Sterling Processing Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 22, 1958

120 N.L.R.B. 567 (N.L.R.B. 1958)

STERLING PROCESSING CORPORATION 567
Sterling Processing Corporation and International Brotherhood
of Teamsters , Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of Amer-
ica, Local 453; and Amalgamated Meat Cutters and Butcher
Workmen of North America, Local 424, AFL-CIO, Joint
Petitioner
Sterling Processing Corporation, Petitioner and District 50,
United Mine Workers of America and the Unions named above
as Joint Petitioner. Cases Nos. 5-RC-2468 and 5-RM-373.' April
4 1958
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION
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-member panel [Chairman Leedom and Members
Rodgers and Jenkins].
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 certain
employees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of certain employees of the Employer, within the meaning of
Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act 2
4. The following employees of the Employer constitute a unit appro-
priate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning
of Section 9 (b) of the Act: 3
All production and maintenance employees employed at the
Employer's Oakland, Maryland, poultry processing plant, including
truckdrivers and helpers, but excluding all office clerical employees,
guards, watchmen, professional employees, and supervisors as defined
in the Act.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
1 Cases Nos. 5-RC-2468 and 5-RM-373 were consolidated for the purposes of hearing
2 On March 19, 1958, the Joint Petitioner herein filed a petition requesting an election in
the above-described unit On March 20, 1958, the Employer Petitioner filed an RM
petition for an election in the same unit, naming as claimants the Joint Petitioner and
District 50, UMW, and requesting that the latter also be placed on the ballot. Although
these petitions have been consolidated for hearing, we shall direct the election on the
Employer's RM petition and, in accordance with our new policy enunciated in Retail
Assoceates, Inc., 120 NLRB 388, we shall include District 50 on the ballot, notwith-
standing its failure to achieve compliance. However, if District 50 wins the election we
shall only certify the arithmetical results. -
3 The unit description conforms to the stipulation of the parties.
120 NLRB No. 92.