Pacific Mills

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 20, 1943

49 N.L.R.B. 981 (N.L.R.B. 1943)

In the Matter of PACIFw MILLS and INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OP
TEAMSTERS, CHAUFFEURS, {' Y ARFHOUSEMEN & HELPERS, LOCAL No. 477,
(A.F.orL)
Case No. R-49./6
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION
AND
DIRECTION r
May 20, 1943
On March 30, 1943, the National Labor Relations Board, herein
called the Board, issued its Decision and Direction of Election in the
above-entitled proceeding.i Pursuant to the Direction of Election,
an election by secret ballot was conducted on April 14, 1943, under
the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the First
Region. (Bostoli, Massachusetts).' _On May 4, 1943, the Regional
Director, acting pursuant to Article III, Section 10, of National Labor
Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, issued
an Election Report, copies of which were duly served upon the parties.
As to the'balloting and its results, the Regional Director reported,
as follows:
Approsuaate number ut'eligible voters----------------------- 85
Total ballots cast------------------------------------------- 78
Total ballots challenged------------------------------------- 13
Total void ballots------------------------------------------ 1
Total valid votes C01111teff ----------------------------------- 64
Votes, cast for Pacific Mills Worsted Division Employees'
Association -------------------------------- 19
Votes cast for International Brotherhood of Teamsters,
Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers, Local 477, (A. F. of L )_ 34
Votes cast for neither--------------------------------------- 11
,On April 30, 1943, the Teamsters and the Company filed objections
to the Election Report. On May 4, 1943, the Association filed objec-
tions to the Election Report , all of which have been considered by the
Board . The objections of both labor organizations and the Com-
148 N . L. R. B 844.
49 N. L R . B., No. 143.
981
982 DEGISSONS ' OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
pany 2 relate only to the Regional Director's disposition , of the
challenged ballots.
Inadvertently, the phrase "excluding all supervisory and clerical
employees" was omitted from the description of the appropriate unit
in the Decision and Direction of Election herein, although the record
disclosed that the Teamsters desired their exclusion without objection
by either the Company or the Association, in the event the Board deter-
mined that the unit sought by the Teamsters was appropriate. The
large number of challenged ballots was due, in part, to this omission.
The Decision is hereby amended nvinc pro tmw so that the description
of the appropriate unit reads as follows :
In view of the foregoing, we find that all yardmen, warehousemen
(including truckers and laborers engaged at all five storage de-
-pots), truck drivers and truck drivers' helpers of the Company at
its Lawrence plant, excluding all supervisory and clerical em-
ployees, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective
bargaining within the meaning of Section'9 (b) of the Act.
In view of the fact that, the counting of the challenged ballots was
essential to determine the results of the election, the Regional Director
Investigated the validity of the 13 challenged ballots as well as the
facts surrounding Lawrence Greenfield against whom the Company
and the Association made post-election objections, and reported his
findings and recommendations with respect to each of them.
Frederick Mathews was challenged by the Teamsters on the ground
that he is a supervisory employee. This employee stated that he had
authority to discharge; however, his' overseer stated that he has no
such authority, but that he has the power to report, and to send xn
employee home, under certain limited circumstances. Mathews per-
forms manual work only part of the time, spending a substantial por-
tion of each day in checking and filling orders. He is designated on
the pay roll of the Company as a "working leader" and has four truck-
ers under him. His basic hourly wage rate is 23 cents higher than that
'of the truckers.. We agree with the Regional Director's recommenda-
tion and find that Mathews is a, supervisory employee. We shall, there-
fore, consider his ballot invalid.
. John Haggas was challenged by the Teamsters upon the same
grounds as its challenge of Mathews. The facts regarding Haggas
are identical with those regarding Mathews, with the exception that
Haggas works on a different shift. We find that Haggas is a super-
visory employee and shall, therefore, consider his ballot' invalid.
2 In addition to its objections to the disposition of the Regional Director with regard
to the challenged ballots , the Company made an objection to the counting of the ballot
of one Lawrence Greenfield ; on the ground that he secretly quit the employ of the Com-
pany but had fraudulently concealed this fact from the representative of the Board and
the observer for the Company , and because of this he was not challenged at the election.
PACIFIC MILLS 983
John Czarnecki was challenged by-the, Teamsters as a clerical em-
ployee. The major part of his working time is devoted to clerical
duties although he does a small amount of trucking in emergencies.
We agree with the Regional Director's findings that Czarnecki is a
clerical employee, and not within the appropriate unit, as amended
rune pi ,o tune. We shall, therefore, declare Czarnecki's ballot invalid.
Harold Russell was challenged on the 'round that he had been a
trucker in No. 10-Receiving Room (one of the sites determined in the
Decision and Direction of Election to be a warehouse) only since April
13, 1943. From the date of his employment with the Company and
on the date as of which eligibility to vote in the election herein was
determined, Russell was employed in a production department of the
Company. We agree with the Regional Director's recommendation
that the challenge be sustained. Accordingly, we shall declare Rus-
sell's ballot invalid.
Alfred Gagnon, Joseph Kaupinas, Arthur Lacombe, Nunzio Oca,
and Joseph C. Courey were challenged on the ground that they were
truckers engaged at Top Making No. 1 Receiving Room, which was not
one of the five storage depots designated in the Decision and Direction.
Inasmuch as the employees eligible to vote in the election herein were
limited to those employees engaged at certain designated depots, we
agree with the Regional Director's recommendation and find that
Gagnon, Kaupinas, Lacombe, Oca, and Courcy were not entitled to
vote, and we shall declare their ballots invalid.
Urban Richard, Joseph E. Gaudet and George Old field were chal-
lenged on the ground that they were supervisory employees. Each of
these employees works with and handles yard crews performing com-
mon labor work, and each receives 10 cents per hour more than the
other crew members. They perform manual labor along with the
rest of their crews and they transmit to the crews the orders of the
yard supervisor. ° They have no authority to hire or discharge but
may report unsatisfactory work or misconduct. In view of the fact
that most of their time is spent performing manual labor along with
the other members of the crew, we agree with the Regional Director's
recommendations'and find Richard, Gaudet, and Oldfield were entitled
to vote. We shall, therefore, order their ballots counted.
James Cockro f t was challenged as a supervisory employee. His
superior stated that he had no authority to act upon his own initiative,
and that-he is a dispatcher with about the same responsibility as Old-
field, Gaudet, and Richard. He spends approximately 2 hours per day
driving and the balance of his workday is spent in shaping up loads
and helping to load and unload trucks. He receives 10 cents an hour
more than the highest paid truck drivers. We agree with the Regional
984 DE=CISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATION 'S BOARD
Director 's recommendation and find that Cockroft was entitled to
vote . We shall , therefore , order his ballot counted.
Lawrence Greenfield was not challenged at the polls. Subsequent
to the election , Greenfield , who was otherwise eligible, although ordered
to report, -to his foreman; ,left the premises and, has , not returned to
work. The Company claims that he had secretly determined to quit at
the time he voted, and therefore should be treated as having terminated
his employment . Although the Regional Director =recommended that
this challenge be overruled , we shall make no final determination at
this time as to Greenfield 's eligibility . We shall direct that if, after
the ballots herein declared valid have been counted , the results are not
decisive , the Regional Director shall investigate and report further
with respect to the *circumstances under which Greenfield left the
Company 's employ.
For the reasons indicated above, we conclude and find that
Frederick Mathews, John Haggas , John Czarnecki , Harold Russell,
Alfred Gagnon, Joseph Kaupinas, Arthur Lacombe, Nunzio Oca, and
Joseph C. Courcy were not e'ligible-to vote in the election, and their
ballots are hereby declared invalid.
We further find that Urban Richard, Joseph E. Gaudet, , George
Oldfield, and James Cockroft were , eligible to vote in the election and
their ballots are hereby declared valid . Since the results of the elec-
tion may depend on the counting of the four challenged ballots de-
clared valid , and Ave shall direct that they be opened and counted.
DIRECTION
By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National Labor
Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act,
and pursuant to Article III, Section 10, of National Labor Relations'
Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Pacific Mills,
Lawrence , Massachusetts, the Regional Director for the First Region
shall, pursuant to the Rules and Regulations of the Board set forth
above, and subject to Article-III , Sections 9 and 10, of said Rules and
Regulations , within ten ( 10) days from the date of this Direction, (1)
open and count the ballots of Urban Richard; Joseph E. Gaudet,
George Oldfield,, and James Cockroft, and, thereafter, prepare and
cause to be served upon the parties in this proceeding a Supplementary
Elections Report, embodying therein his finding and his recommenda-
tions as to the results of`the ' balloting; and. (2) 'if after ' counting-the
ballots of the foregoing persons the results of the election are not
decisive , investigate and report further with respect to the eligibility
of Lawrence Greenfield.