Simpson Logging Co.

In the Matter of SIMPsoN LOGGING COMPANY, EMPLOYER and INTER- NATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS, LOCAL 302, AFL, PETITIONER Case No. 19-RC-353.-Decided December 5, 1949 DECISION AND ORDER Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before Howard A. McIntyre, 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 Reynolds 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 labor organizations involved claim to represent certain em- ployees of the Employer. 3. For the reasons noted below, no question affecting commerce exists 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. The Petitioner seeks a unit of all shovel operators, bulldozer oper- ators, grader operators, and pitmen in the Employer's construction crew. However, the Petitioner would exclude employees in that crew who operate the trucks, the speed track, and the compressors and jack- hammers, as well as the powder men and laborers. The Petitioner would also exclude from its proposed unit the shovel operators and bulldozer operators who work in the logging crew. The Employer and the Intervenor, Local 3-38 International Woodworkers of America, CIO, both contend, and we agree, that the unit sought is inappropriate. The Petitioner, in effect, is seeking to carve out from a bargaining unit which has operated effectively for more than 10 years, certain machine operators and their assistants who are engaged in the con- struction of logging roads and logging railway lines. In justification of its proposed unit, the Petitioner urges that it has represented units 87 NLRB No. 59. 375 376 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD of similar employees engaged in highway construction. However, assuming that such a unit would be appropriate in the construction of highways, the record in this proceeding clearly demonstrates that highway construction is not analogous to building logging roads and logging railroad lines. According to uncontradicted testimony, the work of the Employer's logging crew and its construction crew, both of which come under the general supervision of the Employer's logging manager, is highly integrated and must remain so for successful logging operations. Thus, the construction crew must be able to fell, buck, and handle trees in its right of way in such a manner that they may be removed to the mills and used for lumber just as are those trees which are felled by. the logging crew. For their mutual safety, the members of each crew must be constantly familiar with and aware of the operations of the other in order to avoid dangerous accidents; during the fire season all of the men who work on both crews must be able to operate as a team whenever fires break out. Moreover, the record establishes that the skills of the machine operators in both the logging and construction crews are substantially the same and that there is considerable interchange of employees between the two groups. In view of the foregoing, and because the Petitioner has advanced no persuasive evidence to warrant a departure from our customary practice of denying severance to similar groups in the logging industry, we find that the unit sought by the Petitioner is inappropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining.' Accordingly, the Employer's and the Intervenor's motions to dis- miss, on which ruling was reserved at the hearing, are hereby granted, and we shall dismiss the petition.2 ORDER , Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and upon the entire record in this case, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that the petition for investigation and certification of representatives of employees of Simpson Logging Company, filed herein by Local 302, International Union of Operating Engineers, AFL, be, and it hereby is, dismissed. 1 Winton Lumber Company, 79 NLRB 334, and cases cited therein. 2 We find no merit in the Employer 's contention that its 1947 contract with the Inter- venor, as extended in 1949 , constitutes a bar to this proceeding. The Employer concedes that it received the Petitioner ' s demand for recognition on May 31, 1949 , and that the 1949 extension to its agreement with the Intervenor was not signed by both parties before June 28, 1949. Although it appears from the record that a complete agreement between the Employer and the intervenor was reached on May 27 , 1949 . it cannot bar this proceed- Ing because it was not reduced to writing and signed by the parties before the Petitioner made its demand for recognition . See Utica Structural Steel, Inc ., 86 NLRB 1261, and cases cited therein.