Hackensack Water Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 29, 1949

84 N.L.R.B. 842 (N.L.R.B. 1949)

Z
In the Matter of HACIKENSACK WATER COMPANY, EMPLOYER anJ
'UTILITY- WORKERS UNION OF AMERICA, CIO, PETITIONER - " l
Cdse No. _2-RC-1055.-Decided June .29, 1919
:.. " DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing in this matter was held before
Herbert C. Kane, 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 National Labor
Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with
this case to a three-member panel [Chairman Herzog and Members
Houston and Murdock].
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 Petitioner and United Public Workers of America, Local
331, CIO,1 herein called the Intervenor, are labor organizations claim-
ing to represent employees of the Employer.
3. The question concerning representation :
Under date of March 1, 1948, the Employer and the Intervenor
entered into a collective bargaining contract which provided for ter-
mination on February 28, 1950. At a regularly called meeting of the
Intervenor on October 14,'1948, a resolution was adopted to disaffili-
ate from United Public Workers of America, CIO, and to apply for
a charter from Utility Workers of America, CIO. Fifty-nine mem-
bers present at the meeting voted for the resolution, none voted against
it, and 9 members abstained from voting. On October 26, 1948, the
Petitioner issued a charter to Local 375 at the Employer's plant.
Officers of the Intervenor continued to function as officers of Local 375
'The International as well as Local 331 sought to intervene The hearing officer per-
mitted both to intervene , but, at the close of the hearing, reversed his ruling as to the
International on the ground that only Local 331, and not the International, was a party
to the contract The International argues in its brief that it assumed control of the
contract after the attempted disaffiliation, discussed below, and that it should therefore
have been permitted to intervene. We find, in any event, that the position of the Inter-
national has been adequately presented in the record.
84 N. L. R. B., No. 96.
842
' = { ]-1ACKENSACK= :WATER". COMPANY: ? : ^ ' 843
until the expiration, bf-tlieir term of offlcb.- Local; 375 holds regular
meetings and has negotiated grievances with the Employer. Uncon-
troverted evidence shows that substantially all the employees- of the
Employer who- were members of the Intervenor are now members of
Petitioner's Local 375. On January 13, 1949, United Public Workers
of America, CIO,,'suspended the charter of Local 331 and appointed
ah administrator of its affairs. There is no evidence that, after this
date, the Intervenor held meetings or in any way actively represented
the Employer's employees. The Intervenor, -however, contends that
its-contract with the Employer is a- bar to the instant petition, and'
that the disaffiliation was ineffective as it did not conform =with the
constitutional requirements of United Public Workers of America,-
610.
In view of the foregoing circumstances, we find that there exists a
doubt as to the identity of the labor organization which the employees'
of-the Employer desire to represent them, and that 'it can best be
resolved by an election. As we have previously held, under similar
circumstances, an existing contract does not constitute a bar to a
present `determination of representatives.2
We find that 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. In accordance with the agreement of the parties, we find that all
employees of the Employer 3 in the collecting, sanitation, and purifi-
cation department, the distribution department, the pumping depart-
ment, the meter department, the stores department, and the transpor-
tation department, including meter changers, but excluding all ex-
ecutives, supervisors, clerical and technical employees, meter readers,
members of the patrol force, and watchmen, constitute a unit appro-
priate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning
of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
2 Matter of Pittsburgh Plate Glass Company, Columbia Chemical Division, 80 N L.
R. B 1331; Matter of Elizabethtown Water Company Consolidated, 84 N. L. R. B. 845.
3 The Employer has its principal office and place of business in Weehawken, New Jersey.
It is engaged in impounding, pumping, filtering, treating, and supplying water in Hudson
and Bergen Counties, New Jersey. The parties agreed that the appropriate unit should
cover all the employees of the Employer, including, but not limited to, those employees
in the Employer's establishments and pumping stations in Weehawken, Hackensack, New
Milford, and New Durham, New Jersey. This unit is substantially identical with the
unit described in the contract between the Employer and the Intervenor.
4 The parties agreed to include watchmen in the unit, and they have been included in
the collective bargaining agreements between the Employer and the Intervenor. However,
in the absence of any evidence to the contrary , we must assume that these watchmen per-
form the normal duties of such employees. We shall therefore exclude them from the
unit. Matter of Roanoke Mills Company, 76 N. L. R. B 195.
844 DECISIONS' OF NATIONAL. LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
DIRECTION OF ELECTION 6
.,As,=part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining with the Employer , an election by
secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible , but not later
than 30 days from the date of this Direction , under the direction and
supervision of the Regional Director for the Region in which this
case was heard , and subject to Sections 203.61 and 203.62 of National
Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 5, as amended,
among the employees in the unit found appropriate in paragraph num-
bered 4, above, who were , employed during the pay-roll period im-
mediately preceding the date of this Direction of Election, including
employees who did not work during said pay-roll period . because they
were ill or on vacation or temporarily laid off , but excluding those em-
ployees who have since quit or been discharged for cause and have not
been rehired or reinstated prior to the date of the election, and also ex-
eluding employees on strike who are not entitled to reinstatement, to
determine whether or not they desire to be represented , for purposes
of collective bargaining , by Utility Workers Union of America, CIO.
6 Having failed to achieve compliance , or to initiate steps for compliance , with the
filing requirements of Section 9 (f), (g), and ( h), of the amended Act, the Intervenor will
not be accorded a place on the ballot.