Gusdorf & Son

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jan 28, 1954

107 N.L.R.B. 998 (N.L.R.B. 1954)

998 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
certain employees of the Employer as defined in Section 9 (a)
of the Act. The Union is currently recognized by the Employer
as the exclusive representative of such employees.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the
representation of employees of the Employer within the mean-
ing of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The following employees of the Employer constitute a
unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining
within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act: All production
employees , excluding maintenance employees , office or cleri-
cal, professional, shipping, and sales employees, laboratory
and administrative employees, truckdrivers, guards, foremen,
and supervisors as defined in the Act.'
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
3 The unit conforms to the stipulation of the parties and also to the contract unit.
GUSDORF & SON and UNITED BROTHERHOOD OF CARPEN-
TERS AND JOINERS OF AMERICA, AFL, LOCAL 795, and
FURNITURE AND FINISHERS LOCAL UNION NO. 980, AFL,
affiliated with BROTHERHOOD OF PAINTERS, DECO-
RATORS, AND PAPERHANGERS OF AMERICA, AFL,
Jointly,' Petitioners. Case No. 14-RC-2427. January 28,
1954
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Harold B.
Norman, 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 National Labor Relations Act.
2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent
employees of the Employer.
3. 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.
4. The following employees of the Employer constitute a
unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining
within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act:
All production and maintenance employees at the Em-
ployer's plant at St. Louis, Missouri, excluding office,
IThe names of the Petitioners appear as corrected at the hearing.
107 NLRB No. 204.
J. J. MOREAU & SON, INC. 999
clerical , and professional employees , guards, and super-
visors as defined in the Act .2
5. The Petitioners herein filed a joint petition. The Em-
ployer contends that it is inappropriate for the Board to enter-
tain a petition jointly filed by two unions for the reason that
they do not together constitute a labor organization within the
meaning of the Act. It also contends that "no joint representa-
tion is contemplated" by the Petitioners if they win the
election. We find these objections to be without merit? Board
precedent has fully established the propriety of two or more
labor organizations acting jointly as bargaining representative
for a single group of employees.4 We perceive no cogent
reason for departing from past precedent in such cases. As
for the Employer's assertion regarding the bargaining intentions
of the Petitioners, the record as a whole does not show that,
if selected, the Petitioners will not bargain on a joint basis
for the unit herein found appropriate. In the event the Peti-
tioners, whose names will appear jointly on the ballot, are
successful in the election hereinafter directed, they will be
certified jointly as the bargaining representative of the em-
ployees in the entire appropriate unit. And the Employer may
then insist that they do in fact bargain jointly for such em-
ployees as a single unit.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication]
2 The parties stipulated to the appropriateness of this unit.
SNor do we find merit in the Employer's further objections to this petition based on the
fact that authorization cards signed on behalf of Furniture and Finishers Local Union No.
980, AFL, do not also authorize United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America,
AFL, Local 795, to act for the employees involved or that carpenters employed by the Em-
ployer are not eligible for membership in Furniture and Finishers Local Union No. 980,
AFL. In the former connection, the Employer is in substance challenging the showing of
interest herein, which is a matter for administrative determination, not litigable by the
parties. Sonoco Products Company, 107 NLRB 82, Harry Brown Motor Company, 86
NLRB 652. In the latter connection, the Board has uniformly held that the willingness of a
petitioner to represent employees, rather than the eligibility of employees to membership
in the petitioner, is controlling under the Act. Buzza-Cardozo Company, 99 NLRB 40.
4Sonoco Products Company, supra
J. J. MOREAU & SON, INC. and CHAUFFEURS, TEAMSTERS &
HELPERS, LOCAL UNION 633, and AMALGAMATED MEAT
CUTTERS & BUTCHER WORKMEN OF NORTH AMERICA,
LOCAL UNION 314, AFL, Petitioners. Case No. 1-RC-3448.
January 28, 1954
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before George A.
Sweeney, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at
107 NLRB No. 207.