Boorum and Pease Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 26, 1938

7 N.L.R.B. 486 (N.L.R.B. 1938)

In the Matter of BOORUM AND PEASE COMPANY and UNITED PAPEit
WORKERS LOCAL INDUSTRIAL UNION #292 AFFILIATED WITH THE
COMMITTEE FOR INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATION
Case No. R-731.-Decided May 06, 1933
Blank Book, Commercial Forms, and Loose-Leaf Devices Manufacturing
Industry-Investigation of Representatives: controversy concerning representa-
tion of employees:- controversy concerning appropriate unit ; majority status
disputed by employer ; employer's refusal to grant recognition of union-Unit
Appropriate for Collective Bargaining: production and maintenance employees,
excluding clerical, supervisory, and warehouse employees ; desires of employees ;
dissimilarity of wage scales and hours of employment; eligibility for member-
ship in only organization among employees-Representatives: proof of choice:
comparison of pay roll with union membership cards ; employer's request for
election, made subsequent to hearing and after stipulation as to majority repre-
sentation, held without merit, in absence of evidence of, or claim of, change in
majority representation-Certification of Representatives: upon proof of
majority representation.
Mr. David A. Moscovitr, for the Board.
McKerclier & Link, by Mr. George Link, Jr., of New York City,
for the Company.
Liebman, Robbins, Pressman & Lieder, of New York City, for the
United.
Mr. Victor A. Pascal, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On November 29, 1937, United Paper Workers Local Industrial
Union No. 292, herein called the United, filed with the Regional
Director for the Second Region (New York City) a petition alleging
that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the repre-
sentation of employees of Boorum & Pease Company,' Brooklyn, New
York, herein called the Company, and requesting an investigation and
certification of representatives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the Na-
tional Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act.
'From various papers filed by the Company, it appears that the Company uses the
symbol "&" in its name rather than the word "and."
486
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 487
On December 22, 1937, the National Labor Relations Board, herein
called the Board, acting pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the Act and'
Article III, Section 3, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and
Regulations-Series 1, as amended, ordered an, investigation and;
authorized the Regional Director to conduct it and to provide for an
appropriate hearing upon due notice. The Board further ordered,
pursuant to Article III, Section 10 (c) (2), and Article II, Section
37 (b), of the Rules and Regulations, that this proceeding be con-
solidated with a case based upon charges against the Company
filed by the United, alleging that the Company had committed certain.
unfair labor practices within the meaning of the Act. On March 16,
1938, the Board ordered that the present proceeding be severed and',
continued as a separate proceeding.
On January 3, 1938, the Regional Director issued a notice of hear-
ing, copies of which were duly served upon the Company and the
United. Pursuant to a subsequent telegraphic notice sent to the
Company and to the attorney for the Company and to the attorneys.
for the United, a hearing was held on March 29, 1938, at Brooklyn,,
New York, before Herbert A. Lien, the Trial Examiner duly desig-
nated by the Board. The Board and the Company were represented
by counsel and participated in the hearing. Full opportunity to be
heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce
evidence bearing on the issues was afforded all parties. During the,
course of the hearing, the Trial Examiner made several rulings on
motions and on objections to the admission of evidence. The Board
has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner and finds that no.
prejudicial errors were committed. The rulings are hereby affirmed.
After the hearing, the Company and the United filed memoranda,
which have been given due consideration by the Board.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Boorum & Pease Company, a New York corporation, is engaged
in the manufacture and sale of loose-leaf and blank books, commer-
cial forms, and loose-leaf devices. All of its production work is
conducted in a building in Brooklyn, New York, which is herein
referred to as the plant. Approximately 3 blocks distant from the.
plant, the Company maintains a warehouse in which the products
manufactured at the plant are normally stored. The Company uses
paper, cardboard, and fabricated products in its manufacturing
operations. Approximately 15 per cent of these commodities are
purchased from concerns located outside the State of New York.
706791-38-vol vi[-32
488 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Approximately 50 per cent of the Company's finished products are
shipped to destinations outside the State of New York.
H. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
United Paper Workers Local Industrial Union No. 292 is a labor
organization affiliated with the Committee for Industrial Organiza-
tion, admitting to its membership all production and maintenance
.employees of the Company, excluding clerical, supervisory, and ware-
house employees.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
In October 1937, a representative of the United conferred with the
attorney for the Company for the purpose of negotiating a contract
:between the Company and its employees. At the conference the Com-
-pany questioned the United's claim to represent a majority of the em-
ployees and refused to recognize it as their exclusive bargaining repre-
sentative, although the Company indicated that it was willing to
recognize and bargain with the United as the representative of its
:members only. At subsequent conferences there also arose a difference
between the parties as to the appropriate bargaining unit.
We find that a question has arisen concerning representation of
(employees of the Company.
IV. THE EFFECT OF THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION UPON
COMMERCE
We find that the question concerning representation which has
arisen, occurring in connection with the operations of the Company
.described in Section I above, has a close, intimate, and substantial rela-
tion to trade, traffic, and commerce among the several States, and tends
to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce and the
free flow of commerce.
V. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The United maintained that the production and maintenance em-
ployees at the plant, excluding clerical and supervisory employees,
constituted a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargain-
ing. The Company contended that the unit should consist of all its
employees, including those working in the warehouse.
The parties stipulated as to a number of factors, such as wages and
hours of employment, differentiating the production and maintenance
employees from the warehouse employees. It was shown that the
United at first attempted unsuccessfully to organize all the Company's
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 489
employees but shorty thereafter adopted the policy of regarding the
warehouse and clerical employees as ineligible to its membership and
ceased all efforts to organize them.
It does not appear that any labor organization other than the United
claims to represent employees of the Company. By their method of
self-organization, the employees have indicated their free choice as to
the appropriate unit and no cogent reason has'been advanced for
selecting a different unit.
We find that the production and maintenance employees of the
Company, excluding clerical, supervisory, and warehouse employees,
constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargain-
ing and that said unit will insure to employees of the Company the
full benefit of their right to self-organization and to collective bar-
gaining and otherwise effectuate the policies of the Act.
VI. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
In its petition and at the hearing, the United requested that the
Company's pay roll for the week of November 17, 1937, be used as a
basis for the determination of representatives. The Company raised
no objection to this request at the hearing or in stipulations subse-
quently entered into between the parties and filed with the Board.
By stipulations dated April 18, 1938, and filed with the Board, the
parties agreed that, on November 17, 1937, there were approximately
437 employees at the plant, approximately 40 of whom were engaged
in clerical work. It is clear that at most there were 397 employees
within the appropriate unit on that date. The parties checked the
United's membership cards against the Company's November 16, 1937,
pay roll and stipulated that 218 of the names on the cards appeared
on the pay roll. No question was raised as to the genuineness of any
of the signatures of the cards.
It was not until after the close of the hearing and after the stipu-
lations showing the United's majority during the week of November
17, 1937, had been executed by the parties and filed with the Board,
that the Company, in a memorandum filed with the Board on April
30, 1938, for the first time requested the Board not to certify a bar-
gaining representative on the basis of the pay roll which had been
checked, as above set forth, but to conduct an election among those
employees who were in its employ on March 29, 1938, the date of
the hearing. In its memorandum the Company stated that a decrease
in the amount of work had resulted in the discharge of some em-
ployees but did not specify their names or the dates of their dis-
charge. The Company's pay roll for the week of March 29, 1938,
was not introduced into evidence so that it was not possible to check
the United's membership cards against it. Moreover, no evidence
490 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
was introduced at the hearing nor was any claim made by the Com-
pany in its memorandum that the United had ceased to represent a
majority of the employees in the appropriate unit on March 29,
1938. Under the circumstances, we will determine the bargaining
representative of the employees on the basis of the Company's pay
roll for the week of November 17, 1937.
We find that the United has been designated and selected by a-
majority of the employees in the appropriate unit as their representa-
tive for the purposes of collective bargaining. It is, therefore, the
exclusive representative of all the employees in such unit for the
purposes of collective bargaining, and we will so certify.
Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and upon the entire
record in the case, the Board makes the following:
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. A question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the repre-
sentation of employees of Boorum & Pease Company, Brooklyn, New
York, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and
(7), of the National Labor Relations Act.
2. The production and maintenance employees of the Company,
excluding clerical, supervisory, and warehouse employees, constitute
a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining, within
the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act.
3. United Paper Workers Local Industrial Union No. 292 is the
exclusive representative of all employees in such unit for the purposes
of collective bargaining, within the meaning of Section 9 (a) of the
National Labor Relations Act.
CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
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, 49 Stat. 449, and pursuant to Article III, Section 8, of
National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 1,.
as amended,
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED that United Paper Workers Local Industrial
Union No. 292 has been designated and selected by a majority of
the production and maintenance employees of Boorum & Pease Com-
pany, Brooklyn, New York, excluding clerical, supervisory, and ware-
house employees, as their representative for the purposes of collective
bargaining and that, pursuant to the provisions of Section 9 (a) of
the Act, United Paper Workers Local Industrial Union No. 292 is
the exclusive representative of all such employees for the purposes
of collective bargaining in respect 'to rates of pay, wages, hours of
employment, and other conditions of employment.'