McGraw-Curran Lumber Co., Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Sep 15, 1948

79 N.L.R.B. 705 (N.L.R.B. 1948)

In the Matter of McGRAw-CiRRAN LvMBER Co., INC., EMPLOYER and
INTERNATIONAL WOODWORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO, PETITIONER
Cage No. 15-RC-3 .-IIeeided September 15, 1948
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before a 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.
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-nian panel consistmg,of the undersigned, Board
Members. *
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 labor organization named below claims to represent em-
ployees of the Employer.
3. The question concerning representation :
The Employer contends, in effect, that the Board should dismiss the
petition because the true party in interest is the Congress of Industrial
Organizations rather than the Petitioner and because the showing of
representative interest is not sufficient.
As to the first contention, the Employer points to the facts that the
organizational campaign was conducted by the CIO Organizing Com-
mittee. and that the demand for recognition was made in the name of
the CIO. We note, however, that all authorization cards are those
of the Petitioner. Further, there is nothing in the record to indicate
that the Petitioner will not be the actual representative of these em-
ployees, or that it is acting as a front for a non-complying union. On
the contrary, it appears that the organizing committee is merely an
instrumentality of several complying internationals, whose functions
*Houston , Murdock, and Gray.
79 N. L R. B, No. 93.
705
706 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
are ended when organization has been achieved. As to the demand, it
appears that the Employer refused to accept the letter containing the
demand and that no reliance was in fact placed upon it. Indeed, by
such refusal, the Employer indicated, in effect, that it would not re-
spond to any request by mail. The Petitioner utilized the processes
of the Board and in the instant petition asserted a refusal by the
Employer to recognize it as the bargaining representative. Under
these circumstances we find, that the question concerning representa-
tion was properly raised by the Petitioner, the real party in interest.'
We accordingly reject this contention.
It is therefore of no consequence that the Congress of Industrial
Organizations is not in compliance with the provisions of Section 9
1(f), (g), and (h).
The Employer further contends that the Petitioner's showing of
interest is not sufficient. At the hearing, the Petitioner amended its
petition to exclude the woods crew, numbering about 50, from the unit
sought. It is probable that, among the authorizations submitted by
,the Petitioner, there were some from this group. However, we have
often held that a Petitioner's showing of interest is a matter for ad-
ministrative determination, and not open to attack by the parties.
Moreover, we are administratively advised that the Petitioner's show-
ing is adequate, even assuming facts and figures most favorable to the
Employer's contention. We therefore find no merit in this contention.
Accordingly, we find that a question affecting commerce exists con-
cerning the employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section
9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act, as amended.
4. The appropriate unit :
The Petitioner seeks a unit of all production and maintenance em-
ployees of the Employer, including firemen, but excluding watchmen,
office and clerical employees, and supervisors.
The Employer opposes the inclusion of firemen in this unit, on
the ground that these employees, like guards, owe special duties which
set them apart from their fellow employees. The amended Act, which
recognizes the special status of guards, does not make any provision
for firemen, and we have held that a fireman, unless functioning for a
considerable part of the time as a guard, does not come within the
.scope of the exception for guards 2 We therefore find no merit in
this contention of the Employer.
We find further that all production and maintenance employees of
the Employer, including firemen, but excluding guards, watchmen,
' Matter of Massvssvppx Products, Inc. 78 N . L R. B 873
' Matter of Conant Bail Company, 78 N L R. B 884
McGRAW-CURRAN LUMBER CO., INC. 707
office and clerical employees, and supervisors, constitute a unit appro-
priate for the purposes of collective 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 Fifteenth Region, and subject
to Sections 203.61 and 203.62 of National Labor Relations Board Rules
and Regulations-Series 5,'among the employees in the unit found
appropriate in paragraph numbered 4, above, who were employed dur-
ing the pay-roll period immediately- preceding the date of this Direc-
tion, 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 employees 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 excluding 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 Interna-
tional Woodworkers of America, CIO.