The Borden Co.

In the Matter of TIIE BORDEN COMPANY, SOUTHERN DIVISION, EM- PLOYER and AMALGAMATED MEAT CUTTERS & BUTCHER WORKMEN OF NORTH AMERICA , LOCAL UNION No. 103, AFL, PETITIONER Case No. 39-RC-203.-Decided October 3, 1950 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before Charles Y. Latimer, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds : 1. The Borden Company processes and distributes milk and milk products throughout the United States. The present proceeding in- volves only its Houston, Texas, plant, which is under the supervision of its Southern Division. During the first 6 months of 1950, the Houston plant purchased milk and supplies valued at approxfnately $4,000,000, of which about $120,000 represents supplies shipped to the plant from sources outside the State of Texas. All sales were made locally. We find that the employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act.' Having recently reexamined Board policy covering the exercise of jurisdiction, we continue to believe that when a plant is owned and operated by a company which is a multistate enterprise, we should exercise our discretion in favor of taking juris- diction, even though management is entrusted to local officials and the particular plant may sell its entire product within the State where it is located 2 Accordingly, we find that it will effectuate the policies of the Act to assert jurisdiction over the Houston Plant of the Borden Company.3 2. The Petitioner is a labor organization claiming to represent employees of the Employer. 3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the represen- tation of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. 1 The Borden Company, Hutchinson Ice Cream Division , 89 NLRB 227; The Borden Company, 09 NLRB 947; N. L. R. B. V. Schmidt Baking Co., 122 F. 2d 162 (C. A. 4). 2 Collins Baking Company, 83 NLRB 599. 2 We regard N. L. R. B. v. Shawnee Milling Company, 184 F. 2d 57 (C. A. 10), relied on by the Employer, as distinguishable. 91 NIRS No. 109. 628 THE BORDEN COMPANY 629 4. The parties. agree that a unit of production and service em- ployees with certain exclusions is appropriate. They disagree, how- ever, as to checkers. The Petitioner would include them, whereas the Employer contends that they are supervisors and should be excluded. The checkers work at the dock directing the work of loaders, keep- ing records of the amount of merchandise loaded, handling com- plaints, and making necessary adjustments. They have the power effectively to recommend the discipline or discharge of loaders whose work they direct. We find that the checkers are supervisors within the Act's definition and shall therefore exclude them from the unit. We find that all production and service employees at the Em- ployer's Houston, Texas, plant, excluding all clerical employees (sales truck, office, and main office), engineers, maintenance em- ployees, truck drivers, laboratory employees, guards, checkers, and all other supervisors as defined in the Act, constitute a unit ap- propriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the mean- ing of Section 9 (b) of the Act. [Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this volume.]