Swift & Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 28, 1944

56 N.L.R.B. 1731 (N.L.R.B. 1944)

In the Matter Of SWIFT & COMPANY and UNITAD PACKINGHOUSE WORK-
ERS OF AMERICA, LOCAL 28-C, C. I. O.
Case No. 13-B-2411.-Decided June 28, 1944
Mr. E. L. Crain, of Chicago, Ill., for the Company.
Mr. Joseph Kinch, of Chicago, Ill., for the United.
Mr. Bruce Dawson, of Chicago, Ill., for the Association.
Mr. Louis Cokin, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon petition duly filed by United Packinghouse Workers of
America, Local 29-C, C. I. 0., herein called the United, alleging that
a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representa-
tion of employees of Swift & Company, Chicago, Illinois, herein called
.the Company, the .National Labor Relations Board provided for an
appropriate hearing upon due notice before Robert T. Drake, Trial
Examiner. Said hearing was held at Chicago, Illinois, on May 22,
1944. At the commencement of the hearing; the Trial Examiner
granted a motion of Employees Protective Arssociation, herein called
the Association, to intervene., The Company, the United, and the
Association appeared, participated, and were afforded full oppor-
tunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to in-
troduce evidence bearing on the issues. During the course of the
hearing the Association moved to dismiss the petition. The Trial
Examiner reserved ruling thereon. The motion is hereby denied. The
Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hearing-are free from prejudicial
error and are hereby affirmed. All parties were afforded opportunity
to file briefs with the Board.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes. the following':
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Swift & Company is an Illinois corporation , operating plants in
several States. We are here concerned- with its plant at Union Stock
56 N. L. R. B., No. 307.
C'
1731
-1732 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Yards, Chicago, Illinios. During 1943 the Company purchased live
stock valued in excess of $1,000,000, approximately 75 percent of
which was shipped to it from points outside the State of Illinois.
During the' same period the Company sold products valued in excess
of $1,000,000, approximately 75 percent of. which was shipped t .points
outside the State of Illinois.
The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
United Packinghouse Workers of America, Local 28-C, is' a" labor
-organization affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations,
admitting to membership employees of the Company.
Employees Protective Association is an unaffiliated labor organiza-
tion, admitting to, membership employees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Company refuses to recognize the United as exclusive collective
bargaining representative of the armed guards at the Union Stock,
Yards plant.
The Association contends that it has been bargaining with the Com-
pany on behalf of the employees' involved herein for 15 years and that
the petition should be dismissed for that reason. There has never
been any written agreements between the Company and the Associa-
tion. We find the position of the Association to be untenable.1
A statement of a Field Examiner of the Board, introduced into evi-
dence at the hearing, indicates that the. United and the Association
each represents a substantial number of employees in the unit herein-
after found to be appropriate.'
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning
the representation of employees of the Company,' within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The United and the Association contend that all armed guards at
the. Union Stock Yards plant of the Company, excluding clerks, the
night gang leader, and sergeants, constitute an appropriate unit. The
Company contends that the duties of its armed guards are such that
they come into conflict with the interests of the production and mainte-
°i See Matter of Eicor, Inc, 46 N. L. R. B . 1035.
2 The Field Examiner reported that the United and the Association submitted 17 authori-
zation cards and a petition bearing 38 ' names, respectively , of persons on the April •1944 pay
Toll of the Company. There are approximately 54 employees in, the appropriate unit.
SWIFT & COMPANY '1733
nance employees. The Company argues that, since the United al-
ready represents the production and maintenance employees,3 it is
improper to permit the armed guards to be represented by the same
labor organization, albeit in separate bargaining units. The Com-
pany,further contends that the armed guards are part of manage-
ment and are not employees within the meaning of the Act because
they are sworn auxiliary military, police.
The armed guards are charged with the duties of preserving law and
order, protecting the Company's property against sabotage, identify-
ing all persons on the Company's premises, and assisting the fire de-
partment. Despite the peculiar relationship which plant-protection
employees' bear to management they are not to be denied any of the
rights or privileges granted under Section 7 of the Act ,4 since we have
often held, as we do now, that plant-protection officers exercise moni-
torial and not supervisory functions. The record in the-instant case
offers ample evidence that the guards have no disciplinary authority
over the production and maintenance employees, so that while disci-
plinary measures may result from a report made by a guard, such
action is the conduct of the supervisor of the employees involved and
not the conduct of the giiard.5
It cannot seriously be contended at this time that guards who are
sworn into temporary membership as auxiliary military police lose
thereby any of the benefits of the Act."
We turn now to the consideration of the contention that it is im-
proper to permit plant-protection employees to be represented by the
same labor organization as production and maintenance employees.
It should be first noted that the petitioner herein is a separate local
of the United than that which represents the production and mainte-
nance employees. This argument deals with a possible conflict of inter-
est which may arise when plant-protection employees join a labor
organization., Self-organization for collective bargaining is not in-
compatible with efficient and faithful discharge of duty.? It should
be further noted that the petition in the instant proceeding does not
raise the problem of merging the armed guards with the unit of pro-
duction and maintenance employees;
We find that all armed guards at the Union Stock Yards plant of
the Company, excluding clerks, the night gang -leader, sergeants,' and
any other supervisory employees with authority to hire, promote,
° Local 28 of the United presently represents the production and maintenance employees
at the Union Stock Yards plant. Local 28-C and Local 28 are under the same district
director and high union officials.
4 See Matter of Chrysler Corporation , Highland Park plant, 44 N . L. R. B. 881.
° See Matter of Federal Motor Truck Company, 50 N. L. R. B. 9.
° Matter of Consolidated Steel Corporation , Ltd.,, 51 N. L. R. B 333, and cases cited
therein. d
7 See Matter of Dravo Corporation, 52 N. L R . B. 322.
A734 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS, BOARD
discharge , discipline , or otherwise effect changes in the status of
employees , or effectively recommend such action , constitute a unit
appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining , within the
meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
We shall direct that the question concerning representation which
has arisen be resolved by means of an election by secret ballot among
the employees in the appropriate unit who were employed during the
pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of the Direction of
Election herein , subject to the limitations and additions set forth in
the Direction.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National Labor
Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations
Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor Rela-
tions Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3, it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Swift & Company,
Chicago, Illinois, an election by secret ballot shall be conducted as
early as possible, but not later than, thirty (30) days from the.date
of this Direction , under the direction and supervision of the Regional
Director for the Thirteenth Region, acting in this matter as agent for
the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Article III, Sec-
tions 10 and 11, of said Rules and Regulations , among the employees in
the unit found appropriate in Section IV, above, who were employed
during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of this Di-
rection, including employees who did not work during said pay-roll
period because they were ill or on vacation or temporarily laid off, and
including employees in the armed forces' of the United States who pre-
sent themselves in person at the polls , but excluding any who have since
quit or been discharged for cause and have not been rehired or rein-
stated prior, to the date of the election , to determine whether they
desire to be represented by United Packinghouse ` Workers of America,
Local 28-C, affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations,
or by Employees Protective Association , for the purposes of collective
bargaining, or by neither. i