Swift & Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 7, 1960

127 N.L.R.B. 87 (N.L.R.B. 1960)

SWIFT & COMPANY 87
Moreover, it is destructive of the basic rationale of the Zia case be-
cause it permits the swamping of the desire of the unrepresented group
for representation by the votes of the represented group against
representation. Plainly, the Board majority in this case is giving
greater weight to votes against representation than it is willing to
accord votes for representation. Certainly, such a decision can hardly
be justified by holding that it is necessary to avoid undue weighting
of the election scales in favor of the union. If there is anything un-
fair in permitting a union to have its majority status as a representa-
tive of employees in an appropriate unit determined on the basis of a
simple majority of the valid ballots cast in the election in that unit,
then that fact should be called to the attention of Congress, which, no
doubt, will be surprised to learn that the basic principle of political
democracy, majority rule, results in unfairness when applied to in-
dustrial elections.
Swift & Company and Amalgamated Meat Cutters and Food
Store Employees Union Local 464, Amalgamated Meat Cutters
and Butcher Workmen of North America , AFL-CIO, Peti-
tioner. Case No. 22-RC-540. April 7, 1960
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION, ORDER, AND DIRECTION
OF ELECTION
,On October 9, 1959, the Board issued a Decision and Direction of
Election in the above-entitled proceeding,' finding a unit of boners
and cutters to be an appropriate residual unit, and holding that these
employees were the only employees at the Employer's plant presently
unrepresented. Thereafter, on October 23, 1959, the Employer filed
a motion for reconsideration, asserting that there were employees in
other classifications who were also unrepresented. The Employer
urged, inter alia, that the residual unit should be enlarged accordingly.
While the Employer's motion was pending before the Board, the
Regional Director, on October 30, 1959, conducted an election among
the employees in the boners and cutters unit and on November 9, 1959,
issued a certification of representatives.
On February 5, 1960, the Board issued a notice to all parties to
show cause in writing, on or before February 15, 1960, why the Board
should not vacate the Decision and Direction of Election, and the
certification in this matter; why the Board should not broaden the
unit found appropriate in the original decision to include all cutters
Unpublished.
127 NLRB No. 17.
88 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
and boners and all other unrepresented employees; and why the Board
should not direct an election in such a broader unit, assuming the Peti-
tioner establishes a sufficient showing of interest in such unit. There-
after, on February 15, 1960, the Employer filed a reply to the Board's
notice. No other party responded.
Upon reconsideration of this case, the Employer's motion, the
Employer's reply to the Board's notice to show cause, and the entire
record herein, we find, as contended by the Employer, that the boners
and cutters do not constitute the only unrepresented employees, and
that a unit limited to these classifications would not be appropriate.
We further find that drivers are the only employees falling within a
general production and maintenance classification who are presently
represented. Accordingly, we shall vacate the Decision and Direction
of Election of October 9, 1959, insofar as it finds a unit of boners
and cutters to be appropriate, and we shall also vacate the election and
the certification. Further, we shall direct an election among the fol-
lowing employees of the Employer whom we find constitute an appro-
priate unit for purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning
of Section 9 (b) of the Act : 2
All production and maintenance employees at the Employer's New
Brunswick, New Jersey, establishment, excluding salesmen, drivers,
guards, watchmen, office clerical and professional employees, and
supervisors as defined in the Act.3
[The Board vacated the Decision and Direction of Election in Case
No. 22-RC-540 insofar as it finds a unit of boners and cutters to be
appropriate and directs an election in such unit, and vacated the
election conducted in this case on October 30, 1959, and the certifica-
tion of representatives issued on November 9, 1959.]
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
MEMBERS BEAN and FANNING took no part in the consideration of
the above Supplemental Decision, Order, and Direction of Election.
2 The unit found appropriate is larger than that sought by the Petitioner, and neither
the exact size of the unit nor the exact interest of the Petitioner in the unit is clear
from the record before us. Accordingly , we instruct the Regional Director not to proceed
with the election herein directed until lie shall have first determined that the Petitioner
has made an adequate showing of interest among the employees in the appropriate unit.
In the event the Petitioner does not wish to participate in an election in such a unit,
we shall permit it to withdraw its petition upon notice to the Regional Director within
5 days from the date of issuance of this direction.
3In its reply to the Board 's notice of February 5, 1960 , the Employer urged that
shipping and receiving employees be excluded from the unit . Such employees are nor-
mally included in production and maintenance units, and we perceive no adequate reason
for excluding them from the unit found appropriate herein. Accordingly , we include
them. The Babcock & Wilcox Company, 116 NLRB 1542, 1544.