Martin Food Products, Inc.

In the Matter Of MARTIN FOOD PRODUCTS , INC. and WAREHOUSE AND DISTRIBUTION WORKERS UNION, LOCAL 208, I . L. W. U. C. I. 0.) Case No. R-4909.-Decided March 11, 1943 Jurisdiction : food products manufacturing industry. Investigation and Certification of Representatives : existence of question: re- fusal to accord, union recognition ; company's objection to nature and method of proof of union's claim to representation, overruled; election necessary. Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : all employees in the production and shipping departments, excluding supervisory employees, maintenance em- ployees, office and clerical employees, truck drivers and truck helpers; shipping department employees included notwithstanding company's objection, when among other considerations, both departments were interdependent and necessary to the company in the carrying on of its business. Mr. Stanford Clinton, of Chicago, Ill., for the Company. Mr. David B. Rothstein of Chicago, Ill., for the Union. Mr. A. Sumner Lawrence, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION STATEMENT OF THE CASE Upon petition duly filed by Warehouse and Distribution Workers Union, Local 208, I. L. W. U. (C. I. 0.), herein called the Union, alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of Martin Food Products; Inc., Chicago, Illinois, herein called the Company, the National Labor Re- lations Board provided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice before Robert T. Drake, Trial Examiner. Said hearing was held at Chicago, Illinois, on February ,15, 1943. The Company and the Union appeared, participated, and were afforded full 'opportunity to- be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues. The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. Upon the entire record in the case,-the Board makes the following : 48 N. L. R. B., No. 5. 19 52147-43-vol. 48-3 20 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD FINDINGS OF FACT I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY Martin Food Products, Inc., an Illinois corporation, has its princi- pal office and plant, the only one involved, in this proceeding, at Chicago, Illinois, where the Company is engaged in the manufacture, sale, and distribution of fruit and peanut products, 'including jam, jelly, and peanut butter. During the calendar year 1942, the Com- pany purchased for use at its Chicago plant raw materials valued at more than $750,000, of which approximately - 90 percent in dollar value was transported to the plant from points outside the State of Illinois. During this same period, the Company manufactured and sold from its Chicago plant finished products exceeding in value $1,000,000, of which approximately 89 percent was shipped to points outside the State of Illinois. H. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED Warehouse and Distribution Workers Union, Local 208, I. L. W. U., is a labor organization 'affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, admitting to membership employees of the Company. III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION On or about January 11, 1943, the Union notified the Company that it represented a majority of the production employees in the Com- pany's plant. The Company replied that it doubted the Union's claim of majority representation and stated that the Union should establish its right to represent the employees of the Company. A statement of the Regional Director, introduced in evidence at the hearing, and a statement of the Trial Examiner, indicate that the Union represents a substantial number of employees in the unit hereinafter found to be appropriate., 'The Regional Director reported that the Union had submitted 70 membership applica- tion cards . all bearing apparently genuine signatures ; that of the 70 cards, 45 dated between November 1942 and January 1943, bore the names of persons whose names were on the Company pay roll of January 30, 1943, containing the names of 100 persons within the alleged appiopriate• unit. In addition to the statement of the Regional Director, the Trial Examiner reported that the Union had presented at the hearing 7 cards all bearing appar- ently genuine signatures and dated between January 25 and February 4, 1943 ; that of those cards . 6 bore the names of persons whose names are on the Company pay roll of January 30, 1943. The Company 's contention that the statements of the Regional Director and the Trial Examiner are not entitled to consideration through the absence of a check of the signatures, with the pay -roll records of the Company is, without inerit . See Matter of San-Equip., Inc. and International Association of Bridge, Structural & Ornamental ' Iron Workers, Local Union No. 612, 44 N. L. R. B. 524. The Company 's further contention that it is entitled to introduce evidence to contradict the statement of the Regional Director is like« ise without foundation and has been frequently rejected by the Board . See Matter of Atlas Powder Company, Zapon Division and Local 12083, National Council of Gas, Coke & Chemical Workers, 43 N. L. R. B 757, and cases cited therein. MARTIN FOOD PRODUCTS, INC. 21 We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the representation of employees of the Company within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act. , IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT The Union claims that the appropriate unit should consist of all employees in the production, and shipping departments, excluding foremen (supervisors), maintenance employees, clerical employees, truck drivers, and truck helpers. 'The Company does not dispute the exclusions requested by the Union but claims that the shipping de- partment is functionally separate from the production department and should therefore be excluded from the appropriate unit. While the production and shipping departments are under separate supervision and there are some differences in the number of hours worked by employees therein, it was admitted by the Company that both departments are interdependent and necessary to the Company in the carrying on of its business. Furthermore, the evidence clearly demonstrates that the only difference between the wages in the ship- ping 'department and those in the production department is the difference in the wage scale for men as opposed to that for the women employees. Moreover, it appears not only that both shipping 'and production employees are eligible to membership in the Union, but also, that Union organization has extended to both shipping and produc- tion departments. The Company has no history of collective bar- gaining and there is no evidence of union organization limited to production department employees. No separate pay-roll classifica- tions are established for shipping employees as distinguished from production employees. Under the circumstances, we find that the shipping department employees may properly be included within the appropriate unit.2 We find that all employees in the production and shipping depart- ments, excluding supervisory employees,3 maintenance employees,' office and clerical employees, truck drivers and truck helpers,5 consti- tute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act. 2 See Matter of Lonsdale Company (re Lincoln Bleachery d Dye Works Division) and Lincoln Benefit Association, 27 N. L. R. B. 910 ; Matter of Western Burlap Bag Company and Textile Workers Union of America, C I. 0., 44 N.'L. R B. 356. 3 The parties stipulated and we find that Carl Farber, Mary Kalousek , Harriet Latas, William Meyer, Sr., Lucy Ryza and Valerie Slomiany are supervisory employees to be excluded from the appiopriate unit 4 The parties stipulated and we find that Anna Tvaroha, Joseph' Spangler , Arthur Davis, and James Davidson, are maintenance employees to be excluded from the appropuate unit. 5 The Company employs no truck drivers or truck helpers at the present time. 22 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR' RELATIONS BOARD V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES We shall direct that the question concerning representation which has arisen be resolved by an election by secret ballot among the em- ployees in the appropriate unit who' were employed during the pay- roll period immediately preceding the date of our Direction of Elec- tion herein, subject to, the limitations and additions set forth in the Direction. DIRECTION OF ELECTION By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in'the National Labor Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Rela- tions Act and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, it is hereby DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain repre- sentatives for the purpose of collective bargaining with Martin Food Products, Inc., Chicago, Illinois, an election by'secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible but not later than thirty (30) days from the date of this Direction, under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Thirteenth Region, acting in this matter as agent for 'the National Labor Relations Board and subject to Article III, Section 10, of said Rules and Regulations, among the employees in the unit found appropriate in Section IV, above, who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of this Direction, including employees who did notiwork during said pay-roll period because they were ill or _ on vacation or tempo-, rarily laid off, and including employees in the armed forces of the United States, who present themselves in person at the polls, but ex- cluding employees who have since quite or been discharged for cause, to determine whether or not they desire to be-represented by Ware- house and Distribution Workers Union, Local '208, I. L. W. U. C. I. 0.), for the purposes of collective bargaining.