Rayonier, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 20, 1966

158 N.L.R.B. 176 (N.L.R.B. 1966)

176 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Rayonier, Incorporated and Union of Powerhouse Workers, Local
No. 1. Case No. 12-CA-3417. April 20,1966
DECISION AND ORDER
Upon charges duly filed by Union of Powerhouse Workers, Local
No. 1, herein called the Union, the General Counsel of the National
Labor Relations Board, by the Regional Director for Region 12, issued
a complaint dated December 21, 1965, against Rayonier, Incorporated,
herein called the Respondent, alleging that the Respondent had
engaged in and was engaging in unfair labor practices within the
meaning of Section 8(a) (5) and (1) and Section 2(6) and, (7) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended. Copies of the charge and
complaint were duly served upon the Respondent and the Union.
With respect to the unfair labor practices, the complaint alleges in
substance that the Union,w,as' and is the exclusive representative of
certain employees of the Respondent in the appropriate unit certified
by the Board on.November 18,1965, in Case No. 12-RC-2230, and that
on or.about December .9, 1965, and thereafter, the Respondent unlaw-
fully refused to bargain with the Union.
The Respondent's answer, filed on January 17, 1966, admits certain
jurisdictional and factual allegations of the complaint but denies the
commission of unfair labor practices.
On January 17, 1966, all parties to this proceeding entered into a
stipulation. The stipulation contains a statement of facts, and states
that the parties have waived hearing, the making of findings of facts
and conclusions of law by a Trial Examiner, and the issuance of a
Trial Examiner's Decision, and that they desire to submit the instant
case directly to the Board for findings of facts, conclusions of law,
and Decision and Order. The parties also agree that the stipulation,
together with the charge, complaint, and answer in the instant case,
and the record in Case No. 12-RC-2230, shall constitute the entire
record in this case.
. On January 24, 1966, the Board approved the stipulation and
ordered the proceeding transferred to the Board. Upon the basis of
the parties' stipulation and the entire record in the case, the Board
makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE RESPONDENT
The Respondent is engaged at Fernandina Beach, Florida, in the
manufacture of chemical cellulose . During the 12-month period pre-
'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 McCulloch and
Members Fanning and Zagoria].
158 NLRB No. 30.
RAYONIER, INCORPORATED 177
ceding the issuance of the complaint herein, the Respondent shipped
from its Fernandina Beach, Florida, plant,' chemical cellulose valued
in excess of $50,000 directly to points outside the State of Florida. -
The Respondent admits, and we find, that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the Act.
II. THE LABOR ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
Union of Powerhouse Workers, Local No. 1, is a labor organization
as defined in Section 2(5) of the Act.
M. THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
On October 27, 1965, the Board denied the requests for review of
the Regional Director's Decision and Direction of Election, filed by
the Respondent, the Employer in Case No. 12-RC-2230, and by the
Intervenor in that case 2
On November 18, 1965, following an election conducted pursuant
to the Decision and Direction of Election issued by the Regional
Director in Case No. 12-RC-2230, the Board certified the Union as
the collective-bargaining representative of the employees in an appro-
priate unit of all utility department employees located at the Fernan-
dina Beach, Florida, plant, excluding all other employees, watchmen,
guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act.
The stipulation herein states that (1) on or about December 9, 1965,
and continuing to date, the Union requested the Respondent to bargain
collectively with respect to rates of pay, wages, hours of employment,
and other terms and conditions of employment as the exclusive'bar-
gaining representative of all the employees of the Respondent in the
appropriate unit; and (2) the Respondent has refused and continues
to refuse to recognize and bargain with the Union because the Respond-
ent contends that the unit composed of its utility department employ-
ees is inappropriate, and Respondent desires to seek court review 'of
this-issue which was decided by the Regional Director in the Decision
and Direction above- referred to and which was the subject of the
requests for review referred to above.
In its determination of theRespondent's, and the Intervenor's
request for review in Case No. 12-RC-2230, the Board; upon careful
consideration of the entire record in that case, found without merit
the Respondent's and the-Intervenor's requests for review and affirmed
the Regional Director's Decision and Direction of Election, which
found that the present unit might be appropriate if the employees so
desired, 'apart from the existing production and maintenance unit of
the Respondent's employees. The Respondent does not contend that
s International , Brotherhood of Pulp, Sulphite & Paper Mill Workers, AFL-CIO.
221-731-67-vol . 15S-13 -
178 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
there now exists relevant and material evidence which was not avail-
able at the representation proceeding
Accordingly, R e find that the Union was duly certified by the Board
as the collective-bargaining representative of the employees of the
Respondent in the appropriate unit described above and in the Board's
certification, and that the Union at all times since November 18, 1965,
has been the exclusive bargaining representative of all the employees
in the aforesaid unit, within the meaning of Section 9(a) of the Act
We further find that the Respondent has, since December 9, 1965,
refused to bargain collectively with the Union as the exclusive rep-
iesentative of its employees in the unit, and that, by such refusal, the
Respondent has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices
within the meaning of Section 8(a) (5) and (1) of the Act3
r%' IHE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES UPON COMMERCE
The activities of the Respondent set forth in section III, above, have
a close, intimate, and substantial relation to trade, traffic, and com-
merce among the several States, and tend to lead to labor disputes
bui dening and obstructing commerce and the free flow of commerce
V THE REMEDY
Having found that the Respondent has engaged in unfair labor
practices within the meaning of Section 8(a) (5) and (1) of the Act,
we shall order that it cease and desist therefrom and, upon request,
bargain collectively with the Union as the exclusive representative of
all the employees in the appropriate unit, and, if an understanding
is reached, embody such understanding in a signed agreement
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1 Union of Powerhouse Workers, Local No 1, is a labor organiza-
tion as defined in Section 2(5) of the Act
2 All utility department employees located al the Fernandina
Beach, Florida, plant, excluding all other employees, watchmen,
guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act, constitute a unit appro-
priate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning
of Section 9 (b) of the Act
3 The above-named labor organization was, on November 18, 1965,
and at all times thereafter, the exclusive representative of all employ-
ees in the aforesaid appropriate unit for purposes of collective bar-
gaining within the meaning of Section 9(a) of the Act
4 By refusing, on and since December 9, 1965, to bargain collec-
tively with the above-named labor organization as the exclusive rep-
s Salerno Megowen Btsouit Company 152 NLRB 804 0 K Van and Storage Ino, 127
NLRB 1537 , 1539 , enfd 297 F 2d 74 (C A 5)
RAYONIER, INCORPORATED 179
resentative of its employees in the aforesaid appropriate unit, the
Respondent has thereby engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor
practices within the meaning of Section 8(a) (5) and (1) of the Act
5 The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair labor practices
affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of
the Act
ORDER
Pursuant to Section 10(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, as
amended, the National Labor Relations Boaid hereby orders that the
Respondent Rayonier, Incorporated, Fernandina Beach, Florida, its
officers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall
1 Cease and desist from
(a) Refusing to bargain collectively concerning wages, hours, and
terms and conditions of employment with Union of Powerhouse Work-
ers, Local No 1, as the exclusive representative of all the employees in
the following unit
All utility department employees located at the Fernandina Beach,
Floi ida, plant, excluding all other employees, watchmen, guards, and
supervisors as defined in the Act
(b) In any like or related manner, interfering with efforts of Union
of Powerhouse Workers, Local No 1, to bargain collectively
2 Take the following affirmative action which the Board finds will
effectuate the policies of the Act
(a) Upon request, bargain collectively concerning wages, hours, and
terms and conditions of employment, with the above-named labor
organization as the exclusive iepresentative of all employees in the
appropriate unit, and if an understanding is reached, embody such
understanding in a signed agreement
(b) Post at its plant at Fernandina Beach, Florida, copies of the
attached notice marked "Appendix " 4 Copies of said notice, to be
furnished by the Regional Director for Region 12, shall, after being
duly signed by the Respondent's authorized representative, be posted
by the Respondent immediately upon receipt thereof, and be main-
tained by it for 60 consecutive days thereafter, in conspicuous places,
including all places where notices to employees are customarily posted
Reasonable steps shall be taken by the Respondent to insure that said
notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by any other material
(c) Notify the Regional Director for Region 12, in writing, within
10 days from the date of this Order, what steps the Respondent has
taken to comply herewith
k In the event that this Order is enforced by a decree of a United States Court of
Appeals, there shall be substituted for the words ' a Decision and Order ' the words ' a
Decree of the United States Court of Appeals Enforcing an Order '
180 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
APPENDIX
NOTICE TO ALL EMPLOYEES
Pursuant to a Decision and Order of the National Labor Relations
Board, and in order to effectuate the policies of the National Labor
Relations Act, as amended, we hereby notify our employees that :
WE WILL NOT refuse to bargain collectively with Union of
Powerhouse Workers, Local No. 1, as the exclusive bargaining
representative of the employees in the appropriate unit.
The appropriate unit is :
All utility department employees located at the Employ-
er's Fernandina Beach, Florida, plant, excluding all other
employees, watchmen, guards, and supervisors as defined in
the Act.
WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner interfere with efforts
of Union of Powerhouse Workers, Local No. 1, to bargain
collectively.
RAYONIER, INCORPORATED,
Employer.
Dated---------------- By-------------------------------------
(Representative) (Title)
This notice must remain posted for 60 consecutive days from the
date of posting, and must not be altered, defaced, or covered by any
other material.
Employees may communicate directly with the Board's Regional
Office, 706 Federal Office Building, 500 Zack Street, Tampa, Florida,
Telephone No. 228-7711, Extension 257.
Acme Industrial Products, Incorporated and International Union,
United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement
Workers of America, AFL-CIO. Case No.4-CA-3770. April O,
1966
DECISION AND ORDER
On December 29,1965, Trial Examiner Charles W. Schneider issued
his Decision in the above-entitled proceeding, finding that Respond-
ent had engaged in and was engaging in certain unfair labor practices
and recommending that it cease and desist therefrom and take certain
affirmative action, as set forth in the attached Trial Examiner's Deci-
sion. Thereafter, Respondent filed exceptions to the Trial Examiner's
Decision, together with a supporting brief.
158 NLRB No. 7.