Whiting Milk Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 29, 1962

137 N.L.R.B. 1143 (N.L.R.B. 1962)

WHITING MILK COMPANY 1143
4. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair labor practices affecting com-
merce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
5. Respondent Plumbers did not violate Section 8 (b) (7) (C) of the Act by pick-
eting Riggs with an object of obtaining recognition or a contract , or with an object
or forcing or requiring Riggs' employees to designate Plumbers their bargaining
representative.
[Recommendations omitted from publication.]
APPENDIX
NOTICE TO ALL MEMBERS OF LOCAL UNION No. 857 , UNITED BROTHERHOOD OF
CARPENTERS AND JOINERS OF AMERICA , AFL-CIO
Pursuant to the recommendations of a Trial Examiner of the National Labor
Relations Board , and in order to effectuate the policies of the National Labor Rela-
tions Act , we hereby notify you that:
WE WILL NOT induce or encourage the employees of Kennedy Construction
Company , or any other employer, not to use , manufacture , process, transport, or
otherwise handle or work on any goods , articles, materials, or commodities,
or to perform any services , where an object thereof is to force or require
Kennedy , or any other employer, to cease doing business with Keith Riggs
Plumbing and Heating Contractor.
LOCAL UNION No. 857 , UNITED BROTHERHOOD OF CAR-
PENTERS AND JOINERS OF AMERICA , AFL-CIO,
Labor Organization.
Dated------------------- By-------------------------------------------
(Representative ) ( Title)
This notice must remain posted for 60 days from the date hereof , and must not be
altered , defaced, or covered by any other material.
Whiting Milk Company and District 38, Lodge 264, International
Association of Machinists, AFL-CIO, Petitioner
Whiting Milk Company and District 38, Lodge 1898 , International
Association of Machinists , AFL-CIO, Petitioner
Whiting Milk Company and Milk Wagon Drivers and Creamery
Workers Union , Local 380, associated with International
Brotherhood of Teamsters , Chauffeurs , Warehousemen and
Helpers of America , Petitioner . Cases Nos. 1-RC-6625, 1-RC-
6626, 1-RC-6676, and 1-RC-6677. June 29, 1962
. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
.Upon petitions duly filed under Section 9(c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a consolidated hearing was held before M. F. Walsh,
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 Act, the Board
has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-
member panel [Chairman McCulloch and Members Leedom and
Brown].
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the
Act.
137 NLRB No. 122.
1144 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent certain em-
ployees of the Employer.
3. Questions affecting commerce exist concerning the representation
of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9 (c) (1)
and Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.'
4. The Employer is engaged in the processing and distribution
of milk in the Boston, Massachusetts, metropolitan area and contig-
uous areas. Prior to June 1, 1961, the operation in question consisted
of a processing and distribution plant in Charlestown and distribution
points in Marblehead, Watertown, Dorchester, Hyde Park, and
Hyannis. On June 1, 1961, however, the Employer acquired a similar
operation known as White Brothers Milk Company? The White
Brothers operation is composed of a processing and distribution plant
at Quincy and distribution points at Needham, Duxbury, Hyannis, and
Truro.
Teamsters Local 380 has in the past represented at White Brothers
four separate units including (1) production and distribution em-
ployees, (2) plant maintenance employees, (3) building maintenance
employees, and (4) vehicle maintenance employees. At Whiting it has
for a number of years represented a single unit of production and
distribution employees, while the building and plant maintenance em-
ployees and the vehicle maintenance employees of that company have
been represented in two separate units by IAM Lodges 264 and 1898,
respectively. In its present petitions, Teamsters Local 380 seeks sep-
arate units of White 3 and Whiting employees such units to include,
however, maintenance employees in addition to the production and
distribution employees hitherto represented by it. As for IAM Lodge
264, it now seeks a unit of building and plant maintenance employees
coextensive not only with the Whiting employees it currently rep-
resents but with such employees formerly working for White. Sim-
ilarly, Lodge 1898 seeks a unit of vehicle maintenance employees in-
cluding such employees of White as well as Whiting.
Teamsters Local 380 supports its position as to the scope of the
units it seeks by pointing out that, after the acquisition of White
Brothers, both White Brothers and Whiting have been operated as
separate companies. Thus, it is shown that, except at the upper levels,
separate supervision continues; and that milk with the White Broth-
'As the contracts alleged by Local 380 as bars to the petitions by Lodge 264 and
Lodge 1898 were not signed prior to the filing of such petitions , they do not serve as bars.
Appalachian Shale Products Co, 121 NLRB 1160
9To avoid confusion , the term "Whiting " shall hereinafter be used to designate the
Employer ' s operation as it existed prior to the acquisition. The term "White Brothers"
shall refer to that portion of the Employer's operation acquired June 1, 1961.
3 Local 380's petition in Case No. 1-RC-6677 described the unit sought by use of the
term "White Brothers Division ." The IAM's motion to dismiss the petition on the
ground that no such entity exists is hereby denied . The petition names the proper
Employer and the term "White Brothers Division" was apparently used only to identify
the unit sought
WHITING MILK COMPANY 1145
ers label is delivered in trucks with the White Brothers emblem by
employees in White Brothers uniforms. Further, Local 380 points
to the lack of employee interchange and the fact that each processes
and distributes its own products to indicate the lack of functional
integration between Whiting and White Brothers.
The record indicates, however, that the Employer intends to merge
the operations of White into its own operations and that it has taken
certain steps to effectuate such merger. Thus, 300 new trucks which
are on order will be painted Whiting's colors. The use of the White
Brothers label on the Employer's products is to be gradually discon-
tinued. Within a period of 6 months from the date of the hearing,
the Employer intends to eliminate processing at Quincy and concen-
trate all processing at Charlestown. New machinery necessary to the
change has already been ordered. Also, major vehicle repairs are to
be concentrated in one location, Quincy, thus reducing Somerville to
a service garage only. As these changes are consummated, routes,
equipment, and personnel are to be transferred as required by the new
circumstances. It, therefore, apears that the functioning of Whiting
and White Brothers as separate entities is a matter of short duration.
In view of the foregoing we find that the units requested by Local
380, being limited to the employees of the formerly separate com-
panies, are too narrow in scope but that broad units of all the Em-
ployer's production, distribution, and maintenance employees may be
appropriate. However, despite the contrary contentions of Team-
sters Local 380, it appears that the separate maintenance units sought
by IAM lodges may also be appropriate. Thus, the history of bar-
gaining at both Whiting and White Brothers has been a history of
separate representation of maintenance employees. Not only have
maintenance employees been represented separately from production
and distribution employees but vehicle maintenance employees have
been represented under different contracts from those of plant main-
tenance employees. Both plant maintenance and vehicle maintenance
are operated as separate departments with separate supervision, work
functions, and skills. In view of the foregoing and as the units in-
clude the employees of both Whiting and White Brothers, we find that
the plant and building maintenance employees and vehicle mainten-
ance employees comprise readily identifiable groups which may, de-
pending upon the desires of the employees, constitute appropriate
units separate and apart from production and distribution employees'
As either a broad production, distribution, and maintenance unit or
separate units of (1) production and distribution, (2) plant and build-
ing maintenance, and (3) vehicle maintenance employees may be
appropriate, we shall direct elections in the following voting groups :
A American Cyanamid Company, 131 NLRB 909.
1146 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
(1) All employees engaged in servicing, repairing, maintaining,
and assembling automotive equipment, excluding drivers, plant main-
tenance employees, powerplant employees at Charlestown, Massa-
chusetts, office clerical employees, professional employees, guards, and
supervisors as defined in the Act.
(2) All employees of the maintenance department engaged in serv-
icing, repairing and maintaining plant machinery and equipment,
excluding drivers, automotive maintenance employees, powerplant em-
ployees at Charlestown, Massachusetts, office clerical employees, pro-
fessional employees, guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act.-'
(3) All production and distribution employees, excluding all other
employees and supervisors as defined in the Act.
If a majority of employees in voting groups (1) and (2) vote
respectively for IAM Lodges 1898 and 264, they will be taken to have
indicated their desire to constitute a separate appropriate unit or
units, which, in the circumstances, the Board finds to be appropriate
and the Regional Director shall certify the union or unions winning
such elections. If the employees in both groups (1) and (2) vote for
separate representation and if a majority in voting group (3) vote for
Teamsters Local 380, the Regional Director shall certify Local 380
as the bargaining representative of a separate unit of production and
distribution employees, which unit the Board finds under the circum-
stances to be appropriate.
However, if a majority of employees in groups (1) and (2) do not
vote for separate representation, their ballots shall be pooled with
those for group (3). If a majority in the pooled group vote for
Local 380, it shall be certified as the representative of the employees
in such group, which, under those circumstances, the Board finds to
be an appropriate unit. If the votes are pooled, votes cast for Lodges
1898, or 264 shall be counted neither for nor against Local 380; all
other votes shall be given their face value.
[Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication.]
The IAM would exclude employees who operate and maintain boilers and employees
classified as porters at Quincy. It appears that employees in these classifications may be
the type customarily included in plant maintenance units . However, as the record con-
tains insufficient evidence upon which a final determination can be made in this regard,
we shall allow such employees to vote by challenged ballot.
Fort Worth Transit Co., Inc. and Amalgamated Association
of Street, Electric Railway and Motor Coach Employees of
America, AFL-CIO. Case No. 16-CA-1559. July 3, 1962
DECISION AND ORDER
On April 23, 1962, Trial Examiner Reeves R. Hilton issued his
Intermediate Report in the above-entitled proceeding, finding that the
137 NLRB No. 125.