Pickering Lumber Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 31, 1960

128 N.L.R.B. 1443 (N.L.R.B. 1960)

PICKERING LUMBER CORPORATION 1443
spray painters, transport drivers, and sales representatives, but ex-
cluding all office clerical employees, temporary and casual employees,
the branch manager at Lafayette, Indiana, and all other supervisors
as defined in the Act.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
filled in on this basis over a period of 2 or 3 years , the record does not indicate that
they were notified of any possibility of recall nor that any of them have been recalled
regularly . These individuals appear to be temporary and casual employees, and we
shall therefore exclude; them. Freeman Loader Corp ., '127 NLRB 514; F. W . Woolworth
Company , 119 NLRB 480 , 184; Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea Company, National Bakery
Division , 116 NLRB 1463, 1467.
Pickering Lumber Corporation and Western States Regional
Council #3, International Woodworkers of America, AFL-
CIO, Petitioner. Cases Nos. 20-RC-4206 and 20-RC-4207. Au-
gust 31, 1960
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
Upon petitions duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a consolidated hearing was held before Albert
Schneider, 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 Leedom and Members Jenkins and
Fanning].
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.'
3. The Petitioner seeks separate plantwide units at the Employer's
Westside Division and Standard Division Wood Products Manufac-
turing Plants. The Employer and Intervenor contend that the pe-
titions which were filed on May 3, 1960, are barred by their present
contracts covering employees in the requested units. These contracts
were entered into on August 7, 1958, and carry an April 1, 1961,
expiration date. Such contracts of more than 2 years' duration are
under Board rules a bar to a petition for only the first 2 years. A
petition is, therefore, timely if filed more than 60 days, but less than
150 from the end of such 2-year term.2 Here the fixed 2-year period
'Lumber and Sawmill Workers Union, Local No. 2810, of the United Brotherhood of
Carpenters and Joiners of America, AFL-CIO and Lumber and Sawmill Workers Union,
Local No. 2652, of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America,
AFL-CIO intervened in Cases Nos . 20-RC-4206 and 20-RC-4207, respectively, on the
basis of their current contracts covering employees in the requested units.
2 Pacific Coast Association of Pulp and Paper Manufacturers, 121 NLRB 990, 993.
128 NLRB No. 131.
1444 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
for the contracts involved ended August 7, 1960. As the petition was
filed more than 60 and less than 150 days before that date, it is clearly
timely under existing Board contract-bar rules.
The Employer and Intervenors contend, however, that in view of
the seasonal nature of the industry here involved, the Board' s estab-
lished contract-bar rules should not be applied. Specifically, they
urge the Board to adopt a rule holding their contracts a bar for two
full operating seasons-or under the circumstances of this proceeding
until April 1, 1961. We find no merit in the position of the Employer
and Intervenors, for were we to adopt their suggestion we would be
adding an element of uncertainty in the area of contract-bar law con-
cerning the timeliness of petitions-an uncertainty we expressly at-
tempted to eliminate in our most recent revision of our contract-bar
rules.'
In view of the foregoing, we find that the petitions are not barred
by the contracts between the Employer and the Intervenors, and 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 agreement with the parties that the following em-
ployees of the Employer constitute units appropriate for the purpose
of collective bargaining within Section 9 (b) of the Act:
(a) In Case No. 20-RC-4206: All regular production and main-
tenance employees, namely, all inside and outside employees, including
the roundhouse crew and broad-gauge switching crew, employed at
the Employer's plant at Tuolumne, California, but excluding operat-
ing employees on the company narrow-gauge railroad, the dry kiln
operator, janitor and safety inspector, night watchmen, all employees
included in the Woods bargaining unit as defined in Case No. 20-RC-
3990, office clerical employees, professional employees, guards, and
supervisors as defined in the Act.
(b) In Case No. 20-RC-4207: All regular production, mainte-
nance, and operating employees, including employees in the plywood
plant, employed at the Employer's plant at Standard, California, but
excluding all employees in the Woods bargaining unit defined in Case
No. 20-RC-3623, office clerical employees, supply warehouse clerks,,
plant timekeepers, store, boardinghouse and hotel employees, watch-
men, janitors, operating employees on the Company' s logging railroad,
professional employees, guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act.
[Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication.]
3 Deluxe netal Furniture Company, 121 NLRB 995 , 1000 We find no merit in the
contention that the contracts should be held a bar because they effectuated no changes
in working conditions until April 1, 1959, for under the circumstances here the execu-
tion date of August 7, 1958, is clearly determinative in computing the period during
which the agreements are effective for contract-bar purposes
O