Oklahoma Coca-Cola Bottling Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 30, 1948

78 N.L.R.B. 854 (N.L.R.B. 1948)

In the Matter of OKLAHOMA COCA-COLA BOTTLING COMPANY,
EMPLOYER and INTERNATIONAL UNION OF UNITED BREWERY, FLOUR,
CEREAL, SOFT DRINKS AND DISTILLERY WORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO,
PETITIONER
Case No. 16-RC-84.-Decided July 30, 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-man panel consisting 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. 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 Employer operates two plants in Oklahoma at which it
bottles coca-cola. Its main plant, in Oklahoma City, is a distance of
32 miles from the other plant in El Reno. The Employer also main-
tains two warehouses in Norman and St. Pauls, Oklahoma, which are
18 and 65 miles respectively from Oklahoma City. All the goods
handled by the two warehouses are received from the Oklahoma City
plant. The two warehouses as well as the two plants distribute the
Employer's product to the trade in their respective localities.
The Petitioner seeks a unit composed of the production and main-
tenance employees in the Employer's Oklahoma City plant, including
*Chairman Herzog and Members Reynolds and Murdock.
78 N. L. R. B., No. 112.
854
OKLAHOMA COCA-COLA BOTTLING COMPANY 855
route salesmen, garagemen, construction and erection men, and the
sign painter's helper, but excluding office and clerical employees, coin
and refrigeration mechanics, and all supervisors. The Employer
agrees that the categories sought by the Petitioner are appropriate but
contends that the unit should be Employer-wide in scope and include
the production and maintenance employees in the El Reno plant and
the warehouses in St. Pauls and Norman respectively.
The Employer's over-all operations are in charge of a general man-
ager whose headquarters are in Oklahoma City. The production and
maintenance employees in the Oklahoma City plant work under the
supervision of departmental foremen who are answerable to the gen-
eral manager. There is a local manager in charge of the El Reno plant
while the operation of each warehouse is under the separate super-
vision of a foreman. Although all the Employer's employees are car-
ried on a single pay roll which is prepared in the Oklahoma City plant,
the employees in the Oklahoma City plant have little if any contact
with the other employees of the Employer. There is virtually no
interchange between them and the employees in the El Reno plant and
those in the two warehouses. Although transfers from one operation
to another may be effected at the request of employees, such transfers
are infrequent. The record shows, moreover, that the wage rates of
some of the employees in the Oklahoma City plant are higher than
those of employees performing comparable work in the other opera-
tions. There has been no history of collective bargaining in either of
the two plants or the two warehouses.
In view of the foregoing, including the geographical separation of
the Oklahoma City plant from the Employer's other operations, and
upon the entire record in the case, we are persuaded that a unit con-
fined to the employees in the Oklahoma City plant of the Employer
is appropriate.'
We find that all the production and maintenance employees, includ-
ing the route salesmen, garagemenn, construction and erection men, and
the sign painter's helper employed at the Oklahoma City plant of the
Employer, but excluding office and clerical employees, coin and re-
frigeration mechanics, and all supervisors, constitute a unit appro-
priate for 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 pur-
poses of collective bargaining with the Employer, an election by secret
'Matter of Burgess Battery Company, 76 N. L. R. B. 820; Matter of Alabama Textile
Products Corp., 73 N. L. R. B. 1192.
856 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than 30 days
from the date of this Direction, under the direction and supervision
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-Series 5, among the employees in the
unit found appropriate in paragraph numbered 4, above, who were
employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date
of this Direction of Election; 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
International Union of United Brewery, Flour, Cereal, Soft Drinks
and Distillery Workers of America, CIO.