Swift and Co.

In the Matter Of SWIFT AND COMPANY and PACKINGIIOus WORKEP3 ORGANIZING COMMITTEE, LOCAL No. 167, C. I. O. Case No. R-4630 SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES May 1, 1943 Un January 16, 1943, .the. National , Labor Relations Board, herein called the Board, issued its Decision and Direction of Election in this proceeding.' Pursuant to the Direction of Election , an election by secret ballot was conducted on February 10, 1943, under the direction and supervision of- the Regional Director for the Eighteenth Region (Minneapolis, Minnesota). On February 11, 1943, the Regional Di- rector, acting pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, issued and duly served upon the parties his Election Report. As to the balloting and its results , the Regional Director reported as follows : Approximate number of eligible voters----------------- ---------------------- 3, 005 Total ballots'cast--------- ------------------------------- 2,419 Total ballots challenged ------------ ----------------------- 16 Total void ballots----------------------------------------- 11 Total valid votes counted---------------------------- ----- 2,392 Votes cast for Packinghouse Workers Organizing Committee, Local No. 167, C. I. 0.----------------------------------- 1,034 Votes cast, for Packinghouse Workers Industrial Union No. 11__ 1, 285 Votes cast for neither -------------------------------------- 73 On February 17, 1943, Packinghouse Workers Organizing Com- mittee, Local No. ,167, affiliated with the C. I. 0., herein called the PWOC, filed its Objections to Conduct to' the Ballot and Election -Report. Swift and Company, herein called the Company, and Pack- inghouse Workers Industrial Union No. 11, herein called the Inde- pendent, did not object to,the conduct of the election or to the Election 146N L. R.B,No 140 49 N. L. R. B., No 47. 370 SWIFT AND COMPANY 371 Report. The Independent filed an answer to the PWOC's objections on February 25, 1943. On March 23, 1943, the Board having duly considered the matter, issued an Order directing that a hearing be held on the objections set forth in paragraph VII of the PWOC's Objections to Conduct of the Ballot and Election Report. Pursuant thereto, a hearing upon due notice was held on April 5, 1943, at Minneapolis, Minnesota, before James C. Batten, Trial Examiner. The Board, the Company,. the PWOC, and the Independent appeared, participated, and were af- forded 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 af£irmed.2 The PWOC filed a brief on April 12, 1943, which the Board has considered. Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following : FINDINGS OF FACT The PWOC alleged, in paragraph VII of its objections, that "prior to the election Swift and Company and Union No. 11 [Inde- pendent] prepared tags identical in size, shape, design and color- ing; that the Company tag was a safety tag and the Union No. 11 tag was an election campaign tag; that both tags were distributed to employees in the time office of the Company; that the Company guards tore down Local 167 [PWOC] election material posted in the plant but did not disturb Union No. 11 election material posted in the plant ; that by this action the Company supported and fav- ored Union No. 11 and discriminated against Local 167." The PWOC offered no evidence at the hearing to support its allega- tion that company guards tore down PWOC election material posted in the plant and left remaining election material of the Independent. In January 1943, the Company was requested to participate in a safety drive, sponsored by the National Safety Council, to be conducted under the supervision of a, committee selected from the city of St. Paul, Minnesota. The local committee made all the necessary arrangements for the printing of safety pledges, safety stickers, and lapel insignia and for the distribution of such material to the local concerns, including the Company. The printed material furnished by the local committee was printed by the McGill-Warner Company of St. Paul, Minnesota. In most instances foremen distributed the safety material, although 2 The Trial Examiner , in view of the Board 's Order limiting the hearing to objection VII, denied the motion of the PWOC to enlarge the scope of the hearing to permit the intro- duction of evidence regarding other alleged reasons for setting aside the election. The Trial Examiners ruling is affirmed. 531647-43-vol 49-25 0 372 DDOILSIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD in a few distances ordinary employees were asked to do so. The safety drive was over by January 30. Shortly after the appearance of the safety stickers and lapel insignia in the Company's plant, an officer of the Independent called the McGill- Warner Company and arranged to have stickers and lapel insignia of similar design with different wording, printed for the use of the Inde- pendent in its election campaign . There is no showing that the Com- pany aided the Independent in any way in arranging for the printing of material for the Independent, nor furnished` to the Independent any information concerning the printing of the safety stickers and lapel insignia . While there is some evidence indicating. that some mein- -hers of the Independent distributed campaign material to the employees during working hours, there is undisputed evidence that it was done in such a manner that it would not come to the attention of the Company or any of its supervisory .personnel. 'No shoiving has been made that the Company in any way assisted the Independent in passing out the Independent insignia. The sole question , therefore , is whether the mere similarity in design and the fact that the Independent material appeared in the plant shortly after the safety tags and insignia , could reasonably be regarded as leading employees to believe that the Company supported and favored, the Independent. The relevant evidence, set forth above, convinces us and we And the employees did not receive the impression from the nature, character, description, and distribution of the Independent printed material that the Company was lending its support to one of the contestants in the election . The objections are therefore overruled and we shall accordingly certify the Independent as the exclusive repre- sentative of the employees in the appropriate unit. CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National Labor Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, and pursuant to Article III, Sections 9 and 10, of National Labor Rela- tions Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, IT Is HEREBY CERTIFIED that Packinghouse Workers Industrial Union No. 11, affiliated with the International Brotherhood of Swift Em- ployees, has been designated and selected by a majority of all produc- tion and maintenance employees of Swift and Company at its South St. Paul plant , including plant truck drivers, but excluding superin- tendent, ' assistant superintendents, division superintendents , general foremen, foremen , assistant foremen, plant-protection employees (policemen, watchmen , and firemen), standards department em- ployees, time office employees , steady-time plant clerks, hostess, head cook, chemists, all general office employees , bricklayers, plant adminis- SWIFT AND COMPANY 373' trative employees, office cafeteria employees, steady-time scalers, and branch-house truck drivers, as their representative for the purposes, of collective bargaining, and that, pursuant to Section 9 (a) of the, Act, Packinghouse Workers Industrial Union No. 11, affiliated with the International Brotherhood of Swift Employees, is the exclusive representative of all such employees for the purposes of collective bargaining with respect to rates of pay, wages, hours of employment, and other conditions of employment. 1