Swift & Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 30, 1967

166 N.L.R.B. 589 (N.L.R.B. 1967)

SWIFT & COMPANY 589
Swift & Company and United Packinghouse, Food
and Allied Workers, AFL-CIO, Petitioner. Case
11-RC-2469
June 30, 1967
DECISION ON REVIEW AND DIRECTION
OF ELECTIONS
BY CHAIRMAN MCCULLOCH AND MEMBERS
BROWN AND JENKINS
On January 19, 1967, the Acting Regional
Director for Region 11 issued a Decision and
Direction of Election in the above-entitled proceed-
ing in which he found appropriate a unit of all office
clerical employees, the livestock paying clerk, and
the stockyards employees at the Employer's Wil-
son, North Carolina, plant. Thereafter, pursuant to
Section 102.67 of the National Labor Relations
Board Rules and Regulations, Series 8, as amended,
the Employer filed with the National Labor Rela-
tions Board a timely request for review of said
Decision and Direction of Election, contending that
a unit combining office employees with stockyards
employees is inappropriate and that Petitioner's
showing of interest was defective.
On February 14, 1967, the Board by telegraphic
order granted the request for review and requested
the parties to state their positions with respect to
the appropriateness of a separate unit of office cleri-
cal employees and with respect to the direction of
a self-determination election in a separate voting
group of stockyards employees.
Thereafter, the Employer filed a brief on review
supporting its unit contention and requesting the
Board not to direct separate elections for the office
clerical and stockyards employees without separate
showings of interest.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the
Board has delegated its powers in connection with
this case to a three-member panel.
The Board has considered the entire record with
respect to the issues under review and makes the
following findings:
The Petitioner took the position that a combined
unit of the unrepresented office employees and
stockyards employees was appropriate.' In addi-
tion, the Petitioner took the alternative position
that, if the stockyards employees could not ap-
propriately be included with the office employees,
it desired an election in a unit confined to the office
employees . The Employer contends that the office
employees may not be included in the same unit
with stockyards employees because they have no
community of interest , have different training
backgrounds , work different hours in separate areas
under different supervision , and perform dissimilar
work .2 The Acting Regional Director found, in
agreement with the Petitioner , that a unit combining
all office clerical employees , the livestock paying
clerk , and the stockyards employees, was ap-
propriate . There is no history of bargaining for any
of these employees , although Petitioner represents
a unit of production and maintenance employees,
including truckdrivers , for which it was certified by
the Board in 1959.
The Office Employees . Approximately 20 em-
ployees have desk space in the general office and
perform duties of an office clerical nature under the
supervision of the auditor-office manager. Their
work involves the handling of vouchers, invoices,
accounts receivable , and payroll records. There are
two invoice clerks, four production and records
clerks, one accounts receivable clerk , two comp-
tometer operators , one production incentive clerk,
three production incentive checkers , one stenog-
rapher , one telephone operator , one mail clerk, and
one cashier.
Under the same supervision as the office clerical
employees listed above is the livestock paying
clerk, who is primarily stationed at the livestock
buying office in a separate building, but who regu-
larly performs part of his duties in the general office
together with the other office employees. He
receives scale tickets from the livestock buyers,
writes checks to suppliers , prepares livestock
purchase sheets, and , in connection with the forego-
ing, operates a comptometer and an adding
machine. Preston Goff, the employee now assigned
to this position , previously worked as a mail clerk
in the general office . An office clerk substitutes for
Goff when he is ill or on vacation and it appears
that , in the past, the Employer frequently reas-
signed the livestock paying clerk to one of the
general office jobs.
All of the office clerical employees , including
Goff, have a regular work schedule from 8 a.m. to
4:30 p .m., 5 days per week, wear street clothes
while on the job, and have at least a high school
education . There is no indication in the record that
I At the hearing, the Petitioner also contended that the watchmen
should be included in this combined unit. The Acting Regional Director
rejected this contention, concluding that the watchmen were guards within
the meaning of the Act No party has sought review of this finding by the
Acting Regional Director.
2 The Employer, in its brief on review, also contends that the office em-
ployees are not entitled to representation because they are either con-
fidential or managerial employees These contentions were also made by
the Employer at the hearing, but were rejected by the Acting Regional
Director who concluded that the office employees were neither con-
fidential nor managerial The Employer did not request review of these
findings of the Acting Regional Director, hence the Employer's present
contentions in this regard are untimely raised and need not be considered.
However, we conclude, on the basis of our examination of the record, that
the Acting Regional Director's finding that these employees are not
managerial employees is correct Further, while certain of them may cal-
culate incentive payments for hourly employees and handle or have ac-
cess to the payroll and personnel records of other employees, these duties,
as the Acting Regional Director also found and we agree, do not make
them confidential employees Arden Farms, 117 N LRB 318, 320.
166 NLRB No. 61
590 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
they interchange or have any work contact with
stockyards employees. It is noted, in addition, that
all these office clerical employees are carried on the
same payroll, separate and apart from the payrolls
which carry the represented production and main-
tenance employees and the unrepresented
stockyards employees.
The Stockyards Employees. Seven livestock han-
dlers work under the supervision of the head cattle
buyer in the stockyards area, which is separate from
the general office. They perform work of a manual
nature, which includes the unloading, sorting,
penning, feeding, and injection of livestock; the
removal of dead animals and debris; and general
cleaning and policing of the yard area. Their work
hours are staggered, commencing at 5:30 a.m. They
wear work clothes rather than street clothes while
on the job, they do not interchange duties with other
employees, and it appears that only one of them has
a high school education.
The stockyards employees were excluded by
stipulation of the parties from the production and
maintenance unit for which the Petitioner was cer-
tified in 1959. Their work represents a part of the
production flow, as the livestock which they care
for and process constitutes the essential raw materi-
al from which the Employer's product evolves. We
conclude, therefore, that the stockyards employees
are an unrepresented fringe group of production and
maintenance employees.
Under the Board policy, office clerical employees
are customarily excluded from production and
maintenance units.3 By the same token, the Board
also excludes office clerical employees from a
residual unit of production and maintenance em-
ployees 4 or from a previously unrepresented fringe
group of production and maintenance employees
which a labor organization seeks to add to a produc-
tion and maintenance unit.5
We see no reason to depart from these principles
in the present case and conclude, in agreement with
the Employer, that the office clerical employees
may not be included in a unit which also includes
the presently unrepresented production employees
who work in the stockyards. Moreover, the dif-
ferent hours, working conditions, and educational
backgrounds of the office clerical employees, as
well as their separate supervision and lack of work
contact with the stockyards employees, demon-
strate that the office clerical employees have a com-
munity of interest separate from that of the
3 E.g, Westinghouse Electric Corp , 1 1 8 N LRB 1043.
4 California Cornice Steel and Supply Corp, 104 NLRB 787, 789.
S Brown Instruments Division, Minneapolis-Honeywell Regulator
Company, 115 NLRB 344,348
6 Sc hieffel+n & Co, Wine & Spirit Import Division, 129 N LRB 956
stockyards employees. And these factors further
justify the exclusion of office clerical employees
from any unit which includes stockyards em-
ployees.
Upon the foregoing and the entire record in this
case, we find that a unit confined to the Employer's
office clerical employees constitutes an appropriate
unit for collective-bargaining purposes within the
meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act.6 The Petitioner
has indicated a desire to represent such a unit in the
event that a combined unit of office clerical em-
ployees and stockyards employees were found in-
appropriate. We shall, therefore, direct that an elec-
tion be held in a unit confined to office clerical em-
ployees, including the livestock paying clerk.
Inasmuch as the stockyards employees are an un-
represented fringe group of production employees,
they may, if a majority of them so desire, be
represented in the existing unit of production and
maintenance employees. Accordingly, an election
will be held in a voting group of stockyards em-
ployees.
We shall, therefore, direct separate elections in
the following appropriate unit and voting group,
respectively: 7
A. Unit. All office clerical employees, including
the livestock paying clerk, at the Employer's Wil-
son, North Carolina, plant, excluding the
stockyards employees, production and maintenance
employees, truckdrivers, salesmen, livestock
buyers, professional employees, engineers, time
study engineers, quality assurance inspectors, con-
fidential employees, managerial trainees, guards,
and supervisors as defined in the Act.
B. Voting Group. All stockyards employees at
the Employer's Wilson, North Carolina, plant, ex-
cluding all other production and maintenance em-
ployees, truckdrivers, office clerical employees,
salesmen, livestock buyers, professional em-
ployees, engineers, time study engineers, quality as-
surance inspectors, confidential employees,
managerial trainees, guards, and supervisors as
defined in the Act.
If a majority of the employees in the voting group
vote for the Petitioner, they will be taken to have in-
dicated their desire to be included in the existing
production and maintenance unit currently
represented by Petitioner and the Regional
Director will issue a certification of results of elec-
tion to that effect and amend, in accordance
therewith, the Petitioner's certification as bargain-
As the original showing of interest was for a unit different from the
unit and voting group in which elections are directed herein, the direction
of each election, infra, is subject to a separate administrative showing of
interest. Robbins & Myeis, Inc, 144 NLRB 295
SWIFT & COMPANY 591
ing representative for the production and main-
tenance employees.
[Text of Direction of Elections omitted from
publication.]
8 Election eligibility lists, containing the names and addresses of all the
eligible voters in the respective unit and voting group in which an election
is hereby directed , must be filed by the Employer with the Regional
Director for Region 1 1 within 7 days after the date of this Decision on
Review and Direction of Elections These lists may initially be used by
the Regional Director to assist in determining adequate showings of in-
terest The Regional Director shall make these lists available to all parties
to the elections when he shall have determined that an adequate showing
of interest among the employees in each unit found appropriate has been
established . No extension of time to file these lists shall be granted by the
Regional Director except in extraordinary circumstances . Failure to
comply with this requirement shall be grounds for setting aside the elec-
tion whenever proper objections are filed Ercelstor Undern •ear Inc , 156
NLRB 1236