New Jersey Oyster Planters and Packers Association, Inc.

538 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Local 167,, AFL, as the exclusive representative of all its employees in the afore- said appropriate unit. relative to the rentals of company-owned houses occupied by employees, the Respondent has engaged in and is.engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8 (a) (5) of the Act. 5. By said acts the Respondent has interfered with, restrained , and coerced its employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act and thereby engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8 (a) (1) of the Act. 6. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair labor practices affecting commerce within the meaning of section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. [Recommendations omitted from publication in this volume.] Appendix A NOTICE TO ALL EMPLOYEES Pursuant to the recommendations of a Trial Examiner of the National Labor Relations Board, and in order to effectuate the policies of the National Labor Relations Act, we hereby notify our employees that : WE WILL NOT refuse to bargain collectively with United Cement, Lime and Gypsum Workers International Union, Local 167, AFL, as the exclusive representative of all the employees in the bargaining unit described herein with respect to changes in rentals of company-owned houses at our Ford- wick plant. WE WILL NOT make any unilateral changes affecting any employees in the unit represented by the union with respect to company housing without prior consultation with the union. The bargaining unit is : All maintenance and production employees at our Fordwick plant, exclud- ing all supervisory, laboratory, and clerical employees. LEHIGH PORTLAND CEMENT COMPANY, Employer. Dated ------------------ By ----------------------------------------- (Representative )^ (Title) This notice must remain posted for 60 days from the date hereof , and must not be altered, defaced, or covered by any other material. NEW JERSEY OYSTER PLANTERS AND PACKERS ASSOCIATION, INC. and UNITED PACKINGHOUSE WORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO, PETITIONER. Case No. 4-RC-1673. November 24, 1952 Decision and Direction of Election Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Harold X. Summers, 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 Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member panel [Chairman Herzog and Members Murdock and Peterson]. 101 NLRB No. 118. NEW JERSEY OYSTER PLANTERS AND PACKERS ASSN., INC . 539 Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds : 1. The Employers are engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. 2. The labor organizations involved claim I to represent certain employees of the Employers. 3. The Employers and Local 56 urge as a bar to the instant pro- ceeding an agreement between themselves executed on May 9, 1952, and effective until September 30, 1953. The Petitioner contends that this contract is no bar because it is a premature extension of a contract previously executed between the Employers and the United Oyster- men's Union, Local 19600, AFL, hereinafter referred to as Local 19600, and effective until September 30, 1952, with a 60-day automatic renewal clause. The petition herein was filed on July 23, 1952. The Board files reveal that the Petitioner recently filed a petition in Case No. 4-RC-1413 seeking the same unit of the Employers' employees as sought herein. In that case, Local 19600 intervened at the hearing which was held on March 4, 1952, and urged that its contract referred to above, which had a substantial period of time to run, was a bar to determination of representatives at that time. The Board in its Decision and Order issued on April 15, 1952, upheld Local 19600's contract bar contention and dismissed the petition? In the instant proceeding the record discloses that Local 19600, at a membership meeting held in February 1952, voted to consolidate with Local 56. This action by Local 19600 was reaffirmed by its membership at a subsequent meeting held in early March 1952. By letter dated April 18, 1952, the regional director of the AFL, who was appointed to act as administrator of Local 19600, advised the Employers that he had "directed and approved the taking over" of Local 19600 by Local 56 and that Local 56 was now the bargaining agent of the Employers' employees, and further advised the Employers that the contract between the Employers and Local 19600 "is to be considered terminated." Subsequently, on May 9, 1952, the Employers and Local 56 signed a new contract .-3 Upon the foregoing facts, we find no merit to Local 56's contention that as the result of the consolidation of both unions, the existing contract between the Employers and Local 19600 was automatically terminated and removed as a bar so as to render inapplicable the premature extension doctrine to the execution of a new contract. The 'Meat and Cannery Workers Union, Local 56, affiliated with the Amalgamated Meat Cutters and Butcher Workmen of North America, AFL, hereinafter referred to as Local 56, was permitted to intervene at the hearing on the basis of its contractual interest. s New Jersey Oyster Planters and Packers Association, Inc., 98 NLRB 1187. $ Although the May 9 contract provided for a wage increase, it incorporated for the most part and in the same language the provisions of the previous contract. In addition, article 111, section 2 of the May 9 contract refers to the previous contract as "between the parties." 540 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD facts here reveal no schism in the contracting union resulting in the establishment of a new union which challenged the representative status of the existing local. Rather the facts clearly reveal that the change in character and status of Local 19600 has been mainly one of designation and affiliation which never left any doubt or confusion as to the existing bargaining representative. Where the only change in the bargaining representative has been of the character noted above, the Board, despite such change, has upheld the existing contract as a valid and subsisting agreement and effective as a bar.4 Thus the contract between the Employers and Local 56 executed on May 9, 1952, was, in effect, a premature extension of the previous contract which, as noted above, was effective until September 30, 1952 5 Moreover, although the record shows that Local 19600 voted to coLsolidate with Local 56 in February 1952, its contract with the Em- ployers was subsequently urged as a bar to the Petitioner's petition in Case No. 4-RC-1413, with the result that the petition in that case was dismissed. Under such circumstances, the parties are now estopped from pleading that the consolidation of the two locals had the effect of changing the identity of the contracting local so as to render inapplicable the premature extension doctrine as a basis for finding the new contract not a bar. As the petition herein was timely filed with respect to the automatic renewal date of the original con- tract, we find no bar to a present determination of representatives. We find that a question affecting commerce exists concerning the representation of employees of the Employers within the meaning of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. 4. We find, in accordance with the agreement of the parties, that all production and maintenance employees 6 of the employer-members of the New Jersey Oyster Planters and Packers Association, Inc., in- cluding crew members but excluding office clericals, captains, and all other supervisors as defined in the Act, constitute an appropriate unit for the purpose of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act. [Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this volume.] Michigan Bell Telephone Company, 85 NLRB 303; Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Company, 89 NLRB 231; see Harris-Woodson Co., Inc., 85 NLRB 1215; Missouri Service Company, 87 NLRB 1142. 5 Western Electric Company, Incorporated, 85 NLRB 563. In applying the premature extension doctrine, it is immaterial whether the supplemental contract is treated analyti- cally as a new contract or as the extension of an existing agreement. Blasr Limestone Company, 70 NLRB 689. or is it material that the employees may have received sub- stantial benefits under the terms of the new agreement, Radio Corporation of America, 89 NLRB 1226. 9 The unit herein is limited to those employees concerned with the planting , dredging, packing , or shipping of oysters.