Highway Truck Drivers & Helpers, Local 107, Etc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 2, 1960

126 N.L.R.B. 928 (N.L.R.B. 1960)

928 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
We shall direct elections in the following units which are appro-
priate for collective bargaining purposes under Section 9(b) of the
Act.
(a) All employees of the electrotype department at the Employer's
Nashville, Tennessee, plant, including finishers, molders, casters,
batterymen, the builder, and the leadinan in the molding section; re-
visers, check-over men, finishers, floormen, and the leadman in the
finishing section; all wax rule employees and the leadman in the wax
rule section, but excluding all other employees, office clerical em-
ployees, guards, the foreman in the molding section, the foreman in
the finishing section, and supervisors as defined in the Act.
(b) All employees in the rubber plate department at the Em-
ployer's Nashville, Tennessee, plant, including press operators and
floormen, but excluding all other employees, office clerical employees,
guards, the foreman, the leadman, and supervisors as defined in the
Act.
[Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication.]
Highway Truck Drivers and Helpers, Local 107, International
Brotherhood of Teamsters , Chauffeurs , Warehousemen and
Helpers of America and Food Producers Council, Inc.
Warehouse Employees Union Local 169, International Brother-
hood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers
of America and Food Producers Council , Inc. Cases Nos.
4-CD-40 and 4-CD-42. March 3, 1960
DECISION AND ORDER
This proceeding arises under Section 10(k) of the Act, which pro-
vides that "Whenever it is charged that any person has engaged in an
unfair labor practice within the meaning of paragraph 4(D) of Sec-
tion 8(b), the Board is empowered and directed to hear and determine
the dispute out of which such unfair labor practice shall have
arisen...."
On April 13 and June 24, 1959, Food Producers Council, Inc.,
herein called the Charging Party, filed charges with the Regional
Director for the Fourth Region, alleging that Highway Truck Drivers
and Helpers, Local 107, International Brotherhood of Teamsters,
Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, herein called
Local 107, and Warehouse Employees Union Local 169, International
Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers
of America, herein called Local 169, had engaged in and were engag-
ing in certain unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section
126 NLRB No. 115.
HIGHWAY TRUCK DRIVERS & HELPERS, LOCAL 107, ETC. 929
8(b) (4) (D) of the Act. It was charged, in substance, that from
about October 29, 1958, Locals 107 and 169 have induced and en-
couraged employees of William W. Riegner and other employers to
engage in concerted refusals in the course of their employment to
perform any services in unloading merchandise, the object thereof
being to force and require the aforementioned employers to assign
particular work to members of the aforementioned labor organiza-
tions, rather than to employees in another trade, craft, class, or labor
organization.
Thereafter, pursuant to Section 10(k) of the Act and Sections
102.79 and 102.80 of the Board's Rules and Regulations, Series 7, the
Regional Director investigated the charges. On August 13, 1959, the
Regional Director consolidated these cases, and on September 4,
1959, provided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice to the
parties. A consolidated hearing was held before Eugene Al. Levine,
hearing officer, on September 15 and 29, and October 21, 22, and 29,
1959. All parties appeared at the hearing and were afforded full
opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and
to adduce evidence bearing on the issues. The rulings of the hearing
officer made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are
hereby affirmed. The Charging Party and Respondents filed briefs,
which have been duly considered by the Board.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the Act, the Board
has delegated its powers in connection with these cases to a three-
member panel [Chairman Leedom and Members Bean and Jenkins].
Upon the entire record in these cases, the Board makes the
following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Employers involved herein, some of whom are members of the
Charging Party, are engaged in the production, packing, marketing,
and transportation of fresh and processed agricultural commodities.
A majority of the incidents alleged to be in violation of Section
8(b) (4) (D) occurred in the Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, area at
warehouses of The Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea Co., herein called
A & P, the American Stores Company, herein called Acme, and at
Food Fair. All parties stipulated that A & P, Acme, and Food Fair
are engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. William
W. Riegner and Burks-Lehigh Cooperative Fruit Growers, both mem-
bers of the Charging Party, annually receive in excess of $50,000
each for deliveries outside Pennsylvania.
2. The parties stipulated that Local 107 and Local 169 are labor
organizations within the meaning of the Act.
3. For a considerable period of time, out-of-town truckers making
deliveries in the Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, area have been forced
554461-60-vol. 126-60
930 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
to turn over the work of unloading their trucks to other persons. A
substantial number of individuals are engaged in this practice, their
approach to the truckers being that "we unload you or you don't get
unloaded." Most of those involved are in nowise identified in the
record. While certain of them may be members of Local 107 and
while there is testimony that one such individual identified himself as
a Local 107 steward and gave a receipt for money paid him reading
"For unloading at Food Fair #107," whereas another individual,
identified only as "Ralph" in the record, had described himself as
representing the stewards of Local 169,' none of those participating is
in fact shown by the record to be acting as an agent, officer, or rep-
resentative of either Respondent.
The record also discloses an incident involving an individual, whose
identity is in dispute in the record, who insisted upon the hiring of
an unloader as a result of which telephone conversations, which
afforded no relief to the trucker, were held with an unidentified
person, assertedly at a Local 107 office. It further appears that Local
107 has warned members not to join in this type of activity and that
Local 169, which represents warehouse employees of Acme and A & P
under contracts which prohibit those employees from refusing to
handle any freight after it is placed on the platform, has periodically
reminded its members of this contractual prohibition. Neither Re-
spondent has contracts covering the unloading work involved herein.
CONTENTIONS OF THE PARTIES
The Charging Party asserts that Locals 107 and 169, in violation of
Section 8 (b) (4) (D) of the Act, have induced employees of employers
herein to refuse to unload merchandise from the employers' trucks
with the object of compelling the employers to assign the work of un-
loading to members of Local 107. Respondents disclaim responsibility
for any of the conduct complained about in these cases.
APPLICABILITY OF THE STATUTE
Before the Board may proceed under Section 10(k) of the Act, it
must be satisfied that there is reasonable cause to believe that Section
.8(b) (4) (D) has been violated. For Section 10(k) to be applicable
in this case, the record must establish at least the responsibility of
Respondents for the conduct complained about.
We do not believe that the record as a whole warrants holding
Respondents responsible for the conduct giving rise to this proceeding.
A careful review of the record in this case does not indicate that the
conduct was instigated or directed by Respondents or engaged in by
i Such is the nature of the evidence relied upon by the Charging Party in the case.
SOUTHWESTERN PORTLAND CEMENT COMPANY 931
agents, oicers, or representatives of Respondents, or that it can be
attributed to Respondents on any theory of ratification thereof.3 It
accordingly follows that an element indispensable to our proceeding
-under Section 10(k) in this matter is lacking . In the circumstances,
we are compelled to quash the notices of hearing issued in this
proceeding.
ORDER
On the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of
law, and on the entire record in these cases , the Board hereby orders
that the notices of hearing heretofore issued in this proceeding be,
and they hereby are, quashed.
i The self-declarations in this connection referred to above are manifestly not testimony
As to probative evidence to the contrary . See Bennet P. Sohaufer v. Highway Truck
.Drivers d Helpers Local 107, et al. (Horn A Hardart), 280 F. 2d 7 (C.A. 8).
Unlike Highway'Truck Drivers d Helpers , Local 107, International Brotherhood of
-Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen J Helpers of America, AFL-010 (Horn d Hardart
Baking Company ), 115 NLRB 1184, wherein the circumstances warranted a ending that
Local 107 had ratified , and therefore was responsible for, John Zoroiwchak 's activity
during a 1955 organizational campaign , the circumstances herein are not such as to
warrant holding Local 107 accountable for Zorotwchak 's more recent conduct.
Southwestern Portland Cement Company and Davis W. Sellers,
Petitioner and International Union of Operating Engineers,
Local 605, AFL-CIO. Case No. 9-RD-$36. March 3,' 1960
DECISION AND ORDER
. Upona decertification petition duly filed under Section 9(c) of the
National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before . Roderick C.
Hunsaker, 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 Petitioner asserts that the Union, the currently recognized
bargaining representative of the employees designated in the peti-
tion, .is no longer the bargaining representative as defined in Section
9 (a) of the Act.
3. No question. affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of employees ot 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 and the Union, International Union of Operating
Engineers, Local 605, AFL-CIO, an amalgamated local, assert their
;agreement '011 : 41V ` 15, `1959, 'covering the employees . sought herein, as
126 NLRB No. 116