White Provision Co.

In the Matter Of SWIFT & COMPANY, OPERATING UNDER THE, TRADE NAME AND STYLE OF WHITE PROVISION COMPANY and LOCAL UNION No. 108, UNITED PACKINGHOUSE WORKERS OF AMERICA, OF 'PACK- INGHOUSE WORKERS ORGANIZING COMMITTEE, C. I. O. In the Matter Of SWIFT & COMPANY, OPERATING UNDER THE TRADE NAME AND STYLE OF WHITE PROVISION COMPANY and LOCAL UNION No. 108, UNITED PACKINGHOUSE WORKERS OF AMERICA, OF PACK- INGHOUSE WORKERS ORGANIZING COMMITTEE, C. I. O. Cases Nos. R-1856 and C-1772 SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND ORDER December 9, 1941 On June 6, 1940, the National Labor Relations Board, herein called the Board, issued a Decision and Direction of Election Pur- suant to the Direction of Election, an election by secret ballot was conducted on June 19, 1940, under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Tenth Region (Atlanta, Georgia). On June 21, 1940, the Regional Director, acting pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regu- lations-Series 2, as amended, issued'and duly served upon the parties. his Election Report. As to the balloting and its results, the Regional Director reported as follows : Total number eligible_______________________________________ 344 Total ballots cast___________________________________________ 313 Total ballots cast for Local Union No 108, United Packing- house Workers of America, of Packinghouse Workers Organ- izing Committee, C. I. 0___________________________________ 135 Total ballots cast against Local Union No. 108, United Packing- house Workers of America, of Packinghouse Workers Organ- izing Committee, C. I. 0_________________________________ 172 Total number of challenged ballots__________________________ 6 Total number of void ballots________________________________ 0 Total number of blank ballots____________________________ 0 --1 24 N. L R B 427 37 N. L. R B , No 66 400 SWIFT & COMPANY 401 On June 24 and June 27, 1940, respectively, Local Union No. 108, United Packinghouse Workers of America, of Packinghouse Work- ers Organizing - Committee, C. I. 0., herein called the Union, filed with the Regional Director objections to the Election Report, and requested that a hearing be held on.the objections. The objections alleged in substance that Swift & Company, operating under the trade name and style of White Provision Company, herein, called the Company; through its foremen and confidential employees, had, prior to and on the date of the election, interfered with, intimidated, and coerced its, employees in the exercise of their right to select representatives of their own choosing.. On July 24, 1940, the Regional Director filed a Report on Objections in which he recited that certain coercive acts had been committed by supervisory em- ployees and a confidential employee of the Company in connection with the election. The Company, on July 26, 1940, filed exceptions to the Report on Objections. On August 28, 1940, the Union filed charges with the Regional Director, alleging that the Company had interfered with, restrained, and- coerced its employees in the respects recited by the Regional Director in his Report on Objections, and in other respects. The Board, after considering the Election Report, the objections to the Election Report, the Report on Objections, and the exceptions filed by the Company, found that the objections presented substantial and material issues with respect to the conduct of the ballot., On September 13, 1940, the Board directed that a hearing be held on the objections and that the representation -proceeding (Case No. R-1856) be consolidated with 'the proceeding relating to the alleged unfair labor practices (Case No. C-1772). Upon amended charges filed by the Union the Board, by its Regional Director, on October 14, 1940, issued its complaint against the Company alleging that the Company had engaged in and was engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8 (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. Pursuant to notice, a hearing was held upon the complaint and the objections to the election report at Atlanta, Georgia, on November 12 and 13, 1940, before R. N. Denham, the Trial Examiner duly designated by the Chief Trial Examiner. The Board, the Com- pany, and the Union were represented either by counsel or by an official representative and participated in the hearing. Full oppor- tunity was afforded all parties to be heard, to examine and cross- examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues raised by the objections to the Election Report and the complaint. On December 31, 1940, the Trial, Examiner issued his Intermediate Report, copies of which were duly,served upon the Company and the Union. He found that the Company, through one of its foremen, 402 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR', RELATIONS BOARD had, prior to the'election; advised several employees against belonging to or voting for the Union, told one employee' that if there had to be a union in the plant, that the Company would prefer the Ameri= can Federation of Labor to the Congress of Industrial Organizations, with which the Union as affiliated, and asked another employee whether he had joined the Union;' and that by the foregoing acts the Company had interfered with, restrained, and coerced its employees within the meaning of Section 8 (1) of the Act. He, found that the Company had- not engaged in the other. unfair labor practices alleged in the complaint. He recommended that the Company cease and desist from engaging in the unfair labor practices found and that it post appropriate notices. No exceptions to the Intermediate Report were filed by the Company or the Union. On March 27, 1941, the Company filed w ith the Regional Director its report setting forth the manner in which it had complied with the Trial Examiner's Intermediate Report. The Company has fully complied with the recommendations of the Trial Examiner by posting notices as required and for the period of time recommended by the Trial Examiner. Since the Company has fully complied with the recommendations of the Trial Examiner, it is not necessary for us to make findings of fact, conclusions of law, or an order based on such recommendations.2 Under the circumstances of this case, we find that the policies of the Act will best be effectuated by dismissing the petition for investigation and certification of representatives of employees of the Company, without prejudice.3 ORDER By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National Labor Relations Board by Section9 (c) of the National Labor Rela- tions Act, 49 Stat. 449, and pursuant to Article III, Sections 8 and 9, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations- Series 2, as amended, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for investigation and certifica- tion of representatives of employees of Swift & Company, operating under the trade name and style of White Provision Company, Atlanta, Georgia, filed by Local Union No. 108, United Packinghouse Workers of America, of Packinghouse Workers Organizing Committee, C. I. 0., be, and it hereby is, dismissed without prejudice. 2 Article II, Section 35, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations- Series 2. as amended a Since the unfair labor practices alleged in the objections to the Election Report were tie<ated by the Trial Examiner in his Intermediate Report and the Company has complied with the iecoinmendations made by the Trial Examiner in his Intermediate Report and in view of oui disposition of the representation proceeding above. there is no necessity for findings on the merits of the objections or for an order vacating the election.