The Brescome Distributors Corp.

642 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD The Brescome Distributors Corporation 1 and Team- sters Local 671, a/w International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Help- ers of America, Petitioner.2 Case 1-RC-10190 June 16, 1972 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION BY CHAIRMAN MILLER AND MEMBERS JENKINS AND KENNEDY Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, a hearing was held before Hearing Officer Thomas J. Flynn. Thereafter, pursuant to Section 102.67 of the National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regula- tions and Statements of Procedure, Series 8, as amended, the Regional Director for Region I transferred this proceeding to the National Labor Relations Board for decision. The Employer subse- quently filed a brief. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor Relations Board has delegated its authority in this proceeding to a three-member panel. The Board has reviewed the Hearing Officer's rulings made at the hearing and finds that they are free from prejudicial error. The rulings are hereby affirmed. On the entire record in this proceeding, including the Employer's brief, the Board finds: 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act and it will effectuate the purposes of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein. 2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain employees of the Employer. 3. The petition in this proceeding was filed on August 15, 1968, but processing thereof was held in abeyance pending disposition of unfair labor practice charges alleging violations of Section 8(a)(1), (2), and (5) of the Act filed by another labor organization against the Employer and principally involving the Employer's salesmen. In a decision which issued on December 2, 1969, the Board found the Employer guilty of the violations alleged.3 On November 3, 1971, the court enforced the Board's Order.4 There- after, the Regional Director resumed processing the present petition. 1 The name of the Employer appears as amended at the hearing 2 The name of the Petitioner appears as amended at the hearing 3 The Brescome Distributors Corporation, 179 NLRB 787. 4 Wine & Liquor Salesmen & Allied Workers Local #195 v N LR B, 452 F 2d 1312 (C A.D.C.) 5 We disagree Included in the decision in 179 NLRB 787 was the express finding that the Employer rendered unlawful assistance to the Brescome Distributors Employer Association when it executed contracts, not negotiated by the Association's officers or bargaining representatives, The Employer contends that contracts covering separate units of truckdrivers and warehousemen signed with Brescome Distributors Employees Asso- ciation, the labor organization found by the Board and the court to have been an assisted union, executed on July 20, 1967, and effective from July 20, 1967, to July 20, 1970, are bars to the petition, because the Board's Decision in the above unfair labor practice case did not apply thereto.5 It further contends that individual contracts signed by the truckdrivers and warehousemen themselves in 1969, and automatically renewed until February 1973, are also a bar to a present election. Finally, the Employer argues that the petition should be dis- missed because it is not supported by a current showing of interest. We find no merit in any of the contentions advanced by the Employer for dismissing the petition. As to the contract-bar arguments, the 1967 contracts, assuming their validity, have expired by their terms and therefore furnish no reason for not holding an election at the present time. As to the individual contracts with the truckdrivers and ware- housemen executed in 1969, the Board has held that such contracts are not collective-bargaining agree- ments and therefore our contract-bar rules do not apply to them.6 As to the Petitioner's showing of interest, the .efficiency of such a showing is an administrative matter not subject to litigation. O.D. Jennings & Company, 68 NLRB 516. We are administratively satisfied that the Petitioner's show- ing of interest is adequate. Accordingly, we find that a question affecting commerce exists concerning the representation of certain employees of the Employer within the meaning of Sections 9(c)(1) and 2(6) and (7) of the Act. 4. The Petitioner seeks to represent in a single unit truckdrivers and warehousemen at the Employ- er's South Windsor, Connecticut, warehouse, exclud- ing all other employees. The Employer contends that the proposed unit is inappropriate. The Employer is a liquor and wine wholesaler and distributes its products to various customers in and about Hartford, Connecticut. At the time of the hearing the Employer had about 12 truckdrivers and 10 warehousemen in its employ. They are separately supervised by individuals who providing substantial benefits for the Employer 's drivers and warehouse- men, respectively These are the collective-bargaining agreements urged herein by the Employer to be a bar The Board also ordered the Employer to cease and desist giving effect to them However, for the reasons discussed, infra, we do not find it necessary to base our finding of no contract bar on the prior finding of assistance in the related labor practice proceeding. 6 Cal-Western Van & Storage Co, Inc, 170 NLRB 67 197 NLRB No. 94 THE BRESCOME DISTRIBUTORS CORP. 643 are ultimately responsible to the comptroller. The warehousemen work two shifts. The day-shift em- ployees receive merchandise and place it in its proper location in the warehouse. The night-shift employees put up the orders turned in by the salesmen that particular day and load the merchandise onto the trucks for delivery by the truckdrivers. The ware- housemen sometimes fill in for truckdrivers in emergencies. All employees punch a timeclock, are hourly paid, and receive the same fringe benefits. In wholesale operations the Board commonly finds units of truckdrivers and warehousemen appropri- ate.7 Accordingly, 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 truckdrivers and warehousemen employed at the Employer's New Windsor, Connecticut, facili- ty, excluding office clerical employees, salesmen, guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act. [Direction of Election8 omitted from publication.] r Arts & Crafts Distributors, Inc, 132 NLRB 166, 168, Plaza Provision Company (P.R), 134 NLRB 910, Benson Wholesale Company, Inc, 164 NLRB 536, 550 In JH Rutter-Rex Manufacturing Company, Inc, 164 NLRB 5, a case relied on by the Employer, the facts show that the truckdnvers were excluded from a warehousemen's unit because as "over- the-road truckdnvers" they had little or no contact with the warehouse employees. 8 In order to assure that all eligible voters may have the opportunity to be informed of the issues in the exercise of their statutory right to vote, all parties to the election should have access to a list of voters and their addresses which may be used to communicate with them Excelsior Underwear Inc, 156 NLRB 1236; N LR B v Wyman-Gordon Co., 394 U S. 759. Accordingly, it is hereby directed that an election eligibility list, containing the names and addresses of all the eligible voters, must be filed by the Employer with the Regional Director for Region I within 7 days of the date of this Decision and Direction of Election The Regional Director shall make the list available to all parties to the election. No extension of time to file this list shall be granted by the Regional Director except in extraordinary circumstances. Failure to comply with this requirement shall be grounds for setting aside the election whenever proper objections are filed