The Schaible Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Feb 20, 1950

88 N.L.R.B. 733 (N.L.R.B. 1950)

In the Matter of THE SCHAIBLE COMPANY, EMPLOYER and TRUCK
DRIVERS, CHAUFFEURS AND HELPERS LOCAL UNION No. 100, INTER-
NATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, CHAUFFEURS, WAREHOUSE-
MEN AND HELPERS OF AMERICA, AFL, PETITIONER
Case No. 9-RC-669.-Decided February 20, 1950
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before William A.
McGowan, 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
Houston and Reynolds].
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
employees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9 (c)
(1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The Petitioner seeks to represent a unit of all truck drivers at
the Employer's Cincinnati, Ohio, plant. The Employer and the In-
dependent Union of Schaible Employees, herein called the Intervenor,
relying primarily upon the plant's collective bargaining history, con-
tend that only a plant-wide unit is appropriate.
In its Cincinnati plant the Employer is engaged in the manufacture
of plumbing supplies. The truck drivers here involved form part of
the receiving, shipping, and stores department, in which they work
under the receiving foreman, who also supervises five receiving em-
ployees. The drivers, as their title implies, drive company trucks,
making deliveries to and from the plant. They spend between 50 and
88 NLRB No. 145.
733
734. DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
60 percent of their time in such work away from the plant. The re-
mainder of their time is devoted to the same work as that of the receiv-
ing employees, loading, unloading, counting, and weighing on the
company dock. However, as truck driving is their primary job, the
latter work is subject to interruption whenever the need for a driver
arises. No other employees drive the trucks.
Following its certification in 1946 as bargaining representative of
all production and maintenance employees, the Intervenor has had
collective bargaining contracts with the employer covering a plant-
wide unit including the truck drivers whom' the Petitioner now seeks
to represent.
We have frequently held that truck drivers who spend a major por-
tion of their time driving, loading, and unloading, away from the
plant, as do the Employer's drivers, may constitute a separate bargain-
ing unit notwithstanding their prior inclusion in a broader production
and maintenance unit.l Nor do we agree, as the Employer and the
Intervenor argue, that the assignment of truck drivers, during a minor
portion of their time, to work also performed by other employees, ma-
terially affects their identity as a separate group, or significantly
impairs the distinctiveness of their functionally specialized duties?
We believe, therefore, that the truck drivers here involved may, if they
so desire, constitute a separate bargaining unit apart from the plant-
wide unit, or may continue to be represented in a single unit together
with the remaining employees.
Accordingly, we shall direct that an election be held among all truck
drivers at the Employer's Cincinnati, Ohio, plant, excluding all other
employees, guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act .3 If, in this
election, the truck drivers select the Petitioner, they will be taken to
have indicated their desire to constitute a separate unit for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION 4
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining with the Employer, an election by
secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than
i Armour and Company, 86 NLRB 539.
2 Q-F Wholesalers, Inc., 85 NLRB 582.
3 The petition describes the unit as "all truck drivers and helpers." The record shows
that there are no drivers ' helpers. Accordingly , we have limited the unit to drivers only.
a The compliance status of the Intervenor has lapsed since the hearing in this case. The
Regional Director is herewith instructed to delete the Independent Union of Schaible
Employees from the ballot in the election directed herein, if it has not, within 2 weeks
from this date, renewed its compliance with Section 9 (f), (g), and (h). No election shall
be scheduled within the 2 -week period allowed until and unless compliance has been
determined.
THE SCHAIBLE COMPANY 735
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
unit found appropriate in paragraph numbered 4, above, who were
employed during the payroll period immediately preceding the date
of this Direction of Election, including employees who did not work
during said payroll period because they were ill or on vacation or
temporarily laid off, but excluding those employees who have since
quit or been discharged for cause and have not been rehired or rein-
stated 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
Truck Drivers, Chauffeurs and Helpers Local Union No. 100, Inter-
national Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and
Helpers of America, AFL, or by Independent Union of Schaible,
Employees, or by neither.