Stauffer Chemical Co. of Texas

In the Matter of STAUFFER CIEMICAL COMPANY Or TEXAS, EMPLOYER and LALO GARCIA, PETITIONER and LOCAL UNION No. 256, INTERNA- TIONAL CHEMICAL WORKERS UNION, A. F. OF L., UNION Case No. 39-RD-1.-Decided August 8,1919 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon a petition for decertification duly filed, a hearing was held before E. Don Wilson, 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 Gray]. 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 Petitioner, an employee of the Employer, asserts that the Union is no longer the representative of the Employer's employees as defined in Section 9 (a) of the Act. The Union is a labor organization recognized by the Employer as the exclusive bargaining representative for the employees designated in the petition.' 3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa- tion of certain employees of the Employer, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.2 I The Union contends that no question concerning representation exists because it volun- tarily relinquishes its right to represent the Petitioner . This contention is without merit. It is our policy to dismiss a petition for decertification where the union involved unqualifiedly withdraws any claim as exclusive bargaining representative of the employees in an appro- priate unit. Matter of Crane Company, S1 N. L. it. B. 460, and cases therein cited. How- ever, the Union's qualified withdrawal of a claim to represent the Petitioner only, in the instant case , is not such a disclaimer of exclusive representative status. . 2 The Union moved to dismiss the petition on the grounds that it was filed on behalf of a non -complying union. This motion is denied. The desires of the employees can best be 85 N. L. It. B., No. 108. 595 857829-50=vol. 85-39 596 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 4. We find, as agreed by the parties, that all production and main- tenance employees at the Employer's Freeport, Texas, sulphur and insecticide plant, excluding clerical employees, office janitors, depart- ment heads, and all other supervisors within the meaning of the Act, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargain- ing, within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act. 5. The determination of representatives : In the election which we shall direct, we shall place the name of the Union on the ballot, although it has not complied with the registration and filing requirements of the Act, as amended.3 Under our policy, the Union will be.certified if it wins the election, provided that at that time it is in compliance with Section 9 (f), (g), and (h) of the Act. Absent such compliance the Board will only certify the arithmetical results of the election. DIRECTION OF ELECTION As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Stauffer Chemical Company. of Texas, a separate 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 supervision of the Regional Di- rector for the Sixteenth Region, and subject to Sections 203.61 and 203.62 of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations, among the - employees . in the voting group described in paragraph numbered 4, above, who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of this Direction of Election, in- cluding employees who did not work during said pay-roll period be- cause they Were ill or on vacation.or temporarily laid off, but ex- cluding 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 Interna- tional. Chemical Workers Union, Local Union No. 256, A. F. of L. ascertained by the election hereinafter directed : Matter of Ellis-Klatscher Co., 79 N. L. R. B. 183: Matter of lVhitiu Machine Works, 76 N. L. R. B. 998. The Union also contends that its contract with the Employer is a bar to the instant proceeding . We find no merit to this contention . The current contract between the Union and the Employer will expire August 6, 1949. The contract contains a 30-day automatic renewal clause. The petition was filed on May 19, 1949. The petition was, therefore, timely filed. m See Matter of Harris Foundry and Machine Co., 76 N . L. R. B. 118 . The record discloses that , although the International has complied, Local Union No. 256 . has not complied with the filing requirements of the Act.