Sterling Processing Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Feb 27, 1958

119 N.L.R.B. 1783 (N.L.R.B. 1958)

STERLING PROCESSING CORPORATION 1783
Sterling Processing Corporation and Teamsters and Butchers
Joint Organizing Committee , Local 424, Amalgamated Meat
Cutters & Butcher Workmen of North America, and Local 453
International Brotherhood of Teamsters , Chauffeurs, Ware-
housemen and Helpers of America , AFL-CIO, Petitioner. Case
No. 5-RC-2314. February 27,1958
DECISION AND ORDER
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a hearing was held before Sidney Smith, hearing officer.
The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudi-
cial 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 [Members Rodgers, Jenkins, and Fanning].'
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the
Act.
2. The Petitioner herein is the Teamsters and Butchers Joint
Organizing Committee, Local 424, Amalgamated Meat Cutters &
Butcher Workmen of North America, and Local 453, International
Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of
America, AFL-CIO, hereafter referred to as the Committee.
During the course of the hearing, the Employer moved to dismiss
the petition on the ground, inter alia, that the Petitioner is not a labor
organization within the meaning of the Act. This motion was referred
to the Board by the hearing officer and is granted for the reasons stated
below.
The record shows that in 1954, the International Brotherhood of
Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, here-
inafter referred to as the Teamsters, and the Amalgamated Meat Cut-
ters and Butcher Workmen of North America, hereinafter referred
to as the Butchers, entered into an agreement which provided for the
formation of a Joint Committee composed of three members from
each International for the purpose of assisting each other in organiz-
ing the unorganized and solving jurisdictional disputes. Therein the
parties mutually recognized certain jurisdictional lines in the food
processing industry, and in that part of the industry consisting of can-
ning, freezing, and dehydrating food, they agreed to organize on the
following basis: production employees to belong to the Butchers;
receiving and loading employees, warehousemen, and truckdrivers to
belong to the Teamsters. Each International was to designate a
cochairman from the respective committees to outline and conduct a
1 We deny the Employer 's request for oral argument . The record and brief fully present
the positions of the parties on the issues involved.
119 NLRB No. 233.
1784 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
thorough organizational program. The Committee is not empowered
by the agreement to deal with an Employer concerning labor disputes,
wages, hours, grievances, or conditions of employment. It has no
membership, constitution, bylaws, or treasury.
To substantiate its contention that the Committee is a labor organi-
zation which desires to appear on the ballot, the organizer and the
special assistant to the chairman of the Committee testified at the hear-
ing. Both stated that the purpose of the Committee was to organize
the unorganized employees and to place them in the proper jurisdic-
tion. The latter stated that the Committee's work ends after the
employees are organized, and the group is turned over to the Locals
for negotiation of a joint contract, if possible, and if not, separate
contracts. Regardless, each Local services its own membership.
Although the Committee's organizer testified that, if the Committee
won an election, it would process grievances until a contract was com-
pleted, there is no evidence that it has done so in the past. To the
contrary, as indicated above, under the agreement the Committee has
no authority to do so. In addition, the record shows that the Com-
mittee has never been a party to a collective-bargaining agreement.
The Committee has complied with the filing provisions of Section 9
of the Act, and a letter accompanying the papers filed with the Board
states that the Committee operates under the constitution and bylaws
of the two Internationals and exists solely for organizational pur-
poses; that it admits no employees to membership and collects no dues.
From the information above and the entire record in this case it is
clear that the Petitioner does not come within the statutory definition
of a labor organization.' In view of the Committee's request to be
placed on the ballot, and no like request by either or both Locals, we
grant the Employer's motion to dismiss.
[The Board dismissed the petition.]
2 General Motors Corporation, 117 NLRB 955, 956; Grand Central Aircraft Co Inc.,
106 NLRB 358 359; Sears Roebuck and Company , 106 NLRB 1395 ; Olen Mathieson
Chemical Corporation, 114 NLRB 948, Glove Workers' Union (Crescendoe Gloves Inc ),
116 NLRB, 681, 687-688, General Shoe Corporation, 113 NLRB 905 , 906 Burroughs
Corporation, 116 NLRB 1118; Geneva Forge, Inc, 114 NLRB 1295 Cf. Endicott Johnson
Corporation, 117 NLRB 1886; A. C. Lawrence Leather Company, 113 NLRB 60.
The Woodman Company , Inc. and District Lodge No. 46 , Inter-
national Association of Machinists , AFL-CIO. Case No. 10-
RM-235. February 27,1958
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations At, a hearing was held before A. C. Joy, hearing officer.
119 NLRB No. 221.