Martin Food Products, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 11, 1943

48 N.L.R.B. 19 (N.L.R.B. 1943)

In the Matter Of MARTIN FOOD PRODUCTS , INC. and WAREHOUSE AND
DISTRIBUTION WORKERS UNION, LOCAL 208, I . L. W. U. C. I. 0.)
Case No. R-4909.-Decided March 11, 1943
Jurisdiction : food products manufacturing industry.
Investigation and Certification of Representatives : existence of question: re-
fusal to accord, union recognition ; company's objection to nature and method
of proof of union's claim to representation, overruled; election necessary.
Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : all employees in the production and
shipping departments, excluding supervisory employees, maintenance em-
ployees, office and clerical employees, truck drivers and truck helpers; shipping
department employees included notwithstanding company's objection, when
among other considerations, both departments were interdependent and
necessary to the company in the carrying on of its business.
Mr. Stanford Clinton, of Chicago, Ill., for the Company.
Mr. David B. Rothstein of Chicago, Ill., for the Union.
Mr. A. Sumner Lawrence, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon petition duly filed by Warehouse and Distribution Workers
Union, Local 208, I. L. W. U. (C. I. 0.), herein called the Union,
alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning
the representation of employees of Martin Food Products; Inc.,
Chicago, Illinois, herein called the Company, the National Labor Re-
lations Board provided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice
before Robert T. Drake, Trial Examiner. Said hearing was held at
Chicago, Illinois, on February ,15, 1943. The Company and the
Union appeared, participated, and were afforded full 'opportunity to-
be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce
evidence bearing on the issues. The Trial Examiner's rulings made
at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in the case,-the Board makes the following :
48 N. L. R. B., No. 5.
19
52147-43-vol. 48-3
20 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Martin Food Products, Inc., an Illinois corporation, has its princi-
pal office and plant, the only one involved, in this proceeding, at
Chicago, Illinois, where the Company is engaged in the manufacture,
sale, and distribution of fruit and peanut products, 'including jam,
jelly, and peanut butter. During the calendar year 1942, the Com-
pany purchased for use at its Chicago plant raw materials valued at
more than $750,000, of which approximately - 90 percent in dollar
value was transported to the plant from points outside the State of
Illinois. During this same period, the Company manufactured and
sold from its Chicago plant finished products exceeding in value
$1,000,000, of which approximately 89 percent was shipped to points
outside the State of Illinois.
H. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
Warehouse and Distribution Workers Union, Local 208, I. L. W. U.,
is a labor organization 'affiliated with the Congress of Industrial
Organizations, admitting to membership employees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On or about January 11, 1943, the Union notified the Company that
it represented a majority of the production employees in the Com-
pany's plant. The Company replied that it doubted the Union's
claim of majority representation and stated that the Union should
establish its right to represent the employees of the Company.
A statement of the Regional Director, introduced in evidence at
the hearing, and a statement of the Trial Examiner, indicate that
the Union represents a substantial number of employees in the unit
hereinafter found to be appropriate.,
'The Regional Director reported that the Union had submitted 70 membership applica-
tion cards . all bearing apparently genuine signatures ; that of the 70 cards, 45 dated between
November 1942 and January 1943, bore the names of persons whose names were on the
Company pay roll of January 30, 1943, containing the names of 100 persons within the
alleged appiopriate • unit. In addition to the statement of the Regional Director , the Trial
Examiner reported that the Union had presented at the hearing 7 cards all bearing appar-
ently genuine signatures and dated between January 25 and February 4, 1943 ; that of those
cards . 6 bore the names of persons whose names are on the Company pay roll of January
30, 1943.
The Company 's contention that the statements of the Regional Director and the Trial
Examiner are not entitled to consideration through the absence of a check of the signatures,
with the pay -roll records of the Company is, without inerit . See Matter of San -Equip.,
Inc. and International Association of Bridge, Structural & Ornamental ' Iron Workers,
Local Union No. 612, 44 N. L. R . B. 524. The Company ' s further contention that it is
entitled to introduce evidence to contradict the statement of the Regional Director is
like« ise without foundation and has been frequently rejected by the Board . See Matter
of Atlas Powder Company, Zapon Division and Local 12083, National Council of Gas, Coke
& Chemical Workers, 43 N. L. R. B 757, and cases cited therein.
MARTIN FOOD PRODUCTS, INC. 21
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning
the representation of employees of the Company within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the National Labor
Relations Act. ,
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Union claims that the appropriate unit should consist of all
employees in the production, and shipping departments, excluding
foremen (supervisors), maintenance employees, clerical employees,
truck drivers, and truck helpers. 'The Company does not dispute the
exclusions requested by the Union but claims that the shipping de-
partment is functionally separate from the production department
and should therefore be excluded from the appropriate unit.
While the production and shipping departments are under separate
supervision and there are some differences in the number of hours
worked by employees therein, it was admitted by the Company that
both departments are interdependent and necessary to the Company
in the carrying on of its business. Furthermore, the evidence clearly
demonstrates that the only difference between the wages in the ship-
ping 'department and those in the production department is the
difference in the wage scale for men as opposed to that for the women
employees. Moreover, it appears not only that both shipping 'and
production employees are eligible to membership in the Union, but also,
that Union organization has extended to both shipping and produc-
tion departments. The Company has no history of collective bar-
gaining and there is no evidence of union organization limited to
production department employees. No separate pay-roll classifica-
tions are established for shipping employees as distinguished from
production employees. Under the circumstances, we find that the
shipping department employees may properly be included within the
appropriate unit.2
We find that all employees in the production and shipping depart-
ments, excluding supervisory employees,3 maintenance employees,'
office and clerical employees, truck drivers and truck helpers,5 consti-
tute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining
within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
2 See Matter of Lonsdale Company (re Lincoln Bleachery d Dye Works Division) and
Lincoln Benefit Association , 27 N. L. R. B. 910 ; Matter of Western Burlap Bag Company
and Textile Workers Union of America, C I. 0., 44 N.'L. R B. 356.
3 The parties stipulated and we find that Carl Farber, Mary Kalousek , Harriet Latas,
William Meyer , Sr., Lucy Ryza and Valerie Slomiany are supervisory employees to be
excluded from the appiopriate unit
4 The parties stipulated and we find that Anna Tvaroha, Joseph' Spangler , Arthur Davis,
and James Davidson, are maintenance employees to be excluded from the appropuate unit.
5 The Company employs no truck drivers or truck helpers at the present time.
22 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR' RELATIONS BOARD
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
We shall direct that the question concerning representation which
has arisen be resolved by an election by secret ballot among the em-
ployees in the appropriate unit who' were employed during the pay-
roll period immediately preceding the date of our Direction of Elec-
tion herein, subject to, the limitations and additions set forth in the
Direction.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in'the National
Labor Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Rela-
tions Act and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor
Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, it is
hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain repre-
sentatives for the purpose of collective bargaining with Martin Food
Products, Inc., Chicago, Illinois, an election by'secret ballot shall be
conducted as early as possible but not later than thirty (30) days
from the date of this Direction, under the direction and supervision
of the Regional Director for the Thirteenth Region, acting in this
matter as agent for 'the National Labor Relations Board and subject
to Article III, Section 10, of said Rules and Regulations, among the
employees in the unit found appropriate in Section IV, above, who
were employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the
date of this Direction, including employees who did notiwork during
said pay-roll period because they were ill or _ on vacation or tempo-,
rarily laid off, and including employees in the armed forces of the
United States, who present themselves in person at the polls, but ex-
cluding employees who have since quite or been discharged for cause,
to determine whether or not they desire to be-represented by Ware-
house and Distribution Workers Union, Local '208, I. L. W. U. C.
I. 0.), for the purposes of collective bargaining.