J & W Coal Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 19, 1962

136 N.L.R.B. 393 (N.L.R.B. 1962)

J & W COAL COMPANY 393
J & W Coal Company I and United Mine Workers of America
(Ind.). Case No. 10-RC-4667. March 19, 1962
THIRD SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION, ORDER, AND
FOURTH DIRECTION OF ELECTION
On December 4, 1961, the Board issued a Second Supplemental Deci-
sion, Order, and Third Direction of Election 2 in the above-entitled
proceeding. Thereafter, on December 14, 1961, New Laxton Coal
Company, herein referred to as New Laxton, filed a motion to dismiss
the petition on the ground that it no longer operates the mine at
Clinchmore, Tennessee, in which the election had been directed, but
said mine is now operated by J & W Coal Company, herein referred to
as J & W. On January 30, 1962, the Board issued a notice to show
cause why the name of the Employer herein should not be amended
by substituting the name "J & W Coal Company" in place and stead
of the name "New Laxton Coal Company," and why an election
should not be held among the employees in the appropriate unit.
Although all the parties were served with the notice to show cause,
only J & W has responded thereto. In its response, filed on Febru-
ary 16, 1962, J & W maintained that, before an election was held
among its employees, a new showing of interest by the Petitioner
should be required, and a new hearing should be held to determine
whether a question concerning representation exists among these
employees. As the Petitioner, however, has already made an ade-
quate showing of interest, as we have determined in this proceeding
that a question concerning representation exists, and as the comple-
ment of employees in the bargaining unit remains substantially un-
changed, we find no merit in these contentions.
In addition, the Board has been administratively advised as follows :
New Laxton ceased operations at the Clinchmore mine on Novem-
ber 13, 1961, at which time J & W assumed its operation. All 25 em-
ployees of J & W were formerly employed by New Laxton. The
arrangements which J & W has with Round Mountain Coal Company
and New River Coal Company for the rental of equipment and sale
of coal are the same as those which New Laxton had when it was
operating the mine.
On the basis of the foregoing, and for the reasons stated in our
earlier decision, we find that J & W has, in fact, replaced New Laxton
as the employer of the employees here involved. Accordingly, on the
basis of the entire record, we shall order that the name of J & W be
substituted for the name of New Laxton as the Employer herein and
' The name of the Employer , previously designated as C & P Coal Company and as
New Laxton Coal Company , appears as amended in accordance with our decision herein.
2134 NLRB 927, as amended December 29, 1961
136 NLRB No. 3-1.
394 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
that an election be held among the employees in the appropriate unit.
The motion of New Laxton to dismiss the petition is therefore hereby
denied.
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the name "J & W Coal Company" be, and
the same hereby is, substituted in place and stead of the name "New
Laxton Coal Company" as the Employer in the proceeding herein, and
that an election be held among the employees in the appropriate. unit 9
[Text of Fourth Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
MEMBER RODGERS, dissenting :
I would not issue this Fourth Direction of Election. I would dis-
miss the petition for the reasons set forth in the Second Supplemental
Decision in this case-reasons which are not applicable to J & W Coal
Company.
S The appropriate unit was described as follows in our Supplemental ' Decision, Order
and Direction of Election , 130 NLRB 910, 911 : "All employees at the Employer 's Clinch-
more, Tennessee , coal mine, excluding office clerical employees , engineering and technical
employees , professional employees , guards, foremen, and all supervisors as defined in the
Act."
Food Haulers, Inc. and District 50, United Mine Workers of
America, Petitioner
Food Haulers, Inc. and John J. Uanis, Petitioner and Local
Union 863, affiliated with International Brotherhood of Team-
sters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America.
Cases Nos. 22-RC-1078 and 02-RD-85. March 19, 1962
DECISION AND ORDER
Upon petitions duly filed and consolidated, a hearing was held
before Richard W. Coleman, 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 named below claim to represent certain
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:
i The Petitioner in Case No. 22-RD-85 asserts that the Union is no longer the recog-
nized bargaining representative of the employees in the unit as defined in Section 9(a) of
the Act.
13,6 NLRB No. 366.