Hygrade Food Products Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 25, 1949

85 N.L.R.B. 853 (N.L.R.B. 1949)

In the Matter Of HYGRADE FOOD PRODUCTS CORPORATION ( SUPRO MEAT
PRODUCTS COMPANY), EIII.OYER and AMALGAMATED MEAT CUTTERS
AND BUTCHER WORKMEN OF NORTH AMERICA, LOCAL 464 , AFL,i
PETITIONER
Case No. 4-RC-9230.-Decided August 25,1949
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before John H. Wood,
Jr., hearing officer of the National Labor Relations Board. The
hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial
error and are hereby affirmed.2
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meanning of the
National Labor Relations Act.
2. The Petitioner, Amalgamated Meat Cutters and Butcher Work-
men of North America, Local 464, AFL, is a labor organization claim-
ing to represent employees of the Employer.
United Packinghouse Workers of America, CIO, Local 231, herein
called the Intervenor, is a labor organization claiming a contractual
interest to represent employees of the Employer.
I The name of the Petitioner appears as corrected at the hearing.
2 The Petitioner opposed the intervention of the United Packinghouse Workers of Amer.
ica, CIO, , Local 231, for the following reasons: (1) It has failed to comply with Section
9 (f), (g), and ( li) of the Act, and (2) Local 231 has resorted to the subterfuge of
"fronting" for Local 301 whose name appears in the master contract as representing
employees in the Perth Amboy plant.
Whether the Union has complied with the affidavit and filing requirements of the Act
is a matter to be determined administratively by the Board . Matter of Baldwin Locomo-
tive Works , 76 N. L . R. B. 922. Regardless of compliance , Local 231 was entitled to inter-
vene on the strength of Its contractual interest . Matter of New Indiana Chair Company,
Inc., 80 N. L. R. B. 1686. However , we are satisfied that the compliance requirements of
the Act have in fact been met by Local 231 and the International . We find also that
Local 231 has been representing employees in the Perth Amboy plant since about August
1947, when they voted to shift their affiliation from Local 301 and the Employer agreed!
to send checked-off dues to Local 231.
The Intervenor contended that the Petitioner' s showing of interest is insufficient. We
have held on numerous occasions that showing of interest is an administrative matter
not subject to collateral attack. Matter of Amos Molded Plastics Division of Amos
Thompson Corporation, 79 N. L. R. B. 201 ; Matter of W. C. Nabors Company, 79 N. L_
R. B. 40.
85 N. L. R. B., No. 146.
853
854 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
3. The Intervenor contends that its collective bargaining agreement
with the Employer, executed on January 13, 1947, for the period
ending August 11, 1948, constitutes a bar to a present election, because
it was automatically renewed upon failure to serve a 30-day notice
in accordance with the terms of the contract. The petition was filed
on August 11, 1948.
The agreement contains a union-security provision. However, the
Intervenor has not been certified by the Board under Section 9 (e)
(1) of the Act as being authorized to execute such a provision. In
September 1948, the president of Local 231 requested the discharge
of an employee, but the Company refused on the ground that it was
illegal under the Act as amended. Since that time the Intervenor has
not invoked the union-security provision. We have held, neverthe-
less, that the mere existence of such a provision acts as a restraint upon
those desiring to exercise their right to refrain from union activities
guaranteed by Section 7 of the Act.3 Under these circumstances, and
without regard to any other considerations, we find that the contract
cannot serve as a bar to a present determination of representatives 4
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 Employer, Hygrade Foods Products Corporation, a New
York corporation engaged in the meatpacking business, maintains and
operates in various parts of the country about 60 plants, either directly
or through subsidiaries. This case involves the Perth Amboy, New
Jersey, plant, which is operated by a subsidiary known as Supro Meat
Products Company, Inc., a New Jersey corporation.
The Petitioner seeks a single-plant unit restricted to this plant and
composed of all production and maintenance employees, including
meat cutters, boners, luggers, and scalers, but excluding salesmen,
guards, watchmen, truck drivers, clericals, nonworking foremen, gen-
eral manager, and all other supervisors as defined in the Act. Al-
though the Intervenor does not object to the composition of the unit
proposed by the Petitioner, it contends that the only appropriate unit
is a multi-plant unit consisting of the Perth Amboy plant I plus 12
other plants which are covered by a master agreement between the
Employer and United Packinghouse Workers of America, CIO, the
Intervenor's parent organization. The Employer took no definite
position as to the scope of the unit.
Matter of C. Hager & Sons Hinge Manufacturing Company, 80 N. L. R. B. 163.
4Matter of Merchants Fire Dispatch , 83 N. L . It. B. 788 : Matter of Laurel Textiles,
Inc., 80 N. L. It . B. 262; Matter of General Electric Corporation, 80 N. L . It. B. 169.
6 The Perth Amboy plant was brought under the master agreement when Local 301 of
the United Packinghouse Workers of America, CIO, was recognized as the result of a card
check at a date not specified in the record.
HYGRADE FOOD PRODUCTS CORPORATION 855
In another Hygrade case 6 decided this day, similar contentions
were made concerning the unit status of the Newark, New Jersey,
plant of the Employer, which is one of the 13 plants covered by the
Intervenor's master contract. That case involved the same facts
and issues now confronting us. In accordance with the decision in
that case, and for the reasons stated therein, we are of the opinion that
a unit confined to the employees of the Perth Amboy, New Jersey,
plant is appropriate. Accordingly, we find that all production and
maintenance employees, including meat cutters, boners, luggers, and
scalers at, the Employer's Perth Amboy, New Jersey, plant, but ex-
cluding salesmen, guards, watchmen, truck drivers, clericals, non-
working foremen, general manager, and all other supervisors as de-
fined in the Act, constitute a unit appropriate for purposes of collec-
tive bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the
purposes 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 super-
vision 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, among the employees de-
scribed in paragraph numbered 4, above, who were employed during
the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of this Direction,
including employees who did not work during said pay-roll period
because they were ill or on vacation or temporarily laid off, but exclud-
ing those employees who have since quit or been discharged for cause
and have not been rehired or reinstated prior to the election, and also
excluding employees on strike who are not entitled to reinstatement,
to determine whether they desire to be represented, for purposes of
collective bargaining, by United Packinghouse Workers of America,
CIO, Local 231, or by Amalgamated Meat Cutters and Butcher Work-
men of North America, Local 464, AFL, or by neither.
MEMBER MURDOCK, concurring :
For the reasons stated in my concurring opinion in the companion
Hygrade case involving one of this Employer's Newark, New Jersey,
plants, I join in the majority's finding that the single-plant unit is the
appropriate unit in this case.
6 platter of Hygrade Food Products Corporation , 85 N. L . R. B. 841.
856 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
MEMBER REYNOLDS, dissenting in part :
For the reasons set forth in my dissenting opinion in a case' decided
this day involving this Employer, I am unable to agree with the ma-
jority opinion herein insofar as it holds that a separate unit of em-
ployees at the Employer's Perth Amboy, New Jersey, plant is
appropriate.
7 See footnote 6, supra.