Huntley Industrial Minerals, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 20, 1961

131 N.L.R.B. 1227 (N.L.R.B. 1961)

HUNTLEY INDUSTRIAL MINERALS, INC. 1227
MEMBER FANNING, concurring in part and dissenting in part:
For the reasons set forth in my opinion in Humtko, A Division of
National Dairy Products Corporation, 123 NLRB 310, at 312, I would
find that no question concerning representation exists here, that the
petition be dismissed, that a formal ruling should issue that the Union
is not the majority representative of the employees in the unit, that
the certification is revoked, and that the Union may not have a petition
entertained as to these employees for a period of 12 months except
under the circumstances provided for in Section 8(b) (7) (C) of the
Act and Sections 102.75-102.80 of the Board's Rules and Regulations,
Series 8.
I agree with the majority that the disclaimer was equivocal. How-
ever, the Union has admitted that it has no majority, and there is no
true question concerning representation. Under these circumstances
the holding of an election is not only an exercise in futility, but it also
deprives the employees of their opportunity of choosing any other
union in a Board-conducted election for a period of 12 months.
By a decision such as I have outlined above, the Board may accom-
plish all that it can by an election but at the same time avoid penalizing
the employees for 12 months by preserving their rights to select any
other labor organization during that period.
MEMBER BROWN took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Direction of Election.
Huntley Industrial Minerals , Inc. and General Teamsters , Chauf-
feurs, Warehousemen & Helpers, Local Union No. 982, Inter-
national Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehouse-
men & Helpers of America, and Construction, Production,
General Labor Local Union No. 302, AFL-CIO, Petitioners.
Ca.se No. 20-RC-4494. June 20, 1961
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the' National Labor
Relations Act, hearings were held before Joseph L. Meagher, 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 McCulloch and Members Rodgers and Fanning].
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the
Act.
131 NLRB No. 149.
1228 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
2. The labor organizations involved claim 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. The appropriate unit :
The Petitioners petitioned for "all production and maintenance
employees, warehousing employees, transportation employees, and
mining employees," with the usual exclusions. Located at Laws,
California, the Employer has three roller mills, a crushing plant, a
warehouse building, and a mechanical shop building. The Employer
leases several' small mining operations in various locations in the
Bishop-Laws, California, area. The employees sought are classified
as mill -operators, mill helpers, mechanics, yardmen, laboratory tech-
nicians, and miners. At the time of the hearing there was only one
employee in each of these classifications.
The record shows that there is one laboratory technician, whose pri-
mary duties consist of running various tests, such as moisture and
particle tests, particle size distribution tests, and "receptivity on mate-
rial" tests as to color, bulk, density, etc. The Employer contends he
should be excluded as a technical employee. He has had 2 years of
chemistry at a junior college, and spent 1 month training under the
supervision of his predecessor. His previous job was to clean up
around the warehouse and mills, and he still spends 20 percent of his
time doing this work. We find that the tests performed by the labo-
ratory technician are routine in nature, and the job he performs does
not require any special skills or training. We find that the laboratory
technician is not a technical employee, but has substantially the same
interests as the production and maintenance employees. We shall
therefore include him.2
Gene Hawkins is classified by the Employer as "mechanical super-
visor." It appears from the record, however, that he is the only
mechanic employed at present. In rare emergency situations, the
Employer is required to hire another mechanic for short periods of
time, and when this happens, Hawkins acts as supervisor to this em-
ployee. Although the Employer expects to hire additional employees
in other departments during its busy season, it does not anticipate
hiring any other regular mechanic. Hawkins does not presently exer-
cise any supervisory authority. Nor does the fact that he may in the
future exercise such authority on a sporadic basis constitute him a
supervisor 3 We shall therefore include him in the unit.
1 We find the joint Petitioners collectively to constitute a "labor organization" within,
the meaning of the Act . The Stickless Corporation , 110 NLRB 2202.
2 See, e.g., Ruby Company, d/b/a Shelley Processing Company, 129 NLRB 110.
8 See V.I.P. Radio, Inc., 128 NLRB 113.
STERLING PRECISION CORP., INSTRUMENT DIVISION 1229
Accordingly, we find that the following employees at the Em-
ployer's milling operation at Laws, California, and at its mining opera-
tions in the Bishop-Laws, California, area, constitute an appropriate
unit for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of
Section 9 (b) of the Act :
All production and maintenance employees, including all mining
employees, the laboratory technician, and Gene Hawkins, but exclud-
ing all office clerical employees, guards, watchmen, professional em-
ployees, and supervisors as defined in the Act.'
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
4 There are no employees holding the classifications of warehousing and transportation
employees , as requested by the Petitioner . This work is done as an incidental duty of
one of the classifications included in the appropriate unit. We therefore do not include
the warehousing and transportation classifications in the unit description.
Sterling Precision Corp. , Instrument Division and Michele J.
Marzullo
Sterling Precision Corp ., Instrument Division and Michele J.
Marzullo and Local 463, International Union of Electrical,
Radio and Machine Workers , AFL-CIO , Party to the Contract.
Cases Nos. 2-CA-6298 and 2-CA-6501. June 22, 1961
DECISION AND ORDER
On March 28,1960, Trial Examiner Sidney S. Asher, Jr., issued his
Intermediate Report in the above-entitled proceeding, finding that the
Respondent had engaged in and was engaging in certain unfair labor
practices and recommending that it cease and desist therefrom and
take certain affirmative action, as set forth in the copy of the Inter-
mediate Report attached hereto. He also found that the Respondent
had not engaged in certain other alleged unfair labor practices and
recommended dismissal of the complaint with respect to such allega-
tions. Thereafter, the General Counsel and the Respondent filed ex-
ceptions to the Intermediate Report and supporting briefs.'
The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner made
at the hearing and finds that no prejudicial error was committed.
'The rulings are hereby affirmed. The Board has considered the Inter-
mediate Report, the exceptions and briefs, and the entire record in
the case, and hereby adopts the findings, conclusions, and recom-
mendations of the Trial Examiner with the exceptions and modifi-
cations set forth hereinafter.'
i The Respondent' s request for oral argument is hereby denied as the record , exceptions,
and briefs adequately present the issues and positions of the parties.
2 In view of the decision of the United States Supreme Court in the case of Local 357,
International Brotherhood of Teamsters , Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of
131 NLRB No. 155.