Pacific Grape Products Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Nov 12, 1948

80 N.L.R.B. 265 (N.L.R.B. 1948)

In the Matter Of PACIFIC GRAPE PRODUCTS COMPANY, EMPLOYER and
CANNERY WAREHOUSEMEN , FOOD PROCESSORS , DRIVERS AND HELPERS
UNION OF STANISLAUS AND MERCED COUNTIES, LOCAL 748, AFL,
PETITIONER
Case No. 20-RC-298.-Decided November 12,1948
DECISION
AND
ORDER
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 organizations named below claim to represent em-
ployees 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:
On October 9, 1946, following an election conducted in Case No.
20-R-1489,1 Food, Tobacco, Agricultural and Allied Workers Union
of America, Local 82, CIO (herein called the Intervenor) ,2 was certified
by the Board as the exclusive representative of production and main-
tenance employees at the Employer's two food processing plants at
*Chairman Herzog and Members Houston and Gray.
1 The Board 's Decision and Direction of Election in this case is recorded under the name
of Matter of Bercut Richards Packing Company, et al, 64 N. L. R. B 133.
2 The Intervenor , although not in compliance with Section 9 (f), (g), and (h) of the
Act, was allowed to intervene in this proceeding because of its current contract with the
Employer.
80 N. L. R. B., No. 53.
265
266 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Modesto, California. A contract subsequently executed by and be-
tween the Employer and the Intervenor expired on April 1, 1948.
On June 14, 1948, the same parties executed a new agreement, termi-
nating April 1, 1949. They contend that this current contract consti-
tutes a bar to a determination of representatives at this time.
The Petitioner opposes this contention and alleges that the Peti-
tioner made a timely demand upon the Employer for recognition as
bargaining representative of these employees in April 1948. The
Employer denies such notice of the Petitioner's claim. We find it
unnecessary to resolve this issue of fact, for the Petitioner did not file
the instant petition until July 27, 1948, more than 6 weeks after the
execution and effective date of the new contract urged as a bar. Under
these circumstances, the petition was untimely filed.3 We shall dismiss
the instant petition, without prejudice, however, to the filing of a
new petition before the terminal date of the current contract.
ORDER
Upon the basis of the entire record in this case, the National Labor
Relations Board hereby orders that the petition filed in the instant
matter be, and it hereby is, dismissed without prejudice.
3 Matter o f General Electrio X-Ray, 67 N . L. R. B. 947.