The Ohio Valley Gas Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 18, 1959

124 N.L.R.B. 579 (N.L.R.B. 1959)

THE OHIO VALLEY GAS COMPANY 579
does not wish to participate in an election in such unit, we shall permit
it to withdraw its petition upon notice to the Regional Director within
10 days from the date of issuance of this Direction, and shall there-
upon vacate the Direction of Election.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
The Ohio Valley Gas Company and William C. Rapp , Petitioner
and Kenova Local 10-372 Oil Chemical and Atomic Workers
International Union , AFL-CIO. Case No. 9-RD-218. August 18,
1959
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a hearing was held before Harry David Camp, hearing
officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from
prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the Act.
2. The Petitioner asserts that the Union is no longer the bargaining
representative, as defined in Section 9(a) of the Act, of the em-
ployees involved. The Union is a labor organization currently recog-
nized by the Employer as the exclusive bargaining representative of
such employees.
3. The Petitioner seeks a decertification election in a unit of pro-
duction and maintenance employees in the Employer's Ironton, Ohio,
natural gas service district. The Union contends that its current con-
tract covering these employees operates as a bar to the petition herein,
which was filed on February 24, 1959. The Employer is neutral as to
the contract-bar issue. The contract was executed on November 13,
1957, and is effective to October 1, 1959, with a 60-day automatic re-
newal clause. The Petitioner asserts that the contract is not a bar,
urging that the checkoff clause on its face contains an ambiguity per-
mitting irrevocable dues deduction authorizations which exceed the
time limitations set forth in Section 302(c) (4) of the Act. We find it
unnecessary to pass upon the latter contention. In the recent Deluxe
Metal case 1 which, inter alia, announced the new contract-bar rules
relating to the timeliness of petitions, the Board stated :
Henceforth, where there is a subsisting contract, a petition filed
more than 150 days before the terminal date of a contract will be
regarded as premature and will be dismissed unless a hearing is
I Deluxe Metal Purniture Company, 121 NLRB 995.
124 NLRB No. 76.
580 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
directed despite the prematurity of the petition and the Board's
decision issues on or after the 90th day preceding the expiration
date of the contract. [Emphasis supplied.]
As a hearing was held despite the premature filing of the petition, and
as this decision will issue after the 90th day preceding the terminal
date of the contract, we find that the latter agreement is no bar to a
present determination of representatives.'
Accordingly, we find that a question affecting commerce exists con-
cerning the representation of certain employees of the Employer
within the meaning of Section 9(c) (1) and Section 2(6) and (7) of
the Act.
4. We find, in accord with a stipulation of the parties, that the fol-
lowing employees of the Employer constitute a unit appropriate for
the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section
9(b) of the Act:3
All production and maintenance employees of the Employer in its
Ironton District, which is headquartered at 311 South Third Street,
Ironton, Ohio, excluding all clerical, executive, administrative, pro-
fessional and temporary employees, supervisors as defined by the Act,
and all others excluded by law.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
MEMBER JENKINS took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Direction of Election.
2 Deluxe Metal Furniture Company, supra. See, also, St. Louis Independent Packing
Company, a Division of Swift and company, 122 NLRB 887.
3 This is the unit for which the Union is recognized as the exclusive bargaining repre-
sentative under the existing contract.
Masters-Lake Success , Inc. and Jack Berg and Metal , Plastic,
Miscellaneous Sales , Novelty and Production Workers, Local
No. 222, Independent, Party to the Contract
Metal , Plastic, Miscellaneous Sales, Novelty and Production
Workers, Local No. 222, Independent and Jack Berg and
Masters-Lake Success , Inc., Party to the Contract . Cases Nos.
2-CA-5838 and 2-CB-2213. August 19, 1959
DECISION AND ORDER
On May 7, 1959, Trial Examiner Louis Libbin issued his Inter-
mediate Report in the above-entitled proceeding, finding that the Re-
spondents had engaged in and were engaging in certain unfair labor
practices, and recommending that they cease and desist therefrom and
take certain affirmative action, as set forth in the copy of the Inter-
124 NLRB No. 73.