Consolidated Crystal Co., Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Dec 24, 1941

37 N.L.R.B. 954 (N.L.R.B. 1941)

In the Matter of CONSOLIDATED CRYSTAL CO., INC. and WHOLESALE
AND WAREHOUSE WORKERS UNION LOCAL 65, C. I. O.
I
Case No. R-3250.-Decided December 24, 1941
Jurisdiction : watch crystals manufacturing industry.
Investigation and Certification of Representatives : existence of question: Com-
pany stated at the hearing that it would not accord union recognition until
certified by the Board ; election necessary.
Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : all employees of the Company, ex-
clusive of office and clerical employees, officers of the Company, supervisory
employees, and foremen ; agreement as to.
Mr. Max Weinman, of New York City, for the Company.
Liebman, Leider c Witt, by Mr. Harold I. Cammer, of New York
City, for the Union.
Mr. Joseph A. Wickes, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On August 20 and September 25, 1941, respectively, Wholesale and
Warehouse Workers Union Local 65, C. I. 0., herein called the Union,
filed with the Regional Director for the Second Region (New York
City) a petition and an amended petition alleging that a question
affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of em-
ployees of Consolidated Crystal Co., Inc., New York City, herein
called the Company, and requesting an investigation and certification
of representatives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act. On October 15,
1941, 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
2, as amended, ordered an investigation and authorized the Regional
Director to conduct it and to provide for an appropriate hearing
upon due notice.
On October 16, 1941, the Regional Director issued a notice of hear-
ing, copies of which were duly served upon the Company and the
37 N. L. R. B., No. 158.
954
CONSOLIDATED CRYSTAL CO., INC. 955
Union.' Pursuant to notice, a hearing was held on November 3, 1941,
at New York City before Martin I. Rose, the Trial Examiner duly
designated by the Chief Trial Examiner. The Company and the
Union 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 upon 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 evi-
dence. The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner
and finds that no prejudicial errors were committed. The rulings are
hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Consolidated Crystal Co., Inc., is a New York corporation engaged
in the manufacture, sale, and distribution of watch crystals. Its
principal office and place of business is in New York City where its
only plant is located. The principal raw materials used by the Com-
pany in its manufacturing operations are sheet glass and pumice
powder. All such raw materials are shipped to its plant from jobbers
and distributors located in New York City. During the 6 months
immediately preceding September 4, 1941, the Company used in its
manufacturing operations about $1,500 worth of such raw materials.
During the same period of time, the Company manufactured at its
plant approximately 400,000 watch crystals having a gross value of
about $19,000, of which approximately 65 percent was shipped from
the plant to points outside the State of New York. The Company
admits that it is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act.
H. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
Wholesale and Warehouse Workers Union Local 65 is a labor or-
ganization affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations.
It admits to its membership employees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Union did not seek to bargain with the Company prior to the
hearing. At the hearing the president of the Company stated that
3 Three days before the hearing the Trial Examiner telephoned United Optical Workers
Union , Local No. 208, affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations , and notified
it of the hearink . It appears that this union at one time claimed to represent employees
of the Company and that a number of conferences were held between representatives of
this union and the president of the ,Company. Prior to the hearing , however, this union
notified the Regional Office of the Board that it had no interest in the present proceeding
Again, at the hearing , this union stated, through the secretary of its business representa-
tive, that it had no interest in this proceeding.
956 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
it would not bargain with the Union as the exclusive representative
of its employees until the Union had been certified by the Board.
A statement of the Regional Director, introduced into evidence
at the hearing, shows that the Union represents a substantial num-
ber of employees in the unit alleged as appropriate.2
We find that a question has arisen concerning the 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
relation 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 parties agree that all employees of the Company, exclusive
of office and clerical employees, officers of the Company, supervisory
employees, and foremen, constitute a unit appropriate for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining. The parties disagree, however, as to.
one employee, Samuel Schiaci, whom the Company wishes to include
in, and the Union to exclude from, the appropriate unit.
The Union claims that this employee is a foreman: It appears.
from the record that he has worked for the Company for approx-
imately 8 years and is paid on an hourly basis, as are the other
employees. He does not have the power to hire or discharge, or
the power to recommend hiring or discharging, and lie spends sub-
stantially all of his time in production work in the factory. How-
ever, he has charge of the factory at times when the president of
the Company is absent, apportions the work among the employees
engaged in production, and sometimes makes complaints to the presi-
dent with respect to the work of these employees. Upon the entire
record, we are of the opinion that Schiaci is more closely associated
with the management than with the production employees and that
he should be excluded from the appropriate unit as a foreman.
We find that all employees of the Company at its plant in New
York City, exclusive of office and clerical employees, officers of the
Company, supervisory employees, and foremen, constitute a unit
appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining, and that such
2 The Regional Director reported that the Union submitted to her 18 signed application
cards for membership , dated July 1 4, 1941 , bearing the names of persons who appeared on
the Company's pay roll of September 10, 1941 There were approximately 30 employees
on this pay roll in the unit alleged as appropriate.
CONSOLIDATED CRYSTAL CO., INC. 957
unit will insure to employees of the Company the full benefit of
their right to self-organization and to collective bargaining and
otherwise will effectuate the policies of the Act.
VI. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
We find that the question concerning representation which has
arisen can best be resolved by the holding of an election by secret
-ballot. We shall direct that all employees in the appropriate unit
who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately preced-
ing the date of this Decision and Direction of Election, subject to
the limitations and additions hereinafter set forth in the Direction,
shall be eligible to vote.
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 rep-
resentation of employees of Consolidated Crystal Co., Inc., New
York City, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6)
.and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act.
2. All employees of the Company, exclusive of office and clerical
employees, officers of the Company, supervisory employees, and fore-
inen, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective
bargaining, within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the National
Labor Relations Act.
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 8, of the National
Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended,
it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation authorized by the Board
to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining
with Consolidated Crystal Co., Inc., New York City, 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 Second
Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National Labor Rela-
tions Board, and subject to Article III, Section 9, of said Rules and
'As stated above (footnote 1, supra), United Optical Workers Union, Local No. 208,
affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations , has no interest in the present
proceeding Accordingly , we shall not direct that its name be placed upon the ballot.
958 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Regulations, among all employees of Consolidated Crystal Co., Inc.,
New York City, who were employed during the pay-roll period im-
mediately preceding the date of this Direction, including employees
who did not work during such pay-roll period because they were ill
or on vacation or in the active military service or training of the
United States, or temporarily laid off, but excluding office and cler-
ical employees, officers of the Company, supervisory employees, fore-
men, and employees who have since quit or been discharged for cause,
to determine whether or not they desire to be represented for the
purposes of collective bargaining by Wholesale and Warehouse Work-
ers Union Local 65, affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organ-
izations.