Stokely-Van Camp, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Feb 11, 1954

107 N.L.R.B. 1137 (N.L.R.B. 1954)

STOKELY-VAN CAMP, INC. 1 137
professional employees , guards, and supervisors as defined in
the Act.
5. The Employer contends that an election should not be
directed at this time because it anticipates expanding its opera-
tions . To improve production and eliminate certain seasonal
aspects of its business , the Employer intends to alter its
manufacturing process and to manufacture additional products.
At the time of the hearing the Employer had purchased machin-
ery for the new operations , but was unable to state the number
or classification of employees it expected to employ in the
expanded business . In view of these facts, we are of the opinion
that the substantial number of employees now employed should
not be deprived of an opportunity to express their desires as to
a bargaining representative because of the contemplated
changes in operations . We find that a determination of repre-
sentatives at this time is not premature , and we shall direct
an immediate election.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication. ]
STOKELY-VAN CAMP, INC. and UNITED STEELWORKERS
OF AMERICA , CIO, Petitioner. Case No . 35-RC-813 . Febru-
ary 11, 1954
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION, ORDER , AND CERTIFICATION
OF REPRESENTATIVES
On February 1, 1953, the Boardissuedits Decision and Direc-
tion of Election herein1 finding appropriate a unit of production
and maintenance employees, including viner station and seasonal
employees 2 at the Employer' s Greenwood, Indiana, plant, and
directing the election to be held at or about the time of the
employment peak of the next canning season on a date to be
determined by the Regional Director. Thereafter, the Employer
filed motions : (1) On June 8, 1953, to require the Regional
Director to comply with the Board' s Decision and hold the
election in September or October rather than on June 16 as
determined by the Regional Director; and (2 ) June 15, 1953, to
correct the unit determination by excluding viner station
employees and Mexican and British West Indies nationals
from the unit . On June 16 , the Board denied the Employer's
first motion and the election proceeded on that date as
scheduled. Following the election , the parties were furnisheda
tally of ballots. The tally showed that of approximately 115
eligible voters, 94 cast ballots, of which 55 were for, and 12
against, the Petitioner , 26 were challenged and 1 ballot was
void.
1102 NLRB 1259.
2lncluded among the seasonal employees were Mexican and British West Indies nationals.
107 NLRB No. 239.
1138 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABLR RELATIONS BOARD
On June 22, 1953, the Employer filed timely objections to
conduct of the election and to conduct allegedly affecting the
results of the election. In accordance with the Rules and
Regulations of the Board, the Regional Director conducted an
investigation of these objections, and on August 7, 1953, issued
and duly served upon the parties his report on objections,
recommending that the Board overrule the objections and issue
the proper certification of representatives. The Employer
thereafter filed timely exceptions to the report, with a sup-
porting brief.
Timing of the Election
The Employer reiterates the position set forth in its motion
of June 8, to the effect thatthe Regional Director, by scheduling
and holding the election in June rather than in September or
October when the employment peak was greater, acted contrary
to the Board's Decision and Direction of Election. This motion
was denied by the Board because nopersuasive reason to grant
the immediate relief requested was advanced. We have recon-
sidered the motion and again find it without merit. The Regional
Director, in his report, stated that the eligibility and the election
date in June occurred when there was apeak employment of 115,
which was comparable to that of the earlier peak in 1951 and
approximately 46 percent of the highest peak during the entire
1952 season; and that 94 of the 115 eligible voters participated.
Thus, the employment peak at the time of the election was both
substantial and representative. Moreover, the size of the
employment peak is but one of many considerations governing
the Board and the Regional Director in the determination of a
valid election date.' Under these circumstances, we are of the
opinion that, in setting the date of the election in June, the
Regional Director has complied with the Board' s Decision. 4
Accordingly, we shall overrule the Employer's objections in
this respect.
Unit Correction
The Employer also reiterates the position set forth in its
motion of June 15 to correct the unit found appropriate in the
Board's Decision by excluding (1) viner station employees;
and (2) Mexican and British West Indies nationals . For the
reasons hereinafter set forth, we shall grant the motion with
respect to the exclusion of the Mexican and British West Indies
nationals, but not with respect to the viner station employees.
3Libby, McNeil & Libby, 90 NLRB 279.
4 We find no merit in the Employer's objection based on the refusal and failure of the
Regional Director to supply it with copies of correspondence between the Regional Director
and the Board as they are confidential. intraoffice documents and as they, in any event,
would not have affected our ultimate conclusion herein.
STOKELY-VAN CAMP, INC. 1139
Viner Station Employees
The Employer' s operations include 16 viner stations, each
equipped with machines to separate the fruit from pods and to
remove bits of stem and other foreign matter . Each spring
the stations are set up by the Employer and operated through-
out the season until fall when they are torn down and stored
for the next season . Practically all the stations are located in
central farming areas, 4 to 28 miles from the Employer's
plant, near farms raising the crops for the Employer. The
Employer contracts with individual farmers to deliver their
crops to the viner stations . Thus, the farmers perform the
actual harvesting operations of cutting , raking , and loading the
crops on trucks and transporting them to the viner stations
where the Employer first obtains control of them. The vining
operations are performed by employees of the Employer and
constitute , in effect , the first step in the Employer 's canning
operations.
In our original Decision , we considered this specific issue
and found , contrary to the Employer, that the viner station
employees were not agricultural employees within the meaning
of the Act. We held that the viner station employees were a
part of the canning operation , which is a separate commer-
cial enterprise and not an incident to or in connection with
farming operations , and that the viner station employees per-
form no functions in connection with the planting , cultivating,
or harvesting of crops . Accordingly, we included the viner
station employees in the unit found appropriate . As we find
no persuasive basis for changing our Decision in this respect,
we reaffirm it and deny the Employer' s motion to exclude the
viner station employees from the unit.
Mexican and British West Indies Nationals
The record discloses that Mexican and British West Indies
nationals were recruited and imported into this country for
agricultural work on a temporary basis in accordance with
procedures established by the Governments of the United States,
Mexico, and the British West Indies .5 These foreign nationals
are required to execute individual standard work contracts with
the Employer , covering in great detail the terms and conditions
of their employment . The Mexican work contracts are executed
under governmental supervision and may not be altered either
by the employee or the Employer, individually or jointly, with-
5 Mexican workers are imported pursuant to Public Law 78 , 65 Stat . 119 (7 USCA 1461) and
to the Migrant Labor Agreement of 1951 between the United States and Mexico. There is no
specific statute applicable only to the importation of the British West Indies nationals but they
are permitted temporary entry into this country under the McCarran- Walter Act, Public Law
414, 66 Stat. 163 (8 USCA 1184 ( c)) and are recruited and imported under an established
procedure similar to that applicable to the Mexican.
1 140 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
out the consent of the United States and Mexican Governments.
As to the work contracts of the British West Indies nationals,
the Government of the particular British West Indies subdivi-
sion from which the worker comes is a party to the agreement.
Under these circumstances, we agree with the Employer that
these individual standardized contracts effectively remove for
all practical purposes, these foreign nationals from the sphere
of compulsory bargaining through our certification. Accord-
ingly, we believe that the Mexican and British West Indies
nationals should be excluded from the unit and, we shall so
amend the unit.
Our determination herein cannot affect the results of the
election because (1) the viner station employees voted subject
to challenge and their ballots could not affect the results of the
election; and (2) no Mexican or British West Indies national
voted in the election. Accordingly, as it appears from the tally
of ballots that the Petitioner has secured a majority of the
valid votes cast in the election, we shall certify the Petitioner
as the collective-bargaining representative of the employees
in the appropriate unit as amended herein.
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Employer's motion to cor-
rect the unit, be, and it hereby is, denied insofar as it would
exclude viner station employees from the unit and is granted
insofar as it would exclude Mexican and British West Indies
nationals, and that the unit found appropriate in the Decision
and Direction of Election herein be and it hereby is amended to
read as follows:
All production, maintanance, and warehouse employees of
the Employer at its Greenwood, Indiana, plant, including
seasonal, viner station, and machine-shop employees, viner
station supervisors, and field men, but excluding Mexican and
British West Indies nationals, office clerical, professional,
sales, laboratory, and agricultural employees, agronomist,
over-the-road driver, guards, labeling machine operators, and
all other 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.
[The Board certified United Steelworkers of America, CIO,
as the designated collective-bargaining representative of the
employees of the Employer in the amended unit.]