The Rath Packing Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Dec 15, 1949

87 N.L.R.B. 664 (N.L.R.B. 1949)

In the Matter of THE RATH PACKING COMPANY, EMPLOYER and
NATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF PACKINGHOUSE WORKERS, C. U. A.,
PETITIONER
Cases Nos. 18-RC-407 and 18-RC-419.-Decided December 15, 1949
DECISION
DIRECTION .OF ELECTION
AND
ORDER
Upon separate petitions duly filed, a hearing in these consolidated
cases 1 was held before Erwin A. Peterson, hearing officer. The hear-
ing 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 [Members Reynolds, Murdock, and
Gray].
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the National Labor Relations Act.
2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent certain em-
ployees of the Employer.
3. For the reasons stated hereinafter, no question affecting com-
merce exists concerning the representation of employees of the Em-
ployer in Case No. 18-RC-407 within the meaning of Section 9 (c) (1)
and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. We do, however, find that a
question affecting commerce exists concerning the representation of
employees of the Employer in Case No. 18-RC-419 within the mean-
ing of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The Petitioner in these proceedings seeks to sever from an estab-
lished plant-wide bargaining unit of production and maintenance
employees separate departmental units of stockyard employees and
coopers, . respectively. The employees in the proposed units work
1 The above numbered cases were consolidated by order of the Regional Director, dated
July 6, 1949.
87 NLRB No. 90.
664
THE RATH PACKING COMPANY 665
in the Employer's meat packing plant at Waterloo, Iowa. Since 1942,
United Packinghouse Workers of America, Local No. 46, C. I. 0.,
the Intervenor herein, has maintained collective bargaining relations
with the Employer and has entered into collective bargaining agree-
ments covering the Employer's production and maintenance employ-
ees, including the employees in the proposed units. The Intervenor
contends that the units sought by the Petitioner are inappropriate
principally because of the history of collective bargaining on a more
comprehensive basis. The Employer takes no specific position with
respect to the appropriateness of the units sought.
The alleged appropriate unit in Case No. 18-RC-407
In this case the Petitioner seeks to represent in a separate bargain-
ing unit the employees in the stockyard department. There are ap-
proximately 40 employees in this department. These employees are
primarily concerned with the handling and care of livestock and in
bringing the animals into the slaughtering areas of the plant. No
experience is necessary to qualify for jobs in the stockyard department
and the employees in the department exercise no special skills in the
discharge of their duties. The stockyard department employees are
not a craft group nor do they constitute a departmental group with
a tradition of separate representation of the type which, in the past,
we have held may be appropriately severed from a more inclusive
established bargaining unit. In view of the foregoing, including.the
fact that these employees have been represented since 1942 in the
same unit with the Employer's other production and maintenance
employees, we find that the unit sought by the Petitioner in Case No.
18-RC-407 is inappropriate,2 and we shall, therefore, dismiss the
.petition.
The alleged appropriate unit in Case No. 18-RC-419
In this case the Petitioner requests severance of the employees in the
cooperage department. The principal functions of these employees
are to make and repair all barrels, tierces, and vats required for the
storage and shipment of various products of the plant. It requires
at least 2 years' experience to obtain the skills of a cooper. Of the
eight employees in the proposed unit, six are skilled in the coopers'
trade and the other two employees, although unskilled, are being
trained on the job. There is no interchange of duties or functions
between the coopers and the other employees in the plant. Although
several other departments include employees known as packers and
2 General Aniline d Film Corporation, Ansco Division, 80 NLRB 1352; C. T. Dearing
Printing Company, 79 NLRB 1020 ; K-D Lamp Division, Noma Electric Corporation of
Maryland, 71 NLRB 704.
666 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
tierce headers who also work on barrels, these latter employees are
not skilled and are not qualified to do coopers' work. The employees
in the proposed unit comprise a skilled, homogeneous, and readily
identifiable craft group such as may constitute a separate bargaining
unit, notwithstanding their previous'inclusion in a broader bargain-
ing unit .3 However, we shall make no final unit determination at
this time, but shall first ascertain the desires of the employees as
expressed in the election hereinafter directed. If a majority of the
employees in the voting group described below vote for the Petitioner,
they will be taken to have indicated their desire to constitute a separate
bargaining unit represented by the Petitioner.
We shall direct an election among the following employees of the
Employer at its Waterloo, Iowa, plant: All employees in the cooper-
age department, excluding the foreman and other supervisers as
defined in the Act.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION 4
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the
purposes of collective bargaining with the Employer, an election by
secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than
30 days from the date of this Direction, under the direction and super-
vision of the Regional Director for the Region in which this case was
heard, and subject to Sections 203.61 and 203.62 of National Labor
Relations Board Rules and Regulations, among the employees in the
voting group described in paragraph numbered 4, above, who were
employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding this Di-
rection of Election, including employees who did not work during
said pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation or tempo-
rarily laid off, but excluding those employees who have since quit or
been discharged for cause and have not been rehired or reinstated prior
to the date of the election, and also excluding employees on strike who
are not entitled to reinstatement, to determine whether they desire to
be represented, for purposes of collective bargaining, by National
Brotherhood of Packinghouse Workers, C. U. A., or by United Pack-
inghouse Workers of America, Local No. 46, C. I. 0., or by neither.
ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that the petition filed in Case No. 18-RC-407 by
International Brotherhood of Packinghouse Workers, C. U. A., be,
and it hereby is, dismissed.
3 Swift Company, 59 NLRB 1417. See Liggett & Myers. Tobacco Company, 74 NLRB
513, 516:
* Any participant in the election herein may , upon its request to and approval thereof by
the Regional Director, have its name removed from the ballot.