Conant Ball Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 11, 1944

57 N.L.R.B. 1262 (N.L.R.B. 1944)

9
In the Matter of CONANT BALL COMPANY and LOCAL 154, UNrrr
FURNITURE WORKERS OF AMERICA (CIO)
Case No. 1-R-1919.Decided August 11, 1914
Mr. Samuel M. Salvyy, of.E-itchburg, Mass., for the Company.
Grant and Anyoff, by Mr. Sidney S. Grant, of 'Boston, Mass, for
the Union. -
Mr. William C. Baisinger, Jr., of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
-AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION,
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon petition duly filed by Local 154, United Furniture Workers
of America. (CIO), herein called the Union, alleging that a question
affecting commerce had, 'arisen concerning the representation of em-
ployees of Conant Ball Company, Gardner, Massachusetts, herein
called the Company, the National Labor Relations Board provided for
an appropriate hearing upon due notice before Leo J. Halloran, Trial
Examiner. Said hearing was held at Gardner, Massachusetts, on
July 6,1944. The Company and the Union appeared and participated.
All parties were afforded full opportunity to be heard, 'to examine
and cross-examine witnesses, to introduce evidence bearing on the
issues; and to file briefs with the Board. At the hearing the Com-
pany moved for dismissal,of•the petition on the ground,that a valid
and subsisting contract between it and the Union, covering the em-
ployees in the unit petitioned for, constitutes a bar to this pioceeding..
The Trial Examiner reserved ruling-upon this motion for the-Board.
For reasons stated in Section III, infra, we hereby deny the motion.
The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are free from
prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
57 N. L. R. B., No. 191.
11262,
CONANT BALL COMPANY 1263
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following-
FINDINGS, or, FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Conant Ball Company is a Massachusetts corporation engaged at
plants located inTempleton and Gardner, Massachusetts, in the manu-
facture of colonial reproduction furniture . The instant proceedi g
concerns only the Company's plant at Gardner; Massachusetts. The.
principal raw-materials used by the Company are lumber ; steel , paint,
and varnish. During the calendar year 1943, the Company, purchased
approximately $150,000 worth of these raw materials, of which approx-
imately 90 percent was shipped from points outside the Commonwealth
of Massachusetts to the Company's plants. During the same* period
the Company manufactured approximately $300,000 worth of finished
products, of which about 90 percent was shipped from its plants to
points outside the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
The Company admits and we find that,it is'.engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labbr Relations Act.
11, THE,ORGANIZATION INyOL\ED• , ' -
Local 154, United Furniture Workers of America,. ,'is a labor or-
ganization affiliated with the Congress of-Industrial Organizations,
admitting to membership employees of the.Company.' -
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION',
On March 2, 1942,, the Union and the Company entered, into a col-
lective bargaining contract, covering certain of the Company's em-
ployees, which, by its terms,- was to remain in effect until .March 2,,
1943, and "from.yeftr'to year, thereafter, unless either party shall,
notify the other . . of the proposed termination, changes or altera-
tions thirty days before the expiration date hereof, o'r before, Febru-
ary 1 of any subsequent year." This contract continued iii effect
without change until May, 8, 1943,,, at , which time the contracting
parties executed. a -supplementary, agreement providing for certain
changes in the existing agreement and formally extending, its effective
term to May 1, 1944, and from year to year thereafter in the- absence
of notice of "proposed termination, `change, or alteration given,,by
either party thirty days prior, to any anniversary date of the contract,
1264 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
as amended. On or about March 28, 1944, the Union . advised the
Company in writing of its desire for a "new" contract. By letter
dated March 29 1944, the Company informed the Union of its will-
ingness to discuss any proposed changes in the current contract.
Thereafter, the Union submitted to the Company a memorandum of
the proposed changes. Under date of April 24, 1944, the Company
wrote the Union requesting proof that it currently represented a
majority of the Company's employees in the contract unit. On April
27, 1944, the Company and the Union executed a document which
extended their existing contract to July 1, 1944, "without prejudice
to the rights of either of the parties hereto had this extension not
been executed and . . . subject to cancellation or termination by mu-
tual agreement at any time prior to July 1, 1944." On May 18,, 1944,
the Union filed its petition herein.
The Company contends that the Union's letter of March 28, 1944,
although timely, did not stay the operation of the contract's automatic
renewal clause, since it did not contain a request for termination of
the contract. Therefore, contends the Company, the contract auto
matically renewed and constitutes a bar to this proceeding. We can-
not agree. The Union's letter of March 28,1944, contains the following
unequivocal language:
We are ... informing you that your employees have requested
... some changes in our present Agreement, and in the near
future we will present to you a copy of the proposed new contract
as drawn up by your employees.
In our opinion this language clearly indicated an intent upon the
part of the Union to terminate the then existing contract and sub-
stitute therefor a new agreement. The Company was apparently of
the same opinion when it subsequently requested proof that the Union
still represented a majority of its employees and when it entered
into the extension agreement of April 27, 1944. This latter agreement,
moreover, at most merely extended the original contract to July 1,
1944, a date which is now past. For these reasons we conclude that
no bar to a present determination of representatives exists.
A statement prepared by a Field Examiner of the Board, introduced
into evidence at the hearing , indicates that the Union' represents a
substantial number of employees in the unit hereinafter found to be
appropriate
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 Act.
L The Field Examiner reported that the Union submitted a current ledger book containing
the names of 84 dues-paying members and that there are 90 employees in the unit for
which the Union is petitioning.
a
CONANT BALL COMPANY - 1265
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Union seeks a unit embracing all employees of the Company's
plant at Gardner, Massachusetts, excluding executives, superintend-
ents,, supervisory employees with the power effectively to recommend
hiring, firing, or disciplining of employees, salesmen, and office and
clerical employees. The unit established by the afore-mentioned con-
tract between the parties covered "all production employees with the .
following exceptions : Executives, salesmen, maintenance, watchmen,
truck drivers, and engineers." The Company opposes the inclusion
in the proposed unit of maintenance employees, watchmen,2 truck
drivers, and engineers ,3 contending that the contract unit should not
be altered. We are of the opinion that the Company's position is well
taken. The unit established by contract between the Company and
the Union expressly `excluded these employees. The record contains
no evidence as to the number of maintenance employees, watchmen,
truck drivers, and engineers employed by the Company nor does it dis-
close whether any such employees are members of the Union or have
designated it as their bargaining representative. In view of the lim-
ited amount of evidence in the record concerning these employees,
we are persuaded not to disturb the contract unit. Accordingly, we
shall exclude maintenance employees, watchmen, truck drivers, and
engineers from the appropriate unit. Our finding, in this respect,
however, shall not preclude a later determination, based upon a new
petition and a more comprehensive record, that these employees may
be afforded opportunity to vote -as to their inclusion in the larger
unit herein found appropriate.
-We find that all employees"of the Company's plant at Gardner,
Massachusetts, excluding maintenance employees, watchmen, truck
drivers, engineers, salesmen, office and clerical employees, executives,
superintendents, and all other supervisory employees with authority
to hire, promote, discharge, discipline,` or otherwise effect changes
in the status of employees, or effectively recommend such action, con-
stitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining
within the meaning of Section 9 (b) 'of the Act.
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
We shall direct that the question concerning representation which
lias 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 the Direction of Elec-
'2 None of the Company's watchmen is militarized '
The engineers are"apparently firemen and not professional or technical employees.
601248-45-vol 57-81
1266 DECISIONS OF 'NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
tion herein , subject to the limitations and additions set forth in the
Direction. - '
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
i
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 3, as amended, it is
hereby
DIRECTED that , as-part of the investigation to ascertain representa-,
'tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Conant Ball Com-
pany of Gardner , Massachusetts , 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 First Region, acting in this matter
as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to
Article III,-Sections 10 and 11, 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 not work dur-
ing said pay-roll period because they were ill or on "vacation or tem-
porarily laid off , and including employees in the armed forces of the
United States who present themselves ha person at the polls , but, ex-
cluding any who have since quit or been discharged for cause, and
have not been rehired or reinstated prior'to the date of the election,
to determine whether or not they, desire to be represented by. Local
154, United Furniture Workers of America (CIO), for the purposes
of collective bargaining.
CHAIRMAN MILLis took - no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Direction of Election.