Armour Ches-Peake

ARMOUR CHES-PEAKE 681 ance therewith, overrule the objections. As the tally shows that the Petitioner did not win the election, we shall issue a certification of results of election to that effect. [The Board certified that a majority of the valid ballots was not cast for United Steelworkers of America, AFL-CIO, and that said organi- zation is not the exclusive representative of the Employer's employees in the unit found appropriate.] Armour Ches-Peake, a joint venture between Armour and Com- pany, a corporation, and Chesapeake Quality Farms, a corpora- tion and Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers Union, Local 876, International Brotherhood of Teamsters , Petitioner. Case No. Fi-RC-2508. April 30, 1958 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before a hearing officer of the National Labor Relations Board. 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 [Members Rodgers, Bean, and Jenkins]. 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 named below claims to represent certain employees of the Employer. 3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa- tion of certain employees of the Employer, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act .2 1 The Employer raises chickens and prepares them for market. In the past year, the Employer made more than $500,000, worth of shipments directly across State lines. We therefore assert jurisdiction. T. H. Rogers Lumber Company, 117 NLRB 1732, 1735. 2 The Employer contends that the petition should be dismissed on the ground that all the persons sought therein are agricultural laborers excluded from the coverage of the Act by Section 2 (3). The Employer buys day-old chickens from a hatchery, and raises about 75 percent of them in its own growing units. The rest are raised by independent farmers pursuant to contracts. Under such contracts, the Employer retains title to the chickens, prescribes in minute detail the management practices to be followed by the con- tract growers, supplies all the feed, and pays a minimum guaranteed price per thousand chickens and a proportional share of any profits realized by the Employer above expenses. About 75 percent of the feed fed to all the chickens is mixed in the Employer's feed plant, located 1 to 18 miles from the various growing units ; the feed plant mixes from 40 to 60 tons of feed a day. Some of the persons in the proposed unit work nearly all 120.NLRB No. 108. 682 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 4. The following employees of the Employer constitute a unit ap- propriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the mean- ing of Section 9 (b) of the Act: All employees employed by Armour Ches-Peake at its feed mixing operation located at Pittsville, Maryland, excluding all office clerical employees, professional employees, guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act.' [Text of Direction of Election -omitted from publication.] of their time in the feed plant ; the rest spend part of their time working there and the remainder driving trucks or performing other duties connected with the delivery of the feed. The Board's annual apppropriation rider requires the Board to follow the definition of the term "agriculture" contained in Section 3 (f) of the Fair Labor Standards Act, and the Board attempts to follow the interpretation of that Section made by the Department of Labor. Columbiana Seed Company, 119 NLRB 560 . The Department of Labor has administratively advised the Board that unless the work performed on feed fed to the chickens raised in the Employer's growing units is "very carefully segregated" from the work performed on feed fed to the chickens raised by the independent contractors, the persons working in the feed plant are not agricultural laborers , because they are not engaged in "agriculture" "to the extent that their activities are connected - with the raising of poultry by the independent contract growers." As it does not appear that such segregation exists, we find that the individuals involved herein are employees within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. 8 The unit was stipulated by the parties. Bronze Alloys Company and Stove Mounters International Union of North America, AFL-CIO, Petitioner. Case No. 14RC-3295. .April 30, 1958 DECISION AND CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES On November 26, 1957, pursuant to a stipulation for certification upon consent election, an election by secret ballot was conducted under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Four- teenth Region among the employees in the unit herein found appro- priate. Following the election, the Regional Director served on ,the parties a tally of ballots, which showed that, of approximately 34 eligible voters, 18 voted for, and 15 voted against, the Petitioner, and 1 cast a void ballot. On December 2, 1957, the Employer filed objections to conduct affecting the results of the election, alleging in substance, that the Petitioner coerced and intimidated employees by unlawful threats. The Regional Director investigated the objections and, on January 22, 1958, issued and duly served upon the parties his report on objec- tions to election, in which he found the objections to be without merit and recommended that they be overruled. Thereafter, the Employer filed timely exceptions to the Regional Director's report. 120 NLRB No. 95.