Tennessee Packers, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Nov 17, 1949

87 N.L.R.B. 90 (N.L.R.B. 1949)

In the Matter of TENNESSEE PACKERS, INC., EMPLOYER and AMALGAM-
ATED MEAT CUTTERS AND BUTCHER WORKMEN OF NORTH AMERICA,
AFL, LOCAL #405, PETITIONER
Case No. 10-RC-701.Decided Novemzber 17, 191.9
DECISION
AND
ORDER
Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before,John C. Carey,
Jr., hearing officer. 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 Herzog and Members
Reynolds, and Gray].
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer, a Tennessee Corporation, operates a packing
plant in Clarksville, Tennessee. During the period from January
through July 1949, the Employer purchased livestock and other sup-
plies of the approximate value of $3,000,000, of which about $1,800,000
worth was shipped to its Clarksville plant from outside the State.
During the same period it sold processed meats and byproducts for
the sum of $3,500,000, of • which approximately $26,000 worth was
shipped to points outside of State.
We find, contrary to the Emplpyer's contention, that it is engaged
in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.2
' The Employer contends that the hearing officer erred ( 1) in receiving in evidence the
petition filed herein because it did not give the "number of employees supporting the
petition" as required by the Board rules , but merely contained a statement that such number
was "over 30%," and (2) in sustaining Petitioner ' s objection to its question seeking to
find out whether the Petitioner had filed a waiver of its right to file objections in this repre-
sentation case based on matters alleged in its pending unfair labor practice charge against
the Employer . It contends that proper procedure requires that such waiver , if filed by the
Petitioner , should be introduced in evidence . We find no merit in the Employer's con-
tentions . Both the Petitioner ' s showing of interest and its filing of a waiver of its unfair
labor practice charge are matters for the administrative determination of the Board, not
subject to litigation at the hearing.
Cf. Edgar P. Poise, Inc., 80 NLRB 52 ; King Brooks , Inc., 84 NLRB 652. See also
S. Haydn & Sons, Inc., 42 NLRB 852.
87 NLRB No. 16.
90
TENNESSEE PACKERS, INC. 91
2. The Petitioner is a labor organization claiming to represent em-
ployees of the Employer.
3. The Petitioner seeks certification for a unit consisting only of
the production employees and truck drivers, and would exclude the
maintenance employees, among whom are also the refrigerator serv-
icemen and clean-up men. The Employer contends that the main-
tenance employees should be included. The only reason advanced
by the Petitioner for their exclusion was that the maintenance em-
ployees properly belong within the jurisdiction of other unions, and
will be organized by such unions. These employees enjoy the same
benefits and privileges as- the production employees, are also paid
on an hourly rate, and are subject to the same working conditions.
As the record discloses no sufficient reason for their exclusion, we find,
in accordance with our usual practice, that the maintenance employees
should be included in the unit.3
We therefore find that the, unit sought by the Petitioner, from which
the maintenance employees are excluded, is not an appropriate bar-
gaining unit. It appears that the Petitioner has restricted its organi-
zational activity to employees within the narrower unit sought in its
petition, and has not made an adequate showing of interest among
the employees in the broader production and maintenance unit which
we have found is appropriate. Therefore we will not direct an elec-
tion among the employees in that broader unit, but will dismiss the
petition without prejudice.4
ORDER
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings, and upon the entire record
in this case, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that
the petition filed herein be, and it hereby is, dismissed without
prejudice.
3 McKamie Gas Cleaning Company , 80 NLRB 1447 ; Goodall Company , 80 NLRB 562.
See also A. J. Sires Products Corporation, 83 NLRB 99.
4J. TV. Lyons, d/b/a Lyons Auto Supply, 86 NLRB 633. See also Permdnente Metals
Corporation, 82 NLRB 692.