Brown Co.

BROWN COMPANY (KVP DIVISION) 57 Brown Company (KVP Division ) and International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, Teamsters Union Local No. 7, Petitioner Brown Company and United Paper and Allied Workers, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, Petitioner. Case 7-RC-9461 and 7-RC-9462 August 13, 1969 ORDER AFFIRMING ADMINISTRATIVE DISMISSAL On May 26, 1969, separate petitions were filed by the Petitioners in the above cases, seeking elections among distinct groups of the Employer's employees at its Kalamazoo, Michigan, paper mill operations.' By letter on June 9, 1969, the Regional Director for Region 7 administratively dismissed the petitions on the ground that as they were filed "during the term of an existing 3-year contract with an expiration date of July 23, 1969, the petitions thus filed are within the contract-bar period as enunciated by the National Labor Relations Board." Thereafter, on July 9, 1969, the Petitioners filed with the Board a timely appeal and a brief in support thereof, pursuant to Section 102.71 of the Board's Rules and Regulations, Series 8, as amended. On July 14, 1969, Intervenor UPP filed a statement in opposition to Petitioners' appeal. The facts are not in dispute. The Regional Director's investigation disclosed that the Employer and UPP and its Parchment Local 323 were parties to a collective-bargaining agreement covering the employees sought in Case 7-RC-9461, effective "to and including the 23rd day of July, 1969." The petition in said case was mailed to the Regional Office from Kalamazoo, Michigan, on Thursday, May 22, 1969, 63 days before the expiration date of the contract. The Employer and UPP and its Local 'United Papermakers and Paperworkers , AFL-CIO, herein called UPP, and its affiliate Parchment Local No 323, intervened in Case 7-RC-9461 UPP and its affiliate Local 1010 intervened in Case 7-RC-9462 1010 were parties to a separate contract covering the employees sought in Case 7-RC-9462, to remain "in full force and effect until midnight, July 23, 1969." The petition in this latter case was also mailed from Kalamazoo, Michigan, but on Friday, May 23, 1969, 62 days before the expiration date of this contract. The 61st day before the contracts' expiration dates was Saturday, May 24, 1969, when the Board's offices were not open for business. Both petitions were received and docketed in the Regional Office on Monday, May 26, 1969, 59 days before the contracts' expiration dates. The Petitioners contend that Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays on which the Board's offices are not open for business should not be included in computing the 60-day insulation period established by the Board in Deluxe Metal Furniture Company, 121 NLRB 995, and reaffirmed in Leonard Wholesale Meats, Inc., 136 NLRB 1000. Otherwise, Petitioners say, the insulated period will be expanded at the expense of employee self-determination. In Deluxe Metal the Board established a 60-day insulated period immediately preceding and including the expiration date of an existing contract and said that a petition filed during this period would be dismissed as untimely. The date on which a petition is received by the Regional Office was fixed as controlling for purposes of determining its timeliness in relation to the 60-day insulated period, and the Board said that all potential petitioners would be required to have their petitions on file at least 61 days before the terminal date of the contract. The Board has always strictly construed this 60-day period and in the instant cases has concluded that the petitions herein were untimely filed inasmuch as they were received in the Regional Office of the Board on the 59th day before the expiration dates of the existing contracts. The Regional Director' s dismissal of the petitions as untimely was therefore warranted under long established Board practice. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioners' appeal be, and it hereby is, denied, and that the Regional Director's administrative dismissal be, and it hereby is, affirmed. [By direction of the Board.] 178 NLRB No. 13