Hawthorne Dairy Products Co.

In the Matter of HAWTHORNE DAIRY PRODUCTS COMPANY, EMPLOYER and GENERAL DRIVERS, WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS LOCAL No. 534, AFFILIATED WITH THE INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, CHAUFFEURS, WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS OF AMERICA, AFL, PETITIONER Case No. 17-RC-376.-Decided July 19, 1949 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before William J. Scott, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hear- ing 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 Reynolds and Gray]. Upon the entire record in this case the Board finds : 1. The Employer, a Missouri corporation, has its principal place of business in Windsor, Missouri, where it is engaged in the manu- facture of cheddar cheese. During the calendar year ending Janu- ary 31, 1949, it purchased raw milk worth $253,745.50, all within the State of Missouri. During the same period it sold cheese valued at $299,838.02, of which $239,128.23 was received for sales delivered to the Cudahy Packing Company, at its Neosho, Missouri, plant. Cudahy in turn mixed the cheese with its processed products, of which more than 50 percent was shipped to points outside the State. The Em- ployer sold cheese in smaller quantities to other dairy companies, some of which also shipped a portion of this cheese, reprocessed, to points outside the State. During the same year, the Employer purchased equipment of out-of-State origin, valued at $8,625.48, from local dealers. We find, contrary to the contention of the Employer, that it is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor. Relations Act.' I Matter of Washington Tobacco Company , 83 N. L. R. B. 437 ; Matter of Fort Worth Rendering Company, 69 N. L. R. B. 1305. 85 N. L. R. B., No. 46. 260 HAWTHORNE DAIRY PRODUCTS COMPANY 261 2. The labor organization named below claims to represent em- ployees 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) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. 4. The following employees of the Employer constitute a unit ap- propriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act: All production and maintenance employees at the Employer's Wind- sor, Missouri, plant, including truck drivers 2 and regular part-time employees,3 but excluding all other employees, professional employees, guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act. DIRECTION OF ELECTION 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 su- pervision of the Regional Director for the Seventeenth Region 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 pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of this Direction 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 or not they desire to be represented, for purposes of collective bargaining, by General Drivers, Warehousemen and Helpers Local No. 534, affiliated with International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Ware- housemen and Helpers of America, A. F. L. 2 Contrary to the Employer 's contention , the Petitioner would exclude John Renfro, a truck driver, on the ground that he is primarily an office worker . Renfro spends 50 percent of his time driving a truck and the remainder doing clerical work in the office, handling complaints of farmer -customers, and soliciting new accounts . We believe that Renfro has a sufficient community of interest with the production and maintenance employees to warrant his inclusion in the unit. Matter of John P. Jeike Company, 83 N. L. R. B. 442. 8 The Petitioner would also exclude Ray Berry, who operates a truck in the morning as an independent contractor doing business with the Employer and is employed as a direct production worker in the afternoon . As Berry is clearly a regular part-time employee, he is included in the unit . Matter of Cocoline Products, Inc., 79 N. L. R. B. 1426.