G. H. Swalley Logging Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Oct 13, 1950

91 N.L.R.B. 921 (N.L.R.B. 1950)

In the Matter of G. H. SWALLEY LOGGING COMPANY, EMPLOYER and
UNITED BROTHERHOOD OF CARPENTERS AND JOINERS OF AMERICA,
LOCAL UNION No. 2750 AFL, PETITIONER
Case No. 36-RC-447.-Decided October 13,1950
DECISION AND ORDER
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a hearing was held before Hubert J. Merrick, 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 power in connection with this case to a three-member
panel [Members Reynolds, 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.
2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent employees
of the Employer.
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:
The Employer is engaged in gypo logging operations with perma-
nent headquarters at Springfield, Oregon. On April 20, 1950, the
date of the filing of the petition, the Employer was engaged in logging
at Oak Ridge, Oregon, at which time the Employer had some 40 em-
ployees at the latter operation. This number had, as of June 8, 1950,
the date of the hearing, been reduced to 15 employees due to the fact
that the timber in the locality was being rapidly exhausted. At the
hearing, a witness for the Employer testified that the Employer ex-
pected to exhaust completely the available timber by July 4, 1950, and
to close its operation at Oak Ridge on or about that date. The witness
also testified that the Employer contemplated transferring its opera-
tions to other localities, some 100 miles distant from the present loca-
tion, and that if and when it did so, it expected to employ some 75
employees. He further stated, however, that he was not certain how
91 NLRB No. 152.
921
922 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
many of the present employees of the Employer would move to the
new operations.
The Petitioner stated that it was seeking to represent the employees
in the claimed appropriate unit at Oak Ridge and at whatever opera-
tion. may be established in the future... The Petitioner contended that
the B'oard should recognize the mobile nature of gypo lumber opera-
tions and the custom of the employees connected therewith to move
with the operation. The Intervenor, International Woodworkers of
America, Local 5-246, CIO;'in support of its motion to dismiss the
petition, asserts that the unit petitioned for is virtually nonexistent;
that there is no certainty where the Employer will move; and that
the.new employees whom the Employer contemplates using in other
operations-will probably be double the number engaged in the present
operation. '
We find merit in the Intervenor's position. The uncontradicted`
evidence shows that the plant operation covered by the requested unit
was scheduled to be liquidated completely by July 4, 1950; that while,
the Employer was considering the transfer of operations to another
locality, the Employer was not certain where it would transfer'such
operations and could only state that if.a transfer took place., it would
require the employment of some 75 people. As noted above, the record
also shows that there is no. certainty as to the number of present em-
ployees who would be willing to transfer to the new operations.
We have held that where an employer's future logging operations
are indefinite in character, the propriety of including in the unit em-
ployees at any new logging locations of the employer should be de '
cided in future proceedings.' Because it appears that the only existing
operation covered by the present petition.was definitely scheduled to
be shut down and abandoned within 30 days from the date of the hear-
ing, a period which has since passed, we are of the opinion that no
useful purpose will be served by proceeding with a determination. of
representatives at this time. Accordingly, we shall dismiss the peti'
ton without prejudice.2
ORDER,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition filed herein be, 'and- it hereby
i's;'dismissed without prejudice.
,1 The Connor Lumber and Land Company; 90 NLRB 283.
2 Churchward & Company, incorporated, 87 NLRB 307 ; Weber Showcase and Fixture
Company, Plant No. 5 (Aircraft Division), 85 NLRB 1202; General Motors Corporation,
881'NI4RB 119; Lamar-Rankin Company; 81 NLRB 222. .