Harvey Lumber & Supply Co.

HARVEY LUMBER & SUPPLY co; 737 their names did not :appear on the eligibility list and that they are not bona fide employees but were added to the Employer's payroll to affect the results of the election. The Regional Director's investiga- tion shows that Paul Brojde and Robert D. Furbee were hired by the Employer as sales representatives in designated territories on January 21 and January 2, 1957, respectively, and have remained on the Employer's payroll thereafter. Their names did not appear on an eligibility list submitted in November 1956 before their hire, but their names did appear on eligibility lists submitted after the Decision and. Direction of Election. Furbee, with permission from the Em- ployer, did not sell for the 3 weeks in March ending on the 9th, 16th, and 23d, and was not paid for this period. However, he continued to receive sample merchandise, instructions for sales planning, and received pay for the week ending March 30, 1957, and for all weeks. thereafter. Brojde and Furbee appear to have the same duties and conditions of employment. as other sales representatives in the unit; The investigation revealed no indication that Brojde and Furbee are not bona fide employees. We shall overrule the challenges to the ballots of Brojde and Furbee. In view of Petitioner's failure to ad- vance any affirmative evidence to indicate that the Regional Director's findings are contrary to fact, we shall deny its request for a hearing in this matter .2 As we have overruled the challenges to the 2 ballots and as the outcome of the election depends on the consideration of these ballots, we adopt the Regional Director's recommendation that these 2 ballots be opened and counted. [The Board directed" that the Regional Director for the Second Region shall open and count the ballots of Paul Brojde and Robert D: Furbee, and serve upon the parties a supplemental tally of ballots.] ' See ' American Cable and Radio Corporation, 107 NLRB 1090, 1092. Harvey Lumber & Supply Co.i and General Truck Drivers, Chauf- feurs, Warehousemen . and Helpers, Local #270, AFL-CIO, Pe- titioner. Case No. 15-RC-1546. July 17,1957 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 William ' w Fox, 1}e4rxng..offiGer. ,. , The. hearing ofl.cer's, rulings .. made; at the,liearung ;ire free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. 1 The SaSie of the Employer appears ae corrected at the hearing: 118 NLRB No. 85. 450553-5 8-vol. 118-48 -738 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 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 Leedom and Members Murdock and Rodgers]. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds : 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. 2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain employees of the Employer. 3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa- tion of the employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. 4. (A). Scope of the unit: The Petitioner seeks a unit of employ- ees 2 at the Employer's operation located on the Harvey Canal in Jefferson Parish, Louisiana, and referred to herein as the Harvey operation. The Employer maintains that the only appropriate unit is one including employees both at Harvey and at its operation located on Bayou Boeuf in.Assumption Parish, near Morgan City, Louisiana, referred to herein as the Morgan City operation. There is no evidence of any bargaining history at either location. The Employer is engaged in selling lumber, piling, chemicals, heavy hardware, and drilling muds 3 to oil drilling concerns. It main- tains its principal .office, and.place of business at the Harvey location, and a recently established concentration point at Morgan City, about 85 miles from Harvey. There is a general manager in charge of the Employer's entire operation. In addition, there is an assistant manager and a yard superintendent at Harvey, and a manager and a yard foreman at Morgan City. Both locations handle the same products for the same type of customer, but the Harvey operation handles a ' far 'greater volume than ' Morgan' City. The ' general manager does most of the purchasing of materials, which are generally shipped directly to each yard, although hardware occasionally comes in by rail to Harvey, and the Morgan City trucks then pick up the Morgan City allotment at Harvey. The sales department operates out of Harvey,4 but the salesmen relay the orders directly to whichever yard is closer to the customer and can more. conveniently make the delivery. Orders for the Employer's products cannot be anticipated, so stocks are frequently transferred from one yard to another as the need arises. Trucks of different sizes and other types of equipment are assigned to each operation. Truckdrivers are employed at each yard, and some of 2 The unit as described in the petition includes "All employees and maintenance em- ployees of the Employer at its plant located on Peters Road in Harvey , Louisiana, including all Truck Drivers," and excludes "All other employees , office clerical employees, professional employees , guards and watchmen and supervisors as defined in the Act as amended." Ground barite, clays, and bentonite are classified as mud. * The manager at the Morgan operation does some sales work also. HARVEY LUMBER & SUPPLY CO. 739 them are regularly assigned to specific trucks. Material may be carried from one yard to the other on whichever trucks are available, and the crew at each yard helps the drivers load and unload. The general manager determines personnel policies and wages for both operations. Employees at both yards are, for the most part., in the same categories, have the same working conditions, and receive essentially the same wage rates. All the accounting work for both yards is done at Harvey, including preparation of the payroll. The yard foreman at Morgan City keeps a time book, which is mailed to Harvey, and the Harvey office sends paychecks to Morgan City for distribution. The general manager flies to Morgan City in a company airplane for a.few hours at least once a week. A mechanic who is an employee. of the Morgan City yard comes to Harvey when needed to make minor repairs on automotive equipment; major work is sent out. There is no other interchange of personnel except for infrequent emergency situations, when truckdrivers or yard employees may be temporarily assigned from one yard to the other. There have been no transfers of supervisory personnel, and no permanent transfers of employees from one yard to the other. Employees are hired and discharged at each yard, and live adjacent to the yard at which they work. Although some of the foregoing factors indicate that a two-operation unit would be appropriate, they are not so compelling as to require our holding that only such a unit is appropriate. Other factors described above support a finding that a unit of Harvey employees, as requested by the Petitioner, is also appropriate. In view of those considerations, including the fact that there is no history of collective bargaining in a 2-operati6 unit; that no union seeks such a unit; that the 2 operations are geographically separated by a substantial distance; that, there, are no transfers and virtually no interchange of personnel between the 2 operations ; that there is local supervision of the operations, including hiring and discharge of employees; and that the Harvey operation is completely autonomous, we conclude that a unit confined to the Harvey operation is appropriate.' (B). Composition of the unit: The Harvey operation has 5 trailer trucks, 3 pickup trucks, and a stake body truck. It employs,5, truck- drivers regularly assigned to the trailer trucks, 3 crane operators, 1 s Jocie Motor Lines, Inc., 112 NLRB 1201; Kearjott Company, Inc., 112 NLRB 979; Bonded Freight ways, Inc., 103 NLRB 407. The cases on which the Employer relies in its brief are clearly distinguishable, For example, in Sidney Blumenthal & Company, Inc., 112 NLRB 579, the operations of the 2 plants involved were completely integrated, all the products of one plant being shipped to the other plant for finishing, and then sold to customers by the finishing plant; and in Southern Truck Line, 107 NLRB 615, the truckdrivers worked regularly out of either of the 2 terminals involved,.andthe maintenance employees , who were included in the unit, frequently interchanged between the .2 terminals. 740 DECISIONS. OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD forklift driver, 1 maintenance man,6 and 9 yard laborers, who are also referred to as mud handlers. The truckdrivers sometimes work in the yard, the laborers sometimes drive trucks, and the truckdrivers and laborers sometimes operate the forklift. There was no dispute, and we find, that all the above-mentioned categories should be included in the unit. The Employer maintains that a shipping and receiving clerk and an inventory clerk should also be included. The Petitioner took no position regarding these employees. As there is uncontradicted testi- mony that these clerks spend a substantial amount of time in the yard in the course of their work, and as their duties bring them constantly into contact with the employees in the unit, we shall include the shipping and receiving clerk and the inventory clerk in the unit as plant clerical employees' We find that the following employees of the Employer constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of'Section 9 (b) of the Act: All production and maintenance employees at the Employer's Harvey, Louisiana, operation, including all truckdrivers, crane operators, forklift drivers, yard laborers, the shipping and receiving clerk, and the inventory clerk, but excluding all office clerical employees, professional employees; guards and watchmen, and all supervisors as defined in the Act. [Text of. Direction of Election. omitted from publication.] 6 The maintenance man maintains the cranes , power saws, and other machines other than 'the automotive equipment. - 7 Wm. R. Whittaker Co., Ltd., 117 NLRB 339; Engine Rebuilding Corporation, 115 NLRB- 1.776, 1778. Pacific Isle Mining Company and International Union of Operat- ing Engineers Local No. 49, AFL-CIO, Petitioner Pacific Isle Mining Company and United Steelworkers of Amer- ica, AFL-CIO, Petitioner. Cases Nos. 18-RC-39216 and 18-RC- 3239. July 17,1957 - - DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon. separate. petitions duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the Na- tional Labor Relations Act,, a consolidated hearing was held before Hjalmar Storlie, 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-mem- ber panel .[Chairman Leedom and Members Murdock and Jenkins]. 118 NLRB No. 86. '