The Borden Co., 460 (1962)

DIxIE DAIRIES DIVISION' OF THE BORDEN COMPANY and INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, CHAUFFEURS, WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS, LOCAL UNION No. 895, AFL, PETITIONER. Case No.

10-RC-0075. January 21,1953

Decision and Direction of Election Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Gilbert Cohen, 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 threemember panel [Chairman Herzog and Members Murdock and Peterson].

Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :

1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act 2

2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain employees of the Employer.

3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representation of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.

4. The Petitioner seeks a unit comprising all wholesale and retail milk routemen, ice cream routemen, and milk route helpers. The Employer contends that the appropriate unit should include, in addition to those employees whom the Petitioner seeks, the milk route reliefmen, other drivers, and production and maintenance employees.

The Employer would exclude the wholesale and retail milk routemen, contending that they are supervisors within the meaning of the Act, and the milk route helpers on the basis that they are casual employees.

The record discloses that there are 13 wholesale milk routemen, 9 retail milk routemen, 10 ice cream routemen, and 4 relief milk routemen.3 All of these routemen perform the major portion of their work away from the plant and apart from the other employees; are separately supervised; are paid on a commission basis, whereas other employees are paid weekly salaries or hourly wages; and are never interchanged with other employees from other departments. Each routeman, with the exception of the relief milk routemen, covers a 1 The name of the Employer appears as amended at the hearing.

2 The Employer contends that the Board should not assert jurisdiction because Dixie Dairies Division is managed locally and sells all its products within the State of Georgia.

We find, however, that as the Employer is a wholly owned subsidiary , and operated as an integral part of a...