Nephi Processing Plant, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Dec 30, 1953

107 N.L.R.B. 647 (N.L.R.B. 1953)

NEPHI PROCESSING PLANT, INC. 647
the Intervenor.' We therefore find that the contract cannot
operate as a bar to the instant proceeding. 9
We find that 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. We find, in accordance with the agreement of the parties,
that all production and maintenance employees at the Employer's
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, plant, excluding draftsmen, pat-
ternmakers, office clerical employees, guards, foremen, and
other supervisors, 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.]
Chairman Farmer took no part in the consideration of the
above Decision and Direction of Election.
2Cf. New Castle Products, Incorporated. 99 NLRB 811.
$In view of this disposition of the contract bar issue, we find it unnecessary to consider
the schism issue raised by the Petitioner.
NEPHI PROCESSING PLANT, INC. ' and AMALGAMATED
MEAT CUTTERS & BUTCHER WORKMEN OF NORTH
AMERICA, LOCAL 537, AFL, Petitioner. Case No. 20-RC-
2428. December 30, 1953
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 Robert J.
Scolnick, hearing officer. 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 the buying and raising of
turkeys, the buying and growing of feed for turkeys, and the
processing of its own and other turkeys for marketing. It
operates approximately 50 turkey ranches all within a 20-mile
radius of Nephi, Utah. At Nephi it operates a processing plant
in which turkeys are slaughtered, picked, eviscerated, frozen,
and packed for shipment to markets all over the country. The
Employer annually ships to points outside the State of Utah,
packaged turkeys valued in excess of $1,500,000. Its annual
1 As amended at the hearing.
2 As all parties appeared at the hearing and were heard on all issues, the Employer's
contention that it had insufficient notice of hearing is without merit.
107 NLRB No. 140.
648 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
purchases of turkey poults, feeds, grains, and packaging
materials from points outside the State of Utah amount to
more than $300,000. We find that the Employer is engaged in
commerce within the meaning of the Act, and that it will
effectuate the policies of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein. 3
2. The labor organization involved claims to represent
certain employees of the Employer.
3. The Employer moved to dismiss the petition on the grounds
that it had not received a formal request for recognition from
the Petitioner. However, at the hearing the Employer stated that
it declined to recognize Petitioner. Accordingly, we hereby
deny the Employer's motion.4 The Employer further contends
that the employees in its processing plant whom the Petitioner
seeks to represent are agricultural laborers within the mean-
ing of Section 2(3) of the Act.
The Employer employs approximately 50 employees on its
various turkey ranches. Prior to 1953 season, when it merely
dressed turkeys for market, it employed approximately 50
employees in its processing plant. For the 1953 season the
Employer added eviscerating equipment, which required an
additional 50 employees to operate. The Employer expects to
continue the eviscerating operation. The processing opera-
tions are essentially an assembly line operation with no em-
ployees performing more than 1 of the operations involved.
There is some turnover of employment during a season so
that although only 100 employees are employed at any one
time, the Employer employs approximately 160 to 175 em-
ployees during the course of the season. Approximately 15
percent of these employees work on the turkey ranches when
the processing plant is not in operation. About 50 percent of
the employees return to work in the processing plant in suc-
ceeding seasons.
The employees in the processing plant and on the ranches
are under separate supervision. The processing plant is not
located on any of the Employer's ranches. As indicated by
the addition of the eviscerating equipment, with the attendant
increase in the degree of industrialization and change in
function of the processing operation, the processing plant is
not merely incidental to the Employer's ranching operations.
Notwithstanding the fact that some of the processing plant
employees are employed on the Employer's turkey ranches
when the processing plant is not in operation, we find under
the principles of Imperial Garden Growers, 5 that in the opera-
tion of the processing plant the Employer is not engaged in
agricultural activities so as to constitute its employees agri-
cultural laborers within the meaning of the Act.
3Stanislaus Implement and Hardware Co. Ltd., 91 NLRB 618.
4Buick Motor Division, General Motors Corporation Jet Plant, Willow Springs, 105 NLRB
958; American Fruit Growers, Inc., 101 NLRB 740.
5 91 NLRB 1034, see also Cochran Co., Inc., 105 NLRB 5; Danny Denenberg, 103 NLRB 714;
Colorado River Farms, 99 NLRB 160; J. J. Crossetti Co., 98 NLRB 268
FEDERAL TELEPHONE AND RADIO COMPANY 649
We find that a question affecting commerce exists con-
cerning 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. We find that the following employees of the Employer
at its turkey processing plant in Nephi, Utah, constitute an
appropriate unit for the purposes of collective bargaining
within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act: All production
and maintenance employees including slaughterers, pickers,
eviscerators, freezers, packers, and shippers, but excluding
office clerical employees, and supervisors as defined in the
Act.
5. The Employer contends that no election should be directed
because of the turnover of employees in the processing plant
during the season and from season to season, and because the
Petitioner's showing of interest is based on authorization cards
signed by employees some of whom in all probability will not
be employed at the time of the election. This contention is with-
out merit. The showing of interest is an administrative matter
and not subject to attack, The Employer also points to a line
of cases 6 in which the Board has dismissed petitions because the
records disclosed that the Employer's operations were not
scheduled to begin until 6 months after the hearing was held.
These cases do not involve seasonal industries and hence are
not applicable to the present situation. As the record discloses
that the Employer recruits its employees from the same labor
market each year and as more than 30 percent of the employees
employed in any one season can reasonably be expected to re-
turn the following season, we shall, in accordance with the
Board's usual policy with respect to seasonal industries, direct
that an election be held at or about the approximate seasonal
peak on a date to be determined by the Regional Director for
the Twentieth Region, among the employees in the appropriate
unit who are employed during the payroll period immediately
preceding the date of the issuance of the notice of election by
the Regional Director.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
6A. O. Smith Corp., 100 NLRB 1379; A. R. Tohl, 97 NLRB 93.
FEDERAL TELEPHONE AND RADIO COMPANY, A DIVISION
OF INTERNATIONAL TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH COR-
PORATION and INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MA-
CHINISTS, AFL. Cases Nos. 2-CA-3003 and 2-CA-3047.
December 31, 1953
DECISION AND ORDER
On September 28, 1953, Trial Examiner Albert P. Wheatley
issued his Intermediate Report in the above-entitled proceed-
107 NLRB No. 146.