Pillsbury Mills, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Nov 20, 1950

92 N.L.R.B. 172 (N.L.R.B. 1950)

In the Matter of PILLSBURY MILLS, INC., EMPLOYER and PLUMBERS
LOCAL UNION No. 15, UNITED ASSOCIATION OF JOURNEYMEN AND
APPRENTICES OF THE PLUMBING AND PIPE FITTING INDUSTRY OF
THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA, A. F. OF L., PETITIONER
Case No. 18-RC-794.-Decided November 20, 1950
DECISION AND ORDER
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a hearing was held before Clarence A. Meter, hearing
officer. The hearing officer's rulings`- made at the healing 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 Herzog and Members Houston and Reynolds].
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 organization involved claims to represent employees
of the Employer.
3. No question affecting commerce exists concerning the repre-
sentation 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:
The - Employer contends that an existing collective bargaining con-
tract is a bar to the present petition in which the Petitioner seeks to
sever a unit of plumbers and steam fitters from a production and
maintenance unit at the Employer's Minneapolis plant.
The Employer has a number of plants located in different parts
of the United States. For a number of years it has bargained with
American Federation of Grain Millers, AFL, herein called the Grain
Millers, for production and maintenance employees in those of its
plants which have selected the Grain Millers as their representative.
The practice has been to negotiate master contracts which establish
certain uniform conditions for all plants, supplemented by agreements
' The Employer' s motion to dismiss the petition on the ground , among others, that an
existing contract is a bar to this proceeding , is granted for the reasons set forth in para-
graph numbered 3, below.
92 NLRB No. 47.
172
PILLSBURY MILLS, INC. 173
at the plant level which make provision for local conditions. Among
the plants covered by this arrangement is the Minneapolis plant of
the Employer, which is alone involved in this proceeding.
On November 8, 1948, the Employer and the Grain Millers signed
a master contract effective to July 1, 1950, and from year to year
thereafter unless terminated by either party on 60 days' notice before
any anniversary date. The contract provided that:
An appendix specifying plant departments, classifications of
employment, rates of pay, the application of seniority, and such
other provisions as may be mutually desirable and necessary but
not in contradiction to the terms of this Agreement, shall be
negotiated by the Company and the Union's Plant Negotiating
Committee and made a part hereof.
Pursuant to this provision, the Employer and the Minneapolis Plant
Negotiating Committee negotiated an appendix or supplemental agree-
ment which prescribed wage rates, shift differentials, and a number
of other local conditions of employment. The appendix also contained
a duration clause similar to that in the master contract.
On April 6, 1950, approximately 3 months before the termination,
date of the 1948 master agreement, the contracting parties signed a
new master contract effective from March 1, 1950, to April 1, 1952.
The new agreement provides :
70. As of the date of execution hereof, this agreement shall
supersede and replace all previous National and Master Agree-
ments between the parties hereto . . . provided, that all Supple-
mental Agreements covering classifications and rates of pay at-
tached to and provided for under such National or Master Agree-
ments shall continue according to their own terms and shall
become part of this Agreement.
2. This Master Agreement and the present Supplemental Agree-
ment or any- Supplemental Agreements hereafter negotiated in
accordance with paragraph 9,2 shall be considered the collective
bargaining Agreement between the parties... .
At least 60 days before July 1, 1950, Grain Millers Local 1, which was
the signatory to the 1948 appendix or supplementary agreement, served
notice of a desire to reopen the appendix as permitted by its terms.
2 Paragraph 9 provides:
Supplemental agreements between the parties, which must be executed, shall specify
plant departments, classification of employment, and rates of pay, and shall provide
for the local application of seniority. Supplemental Agreements may also include
such additional provisions of a local character, not provided for in this Master Agree-
ment . . . No provision of a Supplemental Agreement can be in contradiction hereto
or in conflict herewith.
929979-51-vol. 92-13
174 DECISIONS OF' NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
After negotiation the Employer and Local 1 signed a new supple-
mentary agreement about August 2, 1950. This supplement was made
effective from July 1, 1950, to July 1, 1952. Except for a change in
wage rates, it made little alteration in the previous supplementary
agreement.
Meanwhile, on July 14, 1950, after the signing of the 1950 master
agreement and the termination date of the 1948 master agreement,
but before the signing of the 1950 supplementary agreement, the
Petitioner made its initial claim of representation and filed the present
petition.
The Petitioner contends that the 1950 master agreement is not, a bar
.because : (1) it attempted to extend prematurely the term of the 1948
agreement; and (2) it was incomplete without the supplementary
agreement, which was not signed until after the Petitioner filed its
petition.
We find no merit in either of these contentions : (1) although the
1950 master agreement was signed and became effective before the
termination date of the 1948 contract, the Petitioner did not make its
own claim to representation until after the automatic renewal, or Mill
B,3 date of the 1948 agreement. Under the holding of the Board in
the Northwestern Publishing Company case,4 the "premature exten-
sion" doctrine does not apply to such a situation.
(2) The 1950 master agreement is a 13-page document containing
75 clauses settling such terms and conditions of employment as hours
of work, holiday and overtime pay provisions, seniority, vacations,
grievance procedure, retirement, and various insurance benefits. It is
thus much more than a mere recognition agreement. On the contrary,
it is the basic agreement between the parties with the supplement
merely filling out its terms as provided in both the master and the
supplemental agreenlents.5 Under such circumstances, the master con-
tract alone is to be considered in determining whether the Petitioners
rival claim of representation was timely made.6 The Petitioner's claim
was made too late to prevent the 1950 master agreement from being a
bar. Accordingly, we shall dismiss the petition.
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition filed herein be, and it hereby
is, dismissed.
3 Mill Is, Inc., 40 NLRB 3.4 6.
4 71 NLRB 167: Greenville Finishing Company, Inc.. 71 NLRB 436.
5 The 1950 supplement provides : "This [Supplemental] Agreement is to be attac?^. ed to
and be a part of the Master Agreement," and "In accordance with the terms and provisions
of Section II of the Master Agreement dated March 1, 1950, the followwing` wage •rat¢e will
be effective. . . .
6 Cf. M. P. Moller, Inc., 56 NLRB 16.