Mullins Lumber Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Nov 6, 1951

96 N.L.R.B. 1367 (N.L.R.B. 1951)

MULLINS LUMBER COMPANY 1367
MULLING LUMBER COMPANY and INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF
PULP, SULPHITE AND PAPER MILL WORKERS, AFL; PETITIONER. Case
No. 10-RC-Ili. November 6, 1951
Decision and Direction of Election
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a hearing was held before Jerold B. Sindler, 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 [Chairman Herzog and Members Houston and Murdock].
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 em-
ployees 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. In an earlier proceeding involving the operations of this Em-
ployer, the Board found appropriate the following three separate
units : (1) The lumber plant at Mullins, South Carolina; (2) the furni-
ture plant at Mullins; and (3) the logging and sawmill operations at
Hasty Point, South Carolina.2 Elections ordered in the last two of
these units were won by the Petitioner, which was certified for them
on June 1, 1951.
No election was ordered for the lumber plant at Mullins because the
Petitioner's showing of interest within that unit was inadequate.
Having repaired this deficiency, the Petitioner now seeks to be certi-
fied as representative of all the production and maintenance employees
of that single plant.
The parties agree that the lumber plant unit should include the Em-
ployer's logging crews operating from Mullins and the truck drivers
who transport the logs or rough lumber to the lumber plant. They are
in agreement also that the staff of the Employer's general retail store
at Mullins should be excluded. However, the Petitioner would in-
clude, and the Employer exclude, the following individual and groups :
1 The hearing officer referred to the Board the Employer's motion to dismiss the petition
on the ground that ( 1) the Petitioner 's position at the hearing with respect to the scope of
the unit conflicted with that set forth in the petition as filed, and (2) the Petitioner had
made no proper showing of interest . The motion is hereby denied. The petition was
properly amended at the hearing , and the Employer was given full opportunity to develop
any issues raised by the amendment. Ekco Products Company, 72 NLRB 1058.
As to the Petitioner 's showing of interest , that is a matter for administrative decision
by the Board and is not litigable by the parties . J. P. Stevens & Co., Inc., 93 NLRB 1513.
The Board has determined that the Petitioner has made an adequate showing of interest.
194 NLRB 28, issued April 26, 1951.
96 NLRB No. 192.
1368 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Retail lumber department employees. The five employees in this
department work in a separate warehouse building where the finished
lumber is stored. Three of them are laborers who assemble orders
for delivery. Because they do manual work, we find that their in-
terests are similar to those of production workers. We shall include
them in the Unit .3 The other two employees in this department, Par-
rish and Henson, wait on customers and see to it that their orders are
made up for delivery. Their function is thus a blend of salesman and
shipping clerk. Because they do their work in"a warehouse and are
in close and frequent contact with employees who physically handle
the Employer's product, we find that they may properly be included
in the production and maintenance unit.4 However, one of them,
Parrish, is in charge of the department and has supervisory authority.
We shall therefore exclude him, but shall include Henson.
Over-the-road truck drivers. There are two long-distance truck
drivers who spend 85 percent of their time away from the plant
delivering finished lumber to the Employer's customers. While at
the plant, they help load and unload. They are paid a weekly salary
plus mileage. Because their conditions of work and interests are dis-
tinct from those of the hourly paid local truck drivers and the other
lumber plant employees, we shall exclude them.5
Harvey Port is head mechanic in the Employer's garage, which is
located in a separate building about a block from the lumber and
furniture plants at Mullins. To assist him in servicing the Employer's
vehicles, Port has one full-time helper and, on occasions, a second
helper. We believe that Port's relationship to the other garage em-
ployees is merely that of a skilled workman to his less skilled helpers
and that, on the record as a whole, he has no supervisory authority s
We shall include him in the unit.
We find that all production and maintenance employees of the Em-
ployer at its Mullins, South Carolina, lumber plant, including logging
crews, local truck and tractor drivers, retail lumber department em-
ployees, and the head garage mechanic, but excluding long-distance
truck drivers, general retail store employees, office and clerical em-
ployees, guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act, constitute a
unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the
meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this
volume.]
8 Fairfield Lumber & Supply Co., 57 NLRB 1565.
' Southland Manufacturing Co., 91 NLRB No. 38 ; Westinghouse Electric Corp ., 89 NLRB
8, 18; Edwards Motor Company, Inc., 94 NLRB 372.
5 North Star Granite Corp ., 92 NLRB No . 52; Boro Wood Products Company, Inc, 88
NLRB 886.
6 West Texas Utilities Company, Inc., 94 NLRB 1638; Appalachian Electric Cooperattive,
93 NLRB 1348.