Eagle Cabinet Co.Download PDFNational Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsDec 10, 194671 N.L.R.B. 955 (N.L.R.B. 1946) Copy Citation In the Matter of EAGLE CABINET COMPANY, EMPLOYER and FURNITURE WORKERS UNION, LOCAL 76-B, C. I. 0., PETITIONER Case No. -,9-R-6887.-Decided December 10, 1946 Laxer, Shapiro, & Lauter, by Mr. Mark Lauter, of New York City, for the Employer. Mr. Harry Weinstock, of New York City, for the Petitioner. Breed, Abbott, d Morgan, by Messrs. Francis X. Ward and Daniel F. O'Connell, both of New York City, for the Carpenters. Mr. Morton B. Spero, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at New York City, on October 11, 1946, before Richard J. Hickey, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations Board makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER Eagle Cabinet Company, a New York corporation, is engaged at its only plant in Brooklyn, New York, in the manufacture, sale, and distribution of kitchen cabinets. During the year 1945, the Employer purchased over $50,000 worth of raw materials, of which about 60 percent represented shipments to it from points outside the State of New York. During the same period, the Employer's sales of finished products amounted to more than $250,000, of which approximately 60 percent represented shipments to points outside the State. The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations , claiming to represent employees of the Employer. 71 N. L. R . B, No 157 955 956 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, herein called the Carpenters, is a labor organization affiliated with the Amer- ican Federation of Labor, claiming to represent employees of the Employer. III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION By telegram and letter dated July 29, 1940, and by another letter dated August 1, 1946, Petitioner requested of the Employer recognition as bargaining representative of certain of the Employer's employees. The Employer admittedly received these communications, but did not reply. On July 30, 1946, Petitioner filed its petition herein. At the hearing, the Employer and the Carpenters urged a 10-month contract, entered into by them on August 31, 1946, 1 month after Petitioner's claim and supporting petition, as a bar to this proceeding. We are unable to agree with the position of the Employer and the Carpenters. Inasmuch as the contract was entered into after the Employer had received notice of both the claim and the petition, it cannot, under well-established principles of the Board, constitute a bar to a present determination of representatives,' and we so find.' We find further that a question affecting commerce has arisen con- cerning the representation of the employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9 (c), and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT We find, substantially in accord with the stipulation of the parties, that all production and maintenance employees, including working foremen,3 but excluding all clerical employees, chauffeurs, watchmen, and all or any other supervisory employees 4 with authority to hire, x Matter of General Electric X-Ray Corporation, 67 N, L. R . B. 997 ; Matter of Binon Chocolates , Inc, 65 N. L . R B. 591 ; Matter of Cities Service Refining Company, 58 N L R. B . 28, see also : Matter of Midwest Piping and Supply Co., Inc , 63 N L. R. B. 1060, 1069 ; Matter of Elastic Stop Nut Corporation, 51 N L R. B. 694, 702. 2 At the hearing , the hearing officer rejected the Employer's offer to prove that its action in entering into the contract on August 31 was prompted by the fact that the employees in the plant struck on the day before in order to protest against being represented by Petitioner and to request representation by the Carpenters . The Employer argued therefrom that such special circumstances warrant holding its contract to be a bar to an election at this time. Assuming , however , that the employer had proved this activity on the part of its employees , we find that it does not warrant such a holding, or the establishment of an exception to the rule enunciated above. To accede to the position of the Employer and the Carpenters would permit parties so contracting in the face of conflicting claims to determine the employee ' s choice of bargaining representatives, and to prevent them from choosing to be represented by any labor organization they may desire, and would contravene the purposes of the Act , which was designed to protect and implement the right of employees to make that choice for themselves by a secret election . We therefore conclude that the hearing officer 's ruling was proper, and it is hereby upheld 2 This includes employees Joseph Genduso, William Bee, Frank Umowski, and Rosario DeMario. who appear as "foreman" on the Job Classification list introduced in evidence as Board 's Exhibit No. 6. In this group are employees Phil Siegal and Edward A. Brecher , who, the parties agree, have supervisory functions. EAGLE CABINET COMPANY 957 promote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, of effectively recommend such action, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act. DIRECTION OF ELECTION As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Eagle Cabinet Company, 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 Direc- tor for the Second Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Sections 203.55 and 203.56, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations- Series 4, among the employees in the unit found appropriate in Sec- tion IV, above, who were employed during the pay-roll period im- mediately 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 tcuiporard y 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 Furniture Workers Union, Local 76-B, C. I. 0., or by United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, A. F. L., for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by neither. CHAIRMAN HERZOG took no part in the consideration of the above Decision and Direction of Election. Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation