Franklin County Sugar Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jan 15, 1951

92 N.L.R.B. 1341 (N.L.R.B. 1951)

Tn the Matter of FRANKLIN COUNTY SUGAR COMPANY, EMPLOYER and
AFL BEET SUGAR REFINERY EMPLOYEES LOCAL UNION No. 23818,
PETITIONER
'Cases Nos. 19-RC-660 and 19-RC--687.-Decided January 15, 1951
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
Upon petitions duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a hearing was held before Robert Tilman, 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-member
panel [Members Houston, Reynolds, and Styles].
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 employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9 (c)
,(1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The Petitioner seeks separate units of "inter-campaign" (year-
Tound) employees and "campaign" (seasonal) employees at the Em-
ployer's Preston, Idaho, sugar beet plant. The Employer moved to
dismiss the petitions on the ground that the workers involved herein
are "agricultural workers," and therefore are not "employees" as
defined in Section 2 (3) of the Act.'
1 The Employer moved to dismiss the petitions on the ground that the order consolidating
the cases for hearing was improperly issued by the Regional Director rather than by the
,General Counsel . This motion is denied . The General Counsel lawfully delegated authority
to consolidate the cases to the Regional Director . Nor is there any merit to the Employer's
motion to dismiss the petitions because the original petition in Case No . 19-RC-660 sought
a single unit of all the Employer's employees and the present petition , as amended, seeks
only a part of those employees . This motion likewise is denied.
2 The Employer further contends that the petition should be dismissed because the
Board does not assert jurisdiction over employees processing perishable products. This
contention is without merit. See Bob Tankersley Produce Company, 89 NLRB 974;
Clara-Val Packing Company, 87 NLRB 703.
. 92 NLRB No. 199.
1341
1342 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
The Employer is engaged in manufacturing sugar and molasses
from sugar beets. Its plant at Preston, Idaho, is the only operation
involved in this proceeding. The Employer purchases beets from lo-
cal farmers in neighboring communities, paying them a fixed per-
centage of its net revenue from the sale of sugar and molasses pro=
duced from the beets. The beets are delivered by the farmers to one
of several pickup stations maintained by the Employer. : The Em-
ployer then ships the beets to its plant where they are sorted, stored,
washed, and put through the operations whereby the sugar is ex-
tracted. The Employer's motion to dismiss the petitions on the
ground that its employees are exempted from the Act as agricultural
employees is denied. Decisions of this Board and of the courts
establish that the agricultural exemption in the Act is inapplicable
to the employees in this case, for although they work on an agricultural
commodity they are employed in a separate industrial operation and
are engaged in processing which materially changes the agricultural
product to enhance its value .3
As noted above, the Petitioner seeks separate units of campaign and
intercampaign employees. The Employer contends that only a single.
unit of all the employees involved is appropriate.
The intercampaign employees.-These 32 employees are permanent
employees who work for the Employer on a year-round basis. They
have been with the Employer from 4 to 25 years. Twenty-two of
them have 15 years or more seniority. During the "campaign" or
beet season, these 32 employees constitute a skilled nucleus, manning
the key positions in the refining operations. Between campaigns, the
intercampaign employees perform various jobs such as repairing
and. overhauling machinery and buildings, distributing fertilizer,
processing sugar beet seeds, working in the lime quarry (operated by
the Employer in conjunction with its sugar beet operations), and even
occasionally planting beets for farmers. Between campaigns these
employees work 8 hours a day, 5 days a week. During the campaign,
they normally work only 8 hours a day but the record does not reveal
how many days a week they work. They enjoy vacation benefits,
workmen's compensation coverage, life insurance policies contributed
to by the Employer, and "off-the-job-accident" insurance.
The campaign employees.-During the campaign season, the Em-
ployer operates 3 shifts a day, 7 days a week. It employs 163 em-
ployees in addition to the intercampaign employees, who do production
and maintenance work at the refinery. This working force is ob-
tained within 2 to 5 days after the season starts, and remains at peak
capacity for nearly 5 weeks. The turnover among the campaign
8 See Roberta Fig Company , 88 NLRB 1150.
FRANKLIN COUNTY SUGAR COMPANY 13433
employees from season to season is very high, with only 10 to 25,
percent returning from one season to the next. There is also a large
turnover during any one season. Although the campaign employees,
like the intercampaign employees, are covered by workmen's com-.
pensation and participate in a hospital and sickness fund, unlike the
intercampaign employees, they do not have vacations nor do they
participate in the life insurance or off-the-job-accident insurance
benefits.
Under these circumstances, we find that there is not sufficient com-
munity of interest between the campaign and intercampaign em-
ployees to warrant their inclusion in the same unit, and that separate
units of (1) intercampaign employees and (2) campaign employees
are alone appropriate.-'
We find, therefore, in Case No. 19-RC-660, that all intercampaign
employees employed at the Employer's Preston, Idaho, sugar beet
plant, including the chemist and those employees who become foremen
during the campaign season,-' but excluding all campaign employees,
office and clerical employees, guards, watchmen, and all supervisors, as
defined in the Act, constitute a unit appropriate for the purpose of
collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
We find, further, in Case No. 19-RC-687, that all campaign em-
ployees, excluding intercampaign employees, office and clerical em-
ployees, guards, and supervisors, as defined in the Act, constitute a
unit appropriate for the purpose of collective bargaining within the
meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
5. The Employer has no campaign employees on its payroll at the
present time and will not employ any until the sugar beet season.
commences next October. Accordingly, we shall direct that the
question concerning representation among the campaign employees
be determined during the 1951 sugar beet season on an exact date to
be determined by the Regional Director, subject to the limitations and
additions set forth in the Direction of Elections."
[Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication in this
volume.]
4 R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, 88 NLRB 600 ; Dr. P. Phillips Canning Co ., 73 NLRB
988.
5 During the 6 weeks' campaign season, three of the Intercampaign employees ( one for
each shift ) becomes a foreman. However , the record discloses that these employees do
not have the authority to hire or discharge or to effectively recommend such action, nor
does it appear that these employees responsibly direct other employees within the-
meaning of the Act. Accordingly , we find that they are not supervisors , and we will include
them in the unit.
Oskaloosa Produce Company , 76 NLRB 942; San Fernando Heights Lemon Association,
72 NLRB 372. We find no merit in the employer's contention that the petition in Case No.
19-RC-687 should be dismissed because of the unstable , fluctuating type of employment.
Norcal Packing Company, at al., 76 NLRB 254.