Jack Cooper Transport Co., Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Dec 31, 1952

101 N.L.R.B. 1754 (N.L.R.B. 1952)

1754 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
priate.3 Nor does the remote and sporadic history of multiemployer
bargaining for the salesmen on a members-only basis render the unit
sought inappropriate. Accordingly we find that all salesmen' of
the Employer, excluding all other employees, guards, and super-
visors 5 as defined in the Act, constitute a unit appropriate for the
purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b)
of the Act.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this
volume.]
3 Seer Joseph E. Seagram & Sons, Inc., 101 NLRB 101; Miller & Miller Motor Freight
Lines, 101 NLRB 581.
4 The Employer has one "service salesman " whom the Petitioner would exclude from
the unit. The Employer takes no position . Although this employee is primarily employed
in the service department , where he sells repair jobs to the Employer 's customers , he also
occasionally negotiates the sale of a car or truck. Like the other salesmen , he is paid, at
least impart, on a commission basis. Under these circumstances , and in view of the fact
that he would otherwise be unrepresented , we shall include him in the unit. See New York
Steam Laundry, Inc., 80 NLRB l Z97, 1599.
5 The record shows that the sales leader, whom the Petitioner would exclude , can effec-
tively recommend the hiring and firing of salesmen . We find that he is a supervisor within
the meaning of the Act, and we shall therefore exclude him from the unit.
JACK COOPER TRANSPORT COMPANY, INC., PETITIONER, and INTERNA-
TIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS, LODGE No. 778, A. F. L., AND
INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, CHAUFFEURS, WARE-
HOUSEMEN AND HELPERS OF AMERICA, AUTOMOTIVE PETROLEUM AND
ALLIED INDUSTRIES , LOCAL No. 552, A. F. L., JOINTLY . Case No.
17-RM-66. December 31,1959
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 Margaret L. Fassig, 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 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 Act.
2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent certain
employees of the Employer.
101 NLRB No. 231.
WILSON & CO., INC. 1755
3. A 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?
4. The following employees of the Employer constitute a unit
appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the mean-
ing of Section 9 (b) of the Act :
All maintenance employees, including porters, car washers, grease
men, parts men, machinists, welders, mechanics, and painters at the
Employer's, place of business located in Kansas City, Missouri, but
excluding truck drivers, foremen, office clerical employees, and super-
visors as defined in the Act 2
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this
volume.]
1 The record shows that the Unions jointly requested exclusive recognition from the
Employer on several occasions , picketed the Employer's place of business to gain such
recognition, and at the hearing expressly claimed a majority of the employees in the unit.
Although the Unions also expressed a desire against holding an election at the present time,
they made'no disclaimer of any right to recognition. Accordingly, we find that a question
of representation exists within the meaning of Section 9 (c) (1) (B ) of the Act. Cf.
General Paint Corporation, 95 NLRB 539; Hamilton 's Ltd., 93 NLRB 1076.
2 The parties are in agreement as to the unit.
WILSON & CO., INC. and AMALGAMATED MEAT CUTTERS & BUTCHER
WORKMEN OF NORTH AMERICA , AFL, PETITIONER.. Case No. 13-
RC-f9331 December 31, 1952
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 Raymond A. Jacobson,
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 Act, the Board
has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member
panel'[Members Houston, Murdock, and Styles].
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 involved claim to represent certain em-
ployees of the Employer.
I Although the petition in Case No. 1a-RC-2951 was consolidated with the instant case,
the Chicago Journeymen Plumbers Local Union 130, U . A., A. F. of L., submitted a request
for' withdrawal of the . petition in the former case. Before the hearing , the withdrawal
request was approved by the Regional Director,. and an order severing cases was served
upon the parties.
101 NLRB No. 200.
242305-53-112