Durasteel Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 23, 1944

57 N.L.R.B. 1527 (N.L.R.B. 1944)

In the Matter of DURASTEEL COMPANY and DISTRICT 50, UNITED MINE
WORKERS OF AMERICA
Case No. 14-R-957.-Decided August 23,1944
Messrs. G. E., Lyons, R. C. Titter, and G. E. Anderson, all of Hanni-
bal, Mo., for 'the Company.
Messrs. Dan Wininger and E. J. Bean, both of Hannibal , Mo., for
District 50.
Mr. Victor B. Harris, of St. Louis, MO., 'and Mr. Lester M. Maupin,
of Hannibal , Mo., for the Steelworkers.
Mr. David V. Easton, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon a petition duly filed by District 50, United Mine Workers of
America, alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen con-
cerning the representation of employees of Durasteel Company, Han-
nibal; Missouri,- herein called the Company, the National Labor Re-
lations Board provided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice
before Harry G. Carlson, Trial Examiner. Said hearing was held
at Hannibal, Missouri, on July 18; 1944. The Company, District 50,
and United Steelworkers of America, CIO,1 herein called the Steel-
workers, appeared, participated, and -were afforded full opportunity
to be heard, to examine and cross-examine vithesses, and to introduce
evidence bearing on the issues. The Trial Examiner's rulings made
at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
All parties were afforded an opportunity to file briefs with the Board.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Durasteel Company, a Missouri corporation, operates two plants
under unified management at Hannibal, Missouri; one plant is en-
'The record indicates that Local 2647 is the local orfidnization more particulaily
concerned herein.
57 N. L. R B., No. 247. 1527 1
1528 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
gaged in the manufacture of ordnance bombs and bomb fins, and the
other is engaged in the manufacture of bomb parts and refrigerators.
During the 6 months period ending March 31, 1944, the Company
purchased for use,at its Hannibal plants, steel, paint, cartons, and
other raw materials' valued in excess of,$500,000, of which approxi-
mately 90 percent was shipped to the Hannibal plants from points
outside the State of Missouri. During the same period the Company
sold finished products valued in excess of $300,000, of which about
99 percent was shipped to points outside the State of Missouri.
The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
H. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
District 50, United Mine `Yorkers of America, is a labor organiza-
tion, admitting to membership employees of the Company.
United Steelworkers of America is a labor organization affiliated
with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, admitting to member-
ship employees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On- or about April 10, 1944, District 50 requested recognition from
the Company as the collective bargaining representative of certain of
its employees, and further requested that the Company not renew its
contract with the Steelworkers. The Company made no reply to this
request and takes the position that it cannot recognize District 50 until
said labor organization is certified by the Board.
Following an election held' in 1942, the Steelworkers was certified by
the Board as the collective bargaining representative of the Com-
pany's production and maintenance employees. Thereafter, it exe-
cuted a collective bargaining agreement with the Company which ter-
minated on May 31, 1943. On June 7, 1943, a renewal contract was
executed by the Company and the Steelworkers, providing, inter alia,
that it was to remain in effect until May 31, 1944, and that it was to
renew automatically thereafter in the absence of notification, by either'
party thirty (30), days before the expiration of the agreement, of a
desire to change its terms. On December 27, 1943, District 50 filed a
petition for investigation and certification of representatives`. The
Regional Director refused to issue Notice of Hearing on this petition
on the ground that it was prematurely filed, and that the contract of
June 7, 1943, constituted a bar to the requested determination. Subse-
quently as hereinabove indicated, District 50 made a'request for recog-
nition from the Company on April 10, '1944. On May 4, 1944, an
informal conference was held at the St. Louis Regional Office of the
DURASTEEL COMPANY 1529
Board which was attended by representatives of the Board, the Com-
pany, District 50, and the Steelworkers. At this conference the Steel-
workers requested that the Board check the designations submitted by
District 50 against a pay roll of the Company. The Board's representa-
tive agreed to do so and, apparently, agreed to notify the parties with
respect to his findings. No formal notification of the results of the
check of the designations of District 50 was served upon the parties
until sometime after June 30, 1944. Meanwhile, the Steelworkers com-
menced negotiations with the Company toward the latter part of May,
leading to a new contract. On Julie 15, 1944, these parties executed a
new agreement providing for a 2-year term, expiring May 31, 1946.2
The Steelworkers contends that its contract of June 15, 1944, con-
stitutes a bar to this proceeding, arguing that both it and the Company
acted reasonably in assuming that, since they had not heard from a
representative of the Board with respect to the check of the designa-
tions submitted by District 50 in support of the petition filed by it, this
petition was being dismissed administratively, and they were at liberty
to negotiate for a new `contract. We do not agree. No formal notifi-
cation had been served upon the parties that the petition had been dis-
missed. District 50, upon failure to receive notification from a repre-
sentative of the Board with respect to the results of the check of its
designations, made direct inquiry of the Regional Office, whereas both
the Company and the Steelworkers failed to do so, although reason-
able prudence would seem to require such action. Counsel for the
Steelworkers visited the Regional Office on several occasions between
May 4, the date of the conference, and the date of an issuance of the
Notice of Hearing herein, and apparently did not ascertain the status
of this proceeding. We find that the contract of June 15, 1944, between
the Company and the Steelworkers was executed subsequent to notice
of a claim of a third party and while a proceeding involving the Com-
pany's employees was pending. Under such circumstances, the con-
tract of June 15, 1944 does not constitute a bar to a current determina-
tion of representatives.
A statement of a Field Examiner for the Board, introduced into
evidence at the hearing, as supplemented by a statement of the Trial
Examiner made at the hearing, indicates that District 50 represents
a substantial number of employees in the unit hereinafter found
appropriates
2 The contract of June 15, 1944, as well as that of June 7, 1943, contains a closed-shop,
maintenance-of-membership clause.
8 The Field Examiner reported that District 50 submitted 110 designations bearing sig-
natures appearing upon the Company's pay roll for the period ending April 22, 1944 The
Trial Examiner reported that District 50 submitted 4 additional designations at the hear-
ing bearing names appearing upon said pay roll. The record discloses that the Company
employs approximately 480 employees in the unit hereinafter found appropriate. The
Steelworkers relies upon its contractual relations with the Company for the establishment
1530' DECISIONS OF NATIONAL -LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
We; than as question,affecting .comn7erce has arisen concerning
representation of, employees of the Company within the meaning.of ,
Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and, (7) of the Act.
IV. TIIE APPROPRIATE UNIT
Substantially in accordance with an agreement of the parties at
the hearing, Nye find that all hourly, paid production and maintenance
employees engaged at the Hannibal plants of the Company, including
line inspectors, but excluding' office clerks and stock room 'employees
handling, records, salaried employees, salesmen, watchmen, guards,
janitors, floor inspectors, plant manager, assistant plant manager,
foreman, assistant foreman, 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, constitute 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
has 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 Election
'herein, subject to the limitations and additions set forth in the
Direction.
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 9, of the National
Labor Relations Board-Rules and Regulations-Series 3, as amended,
it is hereby - 1
DIRECTED that, as part of the- investigation to ascertain represent-
atives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Durasteel Com-
pany; Hannibal, Missouri, an election by secret'ballot shall be con-
ducted as early as possible, but not later than thirty (30) days from the
date of this Direction, under the direction and supervision of the Re-
of its interests The record discloses that the Company has an abnormally large turnover
of employees , and that since April 22, 1944 , 135 employees terminated their employment
with the Company and 250 new employees were engaged by , the Company Under these
circumstances , we find that the showing of District 50 is substantial The Steelworkers
moved at the hearing that a new check be made of the designations submitted by District
50, basing its motion upon the turn -over in personnel of the Company . We are satisfied
that , in view of the union security clauses contained in the 1943 and 1944 contracts
between the Company and the Steelworkers , District 50 has submitted a sufficient number
of designations to warrant the'entertainment of this proceeding
DURASTEEL COMPANY 1531
gional Director for the Fourteenth 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 em-
ployees 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 during said
pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation or temporarily
laid off, and including employees in the armed forces of the United
States who present themselves in person at the polls,, but excluding
those employees 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 they desire to be represented by District 50, United
Mine Workers of America, or by United Steelworkers of America,
affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, for the
purposes of collective bargaining, or by neither.
CHAIRMAN MILLIS took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Direction of Election.