Strickland Veneer and Lumber Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 3, 1951

94 N.L.R.B. 293 (N.L.R.B. 1951)

STRICKLAND VENEER AND LUMBER COMPANY 293
claim to represent the Employer's employees in a unit apart from the
employees of the members of the Association. The Board, therefore,
-is not empowered to direct an election on a decertification petition
tinder the aforesaid section of the amended Act.2 Accordingly, we
shall dismiss the petition.'
Order
IT IS 1-IEREBY ORDERED that the petition filed herein be, and it hereby
is, dismissed.
2 IIuoAatliorn cf Meyers, 90 NLRB 785: Wave Publications, Inc, 90 NLRB 274; Davis-
221le hosiery Mill, Iite. SS NLRB 7.38, Cronin Motoi Co, Inc, 77 NLRB 808, Queen City
11`archouees, Inc., 77 NLRB 268
3 In view of our disposition of this case, we find it unnecessary to pass upon the various
othet grounds upon which the Unions contended that the instant petition should be
-dismissed.
T. M. STRICKLAND D/B/A STRICKLAND VENEER AND LUMBER COMPANY
and INTERNATIONAL WOODWORKERS OF AMERICA , C. I. 0., PETITIONER.
Case No. 10-RC-11.3'5. May 3, 1951
Supplemental Decision and Certification of Representatives
On February 9, 1951, pursuant to a Board Decision and Direction of
Election,l an election was held under the direction and supervision of
the Regional Director for the Tenth Region among certain' employees
of the above-named Employer at its Waycross, Georgia, plant. There-
after, a tally of ballots was furnished the parties which showed that
of the approximately 45 eligible voters, 23 cast valid ballots, of which
11 were for and 3 were against the Petitioner, and 9 were challenged.
'On February 27, 1951, the Regional Director, after investigating the
challenges, issued a report on election, challenged ballots and reconi-
mendation to the Board. On March 8, 1951, the Petitioner filed ob-
jections to report on election and recommendation of Regional
Director.
The Regional Director sustained the challenges to the eight ballots
cast by members of the woods crew.2 This crew, at the time the
Board's Decision and Direction of Election issued on February 9,
1951, was performing wood-cutting operations for the Employer.
Shortly thereafter, the Employer leased its woodlands to two in-
'dividuals and, by letter dated February 1, 1951, terminated the employ-
ment of its woods crew. The members of the woods crew were hired
by the lessees, who have complete control over their conditions of em-
ployment, including their wages. Under these circumstances, the
Regional Director found that the members of the woods crew had
Unpublished.
The Regional Director made no recommendation as to the ninth challenged ballot as
it was insufficient to affect the outcome of the election
94 NLRB No. 53.
294 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ceased to be employees of the Employer ^y the time the election was
held on February 9, 1951, and accordingly he sustained the challenges
to their ballots. No exception having been filed to this action of the
Regional Director, his ruling sustaining the challenges to the ballots
of the woods crew is hereby affirmed.3
Having found that the Employer had ceased to employ a woods
crew, the Regional Director recommended that the description of the
bargaining unit set forth in the Decision and Direction of Election be
amended to exclude the woods crew. The Petitioner objects to this
recommendation on the ground that as the lease arrangements be-
tween the Employer and its lessees provide that they can be canceled
on 7 days' notice the Employer could at any time , with or without the
Petitioner's knowledge, again employ a woods crew. The Petitioner
contends therefore that the unit description should include the woods
crew "if, as and when they are employed again by the Employer."
We find no merit, in the Petitioner's contention. As the Employer
at present employs no woods crew, and as no members of the woods
crew have participated in the selection of the Petitioner as the collec-
tive bargaining agent, the Board will exclude the woods crew from
the description of the bargaining unit for which the Petitioner will be
certified. Accordingly, the description of the unit found appropriate
in our Decision and Direction of Election is hereby corrected and
amended to read : All the production and maintenance employees em-
ployed at the Employer's Waycross, Georgia, plant, excluding office
clerical employees, sales employees, watchmen, guards, and supervis-
ors as defined in the Act. Nothing contained herein, however, shall
be deemed to preclude the filing of a new petition with respect to the
woods crew when and if the members of the woods crew again become
employees of the Employer.
Certification of Representatives
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED that the International Woodworkers of
America, CIO, has been designated and selected by a majority of the
employees of T. M. Strickland d/b/a Strickland Veneer and Lumber
Company, Waycross, Georgia, in the unit found appropriate in our
Decision and Direction of Election as herein amended, as their repre-
sentative for the purposes of collective bargaining, and, pursuant to
Section 9 (a) of the Act, the said organization is the exclusive repre-
sentative of all such employees for the purposes of collective bargain-
ing with respect to rates of pay, wages, hours of employment, and
other conditions of employment.
8 Pursuant to Section 3 (b) of the Act the Boaid has delegated its powers in connection
with this case to a three-member panel [ Members Houston , Murdock, and Styles].