Dolese Bros. Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 17, 1946

68 N.L.R.B. 112 (N.L.R.B. 1946)

In the Matter of DOLESE BROS. Co. and CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL
WORKERS ASSOCIATION, INC.
Case No. 16-R-1458
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION
AND
CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
May 17, 1946
On March 8, 1946, pursuant to a Decision and Direction of Election
issued by the Board on February 18, 1946 (65 N. L. R. B. 1124), an
election was conducted among the employees of Dolese Bros. Co., Okla-
homa City, Oklahoma, herein called the Company, in the unit found
appropriate in the above Decision, under the direction and supervision
of the Regional Director for the Sixteenth Region (Fort Worth, Texas).
Upon the conclusion of the election, a Tally of Ballots was furnished the
parties in accordance with the Rules and, Regulations of the Board.
None of the parties filed objections to the conduct of the election or con-
duct affecting the results of the election within the time provided therefor.
The Tally indicates that of approximately 31 eligibles in the voting
group, 30 cast valid votes, of which 16 were cast for Construction
Material Workers Association, Inc. (not affiliated), herein called the
Union, and 14 against the Union. In addition, 4 votes were challenged.
Inasmuch as it appeared that the challenged ballots might affect the
results of the election, the Regional Director, pursuant to Article III,
Section 10, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations
- Series 3, as amended, investigated the issues raised by the challenged
ballots, and on March 15, 1946, issued and duly served upon all the
parties a Report on Challenged Ballots, in which he recommended that
the challenges as to the ballots of John Rhodes, C. W. Worley, and
Harold Wyatt be sustained, and that if this recommendation were
adopted, no finding be made as to the ballot of E. W. James, since his
vote would not affect the results of the election.' Thereafter, the Com-
pany filed exceptions to the Regional Director's Report on Challenged
Ballots.
' The Regional Director further recommended that, in the event the ballot of James should
become determinative , his vote should be counted.
Fa -T. L. R B., No. 16.
112
DOLESE BROS . CO. 113
The exceptions of the Company are substantially as follows :
1. The ballot of John Rhodes is valid and should be counted inasmuch
as he is not a supervisory employee
The Company does not, in its exceptions , proffer any facts which have
not already been duly considered by the Board in its Decision and Direc-
tion of Election wherein John Rhodes was specifically excluded from
the appropriate unit because of his supervisory status. Upon due con-
sideration , therefore , of the Regional Director 's Report, the Company's
exceptions thereto, and the entire record in the case , we hereby adopt
the Regional Director' s recommendations and sustain the challenge as
to the ballot of John Rhodes, finding the ballot to be invalid.
,2. The ballots of C. W. Worley and Harold Wyatt are valid and should
be counted inasmuch as they are employees within the ambit of the
unit defined by the Board in its Decision and Direction of Election
The unit defined by the Board in its decision embraced "all production
and maintenance employees of the Company at its Big Canyon and
Arbuckle plants excluding all clerical employees, the superintendent, and
all other supervisory employees with authority to hire, promote, discharge,
discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or
effectively recommend such action." Worley and Wyatt are two school
boys who work only part-time after school on a farm owned by the
President of the Company. The Company contends that the farm is
operated "in connection with the quarry,"2 that, moreover, Worley and
Wyatt perform work at the quarry, or in connection with it, because
they maintain roads leading to the quarry and crushers, cut weeds and
plow fire guards or furrows around company houses, do maintenance
work on trucks, which are used both on the farm and in the quarries,
and may be called upon to perform various other functions pertaining
to "the business of Dolese Bros. Co."3
Worley and Wyatt, it is clear, are essentially employed on the farm,
and it would appear their work is only incidentally related to the quarry
operations. Such remote connection is not sufficient to bring them within
the scope of a unit of the production and maintenance employees of the
Company's Big Canyon and Arbuckle plants. In fact, testimony of John
Rhodes, elicited at the hearing upon which the Decision and Direction
of Election was based, indicates that there are "a couple of kids" who
3 Presumably the Big Canyon Quarry. Precisely in what manner the farm is operated in
connection with the quarry, the Company does not say.
' How these functions pertain to "the business of the Dolese Bros. Co.," is not explained
by the Company.
114 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
"can't work in the quarry, but they work, you see, around the farm."
Consequently, upon due consideration of the facts shown in the Regional
Director's Report and the Company's exceptions thereto, we hereby adopt
the Regional Director's recommendations and sustain the challenges to
the ballots of C. W. Worley and Harold Wyatt, finding the ballots to
be invalid.
3. The ballot of E. W. James is valid and should be counted
Having found, above, that the ballots of Rhodes, Worley, and Wyatt
are invalid, we deem it unnecessary to pass upon the validity of the ballot
of E. W. James, inasmuch as it appears that the Union has now received
the majority of all valid ballots cast plus the ballot of E. W. James.4
We shall certify the Union as the exclusive bargaining representative
of the employees in the appropriate unit.5
CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National Labor
Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act,
and pursuant to Article III, Sections 9 and 10, of National Labor Re-
lations Board Rules and Regulations - Series 3, as amended,
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED that Construction Material Workers Asso-
ciation, Inc., has been designated and selected by a majority of the pro-
duction and maintenance employees of Dolese Bros. Co., Oklahoma City,
Oklahoma, at its Big Canyon and Arbuckle Plants, excluding all clerical
employees, the superintendent, and all other supervisory employees with
authority to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect
changes in the status of employees, or effectively recommend such action,
as their representative for the purposes of collective bargaining, and
that, pursuant to Section 9 (a) of the Act, the said organization is the
exclusive representative of all such employees for the purposes of collec-
tive bargaining with respect to rates of pay, wages, hours of employment,
and other conditions of employment.
Long after the Company filed its exceptions , separate motions to intervene were filed by
John Rhodes, by Charles W. Worley and Harold Wyatt, and by 13 employees of the Com-
pany (John Rhodes, Worley, and Wyatt joining with them in their separate motion) who
allegedly voted against their representation by the Union . Each motion urges the Board to
refuse to accept the Regional Director 's recommendations and to declare the ballots of
Rhodes, Worley, Wyatt, and James to be valid. We have carefully examined these appli-
cations and find that the facts they allege are substantially identical to those emphasized
by the Company in its exceptions and disclose no reasons for our concluding that the Regional
Director erred in his determination . As we have concluded that such facts do not warrant the
iejection of the Regional Director's recommendations, in the light of the entire record, we
are of the opinion that the applicants have failed to substantiate their motions to intervene.
Apart from any other considerations, therefore, the motions are denied
a We hereby deny the Company's request for a hearing on the issues of the challenged
ballots.