Gulf Atlantic Warehouse Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 30, 1955

111 N.L.R.B. 1249 (N.L.R.B. 1955)

GULF ATLANTIC WAREHOUSE COMPANY 1249
cumstances, finds to be appropriate for purposes of collective bargain-
ing. In the event a majority vote for the IUE, they will be taken to
have indicated their desire to be part of the existing unit of employees
in the Syracuse area which the Board, under such circumstances, finds
to be appropriate, and the Regional Director will issue a certification
of results of election to such effect.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
GULF ATLANTIC WAREHOUSE COMPANY (TERMINAL WAREHOUSE) and
INTERNATIONAL LONGSHOREMEN 'S ASSOCIATION , INDEPENDENT, LO-
CALS 1525 AND 1581, PETITIONER . Case No. 39-RC-881. March 30,
1955
Decision and Order
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a hearing was held before Wilton Waldrop, hearing
officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing 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 labor organizations involved claim to represent certain em-
ployees of the Employer.'
3. No question affecting commerce exists concerning the represen-
tation 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, a Delaware corporation engaged in the business of
cotton compressing and warehousing, maintains branch operations in
many of the major cities throughout the South. Its branch operations
at Houston, Texas, comprise four plants, namely, the Terminal Ware-
house plant, the Fifth Ward plant, the Clinton plant, and the Long
Reach plant. The Petitioner, which has represented the employees at
the Long Reach plant since 1938, here seeks a separate unit of produc-
tion employees at the Terminal Warehouse plant, which it contends is
appropriate. The Intervenor contends that the Terminal Warehouse
plant is now, and has been for 5 years represented by the Intervenor
as part of a multiplant unit, and therefore, a unit confined to this plant
is inappropriate. The Employer takes no position on this issue.
The record discloses that in December 1941, as a result of separate
proceedings and individual certifications, the Intervenor became the
1 At the hearing, Retail, Wholesale & Department Store Union, CIO, Local 75, was per-
mitted to intervene based upon its contractual relations with the Employer.
111 NLRB No. 175.
1250 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
collective-bargaining representative for the employees in the Terminal
Warehouse plant, then owned by Terminal Warehouse Company; the
Fifth Ward plant, then owned by Houston Compress Company; and
the Clinton plant, owned by Gulf Compress Company? Although the
latter 2 companies dissolved and became a part of the Employer in
1943, bargaining continued for all 3 plants on an individual plant
basis through 1949. In March 1949, prior to the merging of Terminal
Warehouse Company with the Employer in July 1949, separate but
identical plant contracts were executed with the Intervenor covering
the employees in these 3 plants.
On April 17, 1950, and again on December 30, 1950, the Employer,
for the first time, met with a joint bargaining committee composed of
representatives from the Terminal Warehouse plant, Fifth Ward
plant, and Clinton plant. Each joint bargaining session resulted in
an "Agreement of Amendment" signed by representatives of the 3
plants and covering the employees of the 3 plants.' Similar agree-
ments of amendment executed by the parties as a result of joint bar-
gaining in 1951, 1952, 1953, and 1954 have extended the duration clause
and amended the section on wages.
In refuting the existence of a multiplant unit, the Petitioner argues
that, because the original 1949 agreements were separate plant con-
tracts, the subsequent agreements of amendment on a multiplant basis
are nothing but amendments to the three separate basic contracts, and
as such, do not constitute collective-bargaining contracts of themselves.
Although the agreements of amendment might appear on their
face to be inseparable from the single-plant agreements, the history
of collective bargaining and the necessary effect of such amendments
upon the original agreements indicate that the amendments were in-
tended as independent contracts. Thus, the character of the amend-
ments, the negotiation on a multiplant basis, and the fact that each
amendment covered all 3 plants in 1 agreement is evidence that the
parties contemplated that the 3 identical single-plant contracts should
be merged in 1 multiplant agreement. In addition, we note that all
agreements since March 1950, in effect, incorporate the 1949 contract
provisions and show on their face that the 3 plants have been treated
as 1 unit for purposes of collective bargaining by the Employer and
the Intervenor. Furthermore, the Board has found that where, as here,
parties enter into a subsequent agreement by which they extend the
2 Although the Intervenor has changed its name and affiliation several times during the
past 14 years, the parties stipulated that it is the same local with which the Employer has
bargained since 1942
3 The April 1950 "Agreement of Amendment" which became effective March 30, amends
the wage section of the 1949 "Agreement" and states that "all other provisions of the
Agreement of March 30, 1949, remain in effect as originally executed." The December
1950 "Agreement of Amendment" extends the duration of the 1949 agreement It ap-
pears from the terminology of these documents that the parties treated the 3 Identical
1949 agreements as a basic collective bargaining contract for all 3 plants.
SUBURBAN TRANSIT, INC. 1251
basic contract, such action creates a new contract superseding the
original' Under these circumstances, we find that the Employer and
the Intervenor have in fact established a 5-year bargaining history on
a multiplant basis covering the Terminal Warehouse plant, Fifth
Ward plant, and Clinton plant.-'
[The Board dismissed the petition.]
6 See The United States Finishing Company, 63 NLRB 575 at 576-577; Aluminum Com-
pany of America, 86 NLRB 189. -
5 Under the circumstances above noted, we find without merit the inference raised by
the Petitioner in its brief that, because the Intervenor has never requested the Board to
consolidate its 3 separate certifications into 1 certification on a multiplant basis, the parties
did not intend to destroy the separate identity of the original single-plant units. See
Owens -Illinois Glass Company, 108 NLRB 947.
SUBURBAN TRANSIT, INC. and DIVISION 824, AMALGAMATED ASSOCIA-
TION OF STREET, ELECTRIC RAILWAY & MOTOR COACH EMPLOYEES OF
AMERICA, AFL, PETITIONER. Case No. 4-RC-P2400. March 30,
1955
Decision and Order
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a hearing was held before William Draper Lewis, Jr.,
hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing 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 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 operates a public bus transportation system in New
Brunswick, New Jersey, and the immediate surrounding area. It is
licensed to do business solely within the State of New Jersey, and
there is no evidence that it is a subsidiary or affiliate of any other com-
pany. In the operation of its six lines it connects with several inter-
state transportation systems such as Greyhound, Trailways, American
Lines, the Pennsylvania Railroad, and the Central Railroad. The
Employer's gross revenue in 1953 amounted to $512,253. Its expendi-
tures for tires and tubes amounted to $8,774; for servicing equipment,
$12,519; for fuel, $35,395; for oil, $2,818; for purchased transporta-
tion, $3,470; and for purchasing and store expense, $8,899.
111 NLRB No. 205.
344056-55-vol . 111-80