Merchants Refrigerating Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 27, 1948

78 N.L.R.B. 528 (N.L.R.B. 1948)

In the Matter Of MERCHANTS REFRIGERATING COMPANY, ' EMPLOYER
and INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, AFL,
PETITIONER and JOSEPH DARWIN, SAMUEL ENLOW , JAMES VOLDING
AND RICHARD FIRST, INDIVIDUALS , PETITIONERS
Case Nos. 14-RC-2 and 14-RD-5.-Decided July 27, 1948
DECISION
AND
ORDER
Upon petitions filed, a hearing was held in the above consolidated
cases, before a hearing officer of the National Labor Relations Board.
The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from preju-
dicial error and are hereby affirmed. At the hearing, the Interna-
tional Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, hereinafter referred to as
IBEW, made a motion to withdraw its RC (or certification) petition.
The hearing officer referred this motion to the Board. Following
the IBEW's motion, the International Union of Operating Engineers,
AFL, Intervenor, hereinafter referred to as Engineers, made a motion
to dismiss the RD (or decertification) petition. This motion was also
referred to the Board.
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 organizations involved claim to represent employees
of the Employer.
3. The Engineers contends that its contract with the Employer is a
bar to this proceeding. In 1946, the Employer and the Engineers
executed a contract with an anniversary date of November 30, 1947,
and a 30-day automatic renewal clause. On August 26, 1947, the
IBEW timely filed its RC petition. On December 17, 1947, after
the automatic renewal date but during the pendency of the RC peti-
tion, the RD petitioners filed their petition for decertification with the
Board. On December 19, 1947, and again at the hearing, the IBEW
1 The -name of the Employer appears-as amended at the hearing . The original name was
the St. Louis Refrigeration and Cold Storage Company-.
78 N. L. R. B., No. 65.
528
MERCHANTS REFRIGERATING COMPANY 529
requested leave to withdraw its RC petition. The Engineers there-
upon moved at the hearing that the RD petition be dismissed, upon the
ground that it was subject to a contract bar. In support of its motion
to dismiss, the Engineers urges that the timeliness of the RD petition
so far as the contract is concerned, is conditioned upon the pendency of
the earlier and timely RC petition; 2 and that, assuming the Board
permits the withdrawal of the RC petition, the contract must neces-
sarily bar the untimely petition for decertification.
The Board customarily permits the withdrawal of representation
proceedings provided that it does not prejudice the rights of inter-
venors in such proceedings.3 There being no intervenors with respect
to the representation petition filed by the IBEW, we see no reason
for departing from our usual policy in the present instance. More-
over, the RD Petitioners are not pressing for immediate action by the
Board with respect to their petition .4 Accordingly, the IBEW's
request for leave to withdraw its petition is hereby granted. As the
withdrawn petition no longer can be said to raise a question concern-
ing representation, we find that the renewed contract between the
Engineers and the Employer now operates as a bar to the petition for
decertification filed after the automatic renewal date.5
We find that no question affecting commerce exists concerning the
representation of employees of the Employer within the meaning of
Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act, and, accord-
ingly, we shall dismiss the petition for decertification.
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for decertification filed by
Joseph Darwin, Samuel Enlow, James Voiding, and Richard First,
Individuals, (Case No. 14-RD-5) be, and it hereby is, dismissed.
2 The Board has held that a petition untimely filed with respect to an existing contract
will nevertheless be processed where the filipg occurred during the pendency of another
petition timely filed. Matter of Humble Oil d Refining Company, 53 N. L R • B. 116.
3 Matter of Underwriters Salvage Company of New York, 76 N L R B. 601
* Since the hearing the Board has received a request from the RD Petitioners for an indefi.
nitd delay of action in this case in order that an attempt may be made to work out an
agreement regarding representation with the Engineers.
5 Matter of North Range Mining Company , 47 N. L R B 1306 , Matter of Central Ohio
Light & Power Company, 69 N. L. R B. 625.