Elk Tanning Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 19, 1940

26 N.L.R.B. 740 (N.L.R.B. 1940)

In : the' Matter ; of ELK TANNING : COMPANY and INTERNATIONAL 'FUR
AND LEATHER WORKERS' UNION, AFFILIATED WITH C. I. O.
Case 90. R=19I^1.-Decided August 19"1940
Jurisdiction : tanning industry.
Investigation and Certification of -Representatives : existence of question: con-
flicting claims of rival representatives; .contract entered into after notice of
union's claim but prior to 'filing of petition," nor bar to; election necessary.
Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : hourly production and maintenance
employees, excluding clerical and supervisory employees.
Pitney, Hardin & Skinner, by Mr. William J. Brennan, Jr., of
Newark, N. J., and Barbour & Pontzer; by .Mn. Robert F. Pontzer, of
Ridgway, Pa., for the Company.
Mr. Victor Hirshfield, of New York City, for the International.
Mr. Herbert P. Sorg, of St. ,Marys,, Pa., for the T., W. U.
Mrs. Augusta Spaulding; ;of counsel to the Board.
'DECISION +
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On, April,13, 1940,? International Fur and Leather Workers' Union,
herein called the international, filed,with the' Regional Director for
the Sixth Region (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) a petition alleging that
a question, affecting commerce had arisen concerning representation
of employees' of Elk Tanning Company, Ridgway., Pennsylvania,
herein called the Company, and requesting an investigation and'certi-
fication of 'representatives pursuant to Section .9 (c) of the National
Labor Relations Act,. 49- Stat.. 449; 'herein'called the Act.
On June 26, 1940, 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 Regu-
lations-Series 2,'as amended,' ordered'an investigation and authorized
the Regidnal'Director to''conduct it and•to provide for an' appropriate
hearing upon due notice.
On June 29, 1940, the Regional Director issued a notice of hear-
ing, copies of which were duly served upon the Company, the Inter-
i The International placed the petition, duly verified , in the hands of a Field Examiner assigned to the
Sixth Regional Office at Ridgway, Pennsylvania , on April 11, 1940
26 N. L. R. B., No. 79.
740
'ELK TANNING COMPANY 741
national, and Tannery Workers' Union, herein called the T. W.' U.,
'a labor organization claiming to represent employees directly affected
by the investigation. Pursuant; to the notice,' a hearing was held
on July 8, 9, and 10, 1940, at Ridgway, Pennsylvania, before Robert
H. Kleeb, the Trial Examiner 'duly designated by the, Board. ' 'The
Company'and the unions were represented-by counsel and all partici-
pated in the hearing. The 'T. W. U. filed a motion'to'intervene in
this proceeding. The Trial Examiner granted-! this motion. ; Full
opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and
to introduce evidence bearing upon the issues was afforded all parties.
At the conclusion of the hearing the, Company 'and the, T. W., U.
moved to dismiss the proceedings on the ground that no question con-
cerning representation had arisen and that a contract entered into, on
April 11, 1940, between the Company and the T. W. U. was a bar
to the present proceeding. The Trial Examiner did, not rule, on
this motion. For the, reasons set forth in Section Al, below,, the
motion is hereby denied. During the course of the hearing the Trial
Examiner made several rulings on other motions and on objections
to the admission of evidence. The Board has reviewed all the rulings
of the Trial Examiner and finds that no prejudicial errors were com-
mitted. • The rulings are hereby affirmed. ' •
On July 30, 1940, a hearing was held before the'Board at Washing-
ton, D. C.; for the purpose of oral argument. ' The Company' and
the T. W. U. appeared and presented their 'arguments. The Inter-
national did not appear.2 `The Company, the International, and the
T. W. U. filed briefs which the Board has considered.
Upon the entire record in the 'case, the Board makes the following:
FINDINGS' OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Elk Tanning Company is a Pennsylvania corporation having sits
principal office in New York City. It is, a wholly owned subsidiary
of United States Leather Company, a, New Jersey corporation.,,, The
Company owns two subsidiaries: Northeastern: Coal Company and
Standard Hide Powder, Manufacturing Companyi1:both located in
Pennsylvania. • The Company owns and operates tanneries at Clear-
field, Wilcox, Salamanca, Coudersport; Emporium, and, Ridgway,
Pennsylvania. Its tannery at Ridgway, known as, the Eagle, Valley
Tannery and herein called the Tannery, is the only plant involved
in this proceeding.
Notice of the hearing for the purpose of oral argument was duly served upon the Company and the
T. W. U. Notice addressed to the International , however, was misdirected and was not received. In
view of our conclusion in Section III, below, regarding the issue argued in the brief tiled by the International
we are of the opinion that the International was not prejudiced by its failure to receive notice of the oral
argument.
323429-42-vol 26-48
742 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
. At the Tannery, the Company is engaged in the tanning of cattle
hides' for sole leather. During 1939 all the raw materials'utilized, in
the tanning process were sent into Pennsylvania from other States of
the United States and foreign countries. In the same year, 78.33
per cent of the finished products of the Tannery were shipped by the
Company to points outside the State. The Tannery comprises 43
buildings, covering approximately 34 acres. 3
The Company admits it is engaged in interstate commerce.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
International Fur and Leather Workers' Union is a labor organi-
zation affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations. 'It
admits to membership production and maintenance employees of the
Company.
Tannery Workers' Union is an unaffiliated labor organization. It
admits , to membership production and maintenance employees of
the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
In the latter part of January 1940 the International began organiz-
ing the employees of the Company at the Tannery. In early March
employees at the Tannery organized a union restricting its member-
ship to employees of the Company, which they called Tannery Workers'
Union. On March 19, 1940, employees interested in the T. W. U.
held an organization meeting at which they elected officers and ap-
pointed committees to draft a constitution and bylaws and a proposed
bargaining contract between the T. W. U. and the Company. On
March 29, 1940, the T. W. U. held its second meeting, adopted the
constitution and bylaws presented by its committee, and, approved
the proposed bargaining contract.
On March 30, 1940, the T. W. U. presented to the Company an
affidavit of its president, which stated that the T. W. U. represented
a majority 'of the Company's production and maintenance employees
at the Tannery. The Company rejected the affidavit 'as inadequate
proof of the T. W. U. majority. On April 3, 1940, two clergymen of
Ridgway filed with the Company an affidavit stating, that, after
checking the signatures on T. W. U. membership cards with signs=
tures bn the Company's pay checks and insurance cards, they believed
that `the T. W. U. cards bore genuine signatures of 138 employees
A Because its competitors were not required to make public any statements revealing the amount of their
business in dollars, volume , or tonnage accounts , the Company has pending before the Securities and Ex -
change Commission an application to make such disclosures by it unnecessary. The Company was not
required to disclose these figures in this proceeding in view of its admission of the interstate character of
its business
ELK TANNING COMPANY 743
I
within the proposed unit. The total number of employees in the
proposed unit was 210.
On the following day, April 4, 1940, the Company recognized the'
T. W. U. as sole bargaining agent of the employees within this unit.-
The Company discussed the bargaining contract proposed by - the
T.W. U. with its committee. No agreement was reached. A meeting
was -arranged for April 11, 1940, to allow the Company -time to refer
the matter to its New York office.
On April 4, 1940, the day of its conference with the T. W. U.
bargaining committee, the Company received a letter from the Inter-
national, requesting a conference and stating that the International
represented a large number of employees at the Tannery. The-Com-
pany replied that it had recognized the T. W. U. as sole bargaining
agent of its employees in that unit, but would confer with the Inter-
national whenever it would arrange an appointment. The Inter-
national did not communicate further with the Company.
On April 11, 1940, as agreed, from 10 a. in. until 12:30 p. m:, the
T. W. U. and the Company discussed the contract proposals of the
T. W. U. and the counter proposals of the Company. At 12:30 the
conference adjourned, subject to the call of the T. W. U. when a private
conference among the committee members should.be concluded. At
about 1:00 p. m. James C. Beech, a Field Examiner attached to the'
Board's Sixth Regional office, arrived in Ridgway pursuant to a re-
quest of the International. Beech conferred first with the organizer
for the International and then with the Company. In response to his.
suggestion of a consent election to determine the desire of employees
at the Tannery for an exclusive bargaining agent, the Company stated
that it would agree to a consent election if the T. W. U. would also
consent. • The Company stated that it had recognized the T. W. U.
a's sole bargaining agent in view of the proof made on April 3;1940,
and' considered itself bound by this act. Beech then conferred at
length with the T. W. U. committee concerning a consent election.,
The committee after consideration decided that it would not agree
to a consent election or file a petition, but would continue its bar-
gaining on the basis of the recognition already accorded to the T. W. U.
by the Company. At 4:30 p. m. the International filed with Beech
the petition in this proceeding.
At a meeting between the Company and the T. W.' U., held, on :
April•11 between 5:00 and 6:45 p. in., an agreement was reached on all
terms of the contract. Under the T. W. U. constitution the contract
had 'to be'submitted to the union membership for ratification. '
At a T. W. U. meeting held at 8:30 p. m., April 11, 1940, the
International organizer was permitted to address the members. He
informed the employees of the petition filed by the International.
744' DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
The T. W. 'U., voted to ratify the proposed contract. During this
evening the Company learned from Beech that the International had
filed the petition in this proceeding. The contract was formally
signed on, April 12, 1940, by the T. W. U. bargaining committee and
the, Company.
The, Company and the T. W. U. contend that the contract between
the Company and the recognized agent of, its employees was sub-
stantially complete before the petition of the International was known
to, either of the . contracting parties. Assuming that this is true,
the filing -of the petition and the International's claim of a substantial,
membership among the employees concerned was known to both
contracting parties before the contract was entered into. We find
that the parties hurried to conclude a,contract during the uncertainty
of, an organization period,,, at a time-when they knew a rival organiza-
tion had a, substantial membership. We find that, under these cir-
cumstances, the contract is not a bar to a determination and certifica-
tion of representatives for collective bargaining.4
The International and the T. W. U. each claim to represent a
majority of the production and maintenance employees of the Com-
pany., , A statement of the Field Examiner, a check of signatures by
the Trial Examiner; and other evidence indicate that each, union
appears to have a substantial membership among such employees.
We find, that a question has arisen concerning the representation of:
employees of the Company at its Eagle Valley, Tannery.
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 agreed,, and we find, that all hourly production and
maintenance employees of the Company, excluding clerical and super-
visory employees, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes 'of
collective bargaining. We find, that said unit will insure to employees
of the Company the full benefit,of their right to self-organization and
to collective bargaining and,otherwise effectuate the policies of the Act.
4 Cf. Matter of Colonic Fibre Company , Inc and Cohoes Knit Goods Workers' Union No. 215111, A. F. of L.,
9 N. L R. B. 658; Matter of The Peoples Gas Light and Coke Corn pang and Chicago By-Product Coke Company
and'United Mine Workers of America, District 60, affiliated ioith the Congress of Industnel Organizations, 15
N. 'L R' B. 1024 , Matter of Silorag Lighting , Inc. and Internation d Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local
Union No 3, 18, N L. R. B 719
ELK TANNING COMPANY 745
lrI. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
We find that the ,question concerning iepresentation of employees
of the Company at the Tannery can best be determined by an election
by secret ballot. We shall direct that those eligible to, vote,in the
election shall be the employees in the appropriate unit who were em-
ployed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the , date
of our Direction of Election, including employees who did not work
during that pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation and
employees who were then or have since been temporarily laid off, but
excluding any who have since quit or been discharged for cause.
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 Elk Tanning Company at its Eagle Valley
Tannery at Ridgway, Pennsylvania, within the meaning of Section 9
(c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
2. All hourly production and maintenance employees of the Com-
pany at its Eagle Valley Tannery, Ridgway, Pennsylvania, excluding
clerical and supervisory employees, constitute a unit appropriate for
the purposes of collective bargaining, within the meaning of Section
9 (b) of the 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 Re-
lations Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 8, of National Labor
Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, it is
hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation ordered by the Board
to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining
with Elk Tanning Company, Ridgway, Pennsylvania, 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 of Election, under
the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Sixth
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
Regulations, among all hourly production and maintenance employees
of the Company at its Eagle Valley Tannery, Ridgway, Pennsylvania,
who were employed by it during the pay=roll period immediately
preceding the date of this Direction of Election, including employees
who did not work during that pay-roll period because they were ill
746 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
or on vacation and employees who were then or have since been
temporarily laid off, but excluding clerical and supervisory employees
and any who have since quit or been discharged for cause, to deter-
mine whether they desire to be represented by International Fur and
Leather Workers' Union, affiliated with the Congress of Industrial
Organizations, or by ' Tannery Workers' Union, for the purposes of
collective bargaining, or by neither.