIONAL UNION, UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AIRCRAFT AND AGRI-
CULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA, CI0,4 PETITIONER.
Cases Nos. 13-RC-3093,13-RC-,3098,13-RC-3106, and 13-RC-3122.
March 16, 1.953
Decision and Direction of Elections
Upon separate petitions duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the
National Labor Relations Act, a consolidated hearing was held be-
1 Herein called the Plumbers.
z Herein called Lodge 113.
3 Herein called the Carpenters.
4 Herein called UAW-CIO.
103 NLRB No. 62.