Magnolia Lumber Corp.

0 ,In the Matter of MAGNOLIA LUMBER CORPORATION, EMPLOYER and TEAMSTERS , CHAUFFEURS AND WAREHOUSEMEN'S LOCAL No. 962, INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS , AFL, PETITIONER Case No. 36-RC-339.-Decided January 1 7,1950 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 Houston and Murdock]. 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 organization involved claims to represent employees of the Employer. 3. Nb question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa- tion of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act, for the following reasons: I At the hearing the Employer moved for dismissal of the petition for the reasons: (1) That there was no showing made by Petitioner that it is in compliance with Section 9 (f), (g), and (h) of the Act; (2) that there was no hearing held on Petitioner 's showing of interest; (3) that there was no demand for recognition made prior to the filing of the petition. The Board has previously held that the question of a labor organization's com- pliance with Section 9 (f), (g), and (h) of the amended Act is an administrative matter to be determined by the Board and is not litigable by the parties . Lion Oil Company, 76 NLRB 565; American Tube Works, Inc., 82 NLRB 718. The Board has also held that the showing of interest is an administrative device adopted by the Board to determine whether further proceedings are warranted and is not subject to objection at the hearing. Burry Biscuit Corporation, 76 NLR]3 640 . It is not necessary for Petitioner to show a prior demand for recognition where the Employer, as here, makes it clear at the hearing that he refuses to recognize the petitioning labor organization. Advance Pattern Company, 80 NLRB 29. 88 NLRB No. 41. 161 162 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD The Petitioner seeks to represent as a separate unit a group of em- ployees consisting of log truck drivers, relief drivers, servicemen, and mechanics employed at the Employer's operations. The Employer, a Mississippi corporation, conducts logging and saw- mill operations in the State of Oregon and maintains its only office and sawmill in the State at Ashland, Oregon. During its seasonal opera- tions the Employer employs approximately 200 employees in its log- ging and sawmill operations. The unit requested by the Petitioner is substantially the same as that sought in the recent Crown Zellerbacl^ 2 and Nettleton Timber s cases. For the reasons fully stated in those decisions and in the Weyerhaeuser Timber Company case,4 we find that the unit requested herein is inappropriate. Accordingly, we shall dismiss the petition. ORDER IT Is HEREBY ORDERED that the petition herein be, and it hereby is, .dismissed. Q 2 87 NLRB 1324. 8 87 NLRB 1319. 4 87 NLRB 1076.