Equitable Life Insurance Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 2, 1940

21 N.L.R.B. 37 (N.L.R.B. 1940)

In the Matter of EQUITABLE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, WASHINGTON,
D. C., 1003 K ST., N. W. AND 1712 L ST., N. W.,1 WASHINGTON,
D. C. and INDUSTRIAL AND ORDINARY INSURANCE AGENTS UNION
#21354 AND INDUSTRIAL AND ORDINARY INSURANCE AGENTS COUNCIL
Case No. R-1704.-Decided March 2, 19.440
Life Insurance Business-Jurisdiction : employer engaged in trade, traffic, and
commerce within the District of Columbia-Investigation of Representatives:
controversy concerning representation of employees : refusal to grant petitioning
union conference on wages and working conditions-Unfit Appropriate for Col-
lective Bargaining : no controversy as to; all agents in two offices , excluding
district managers, assistant district managers , and office and clerical employees-
Election Ordered
Mr. Samuel M. Spencer , for the Board.
Mr. Maurice D. Rosenberg and Mr. C. D. Garrett , of Washington,
D. C., for the Company.
Mr. George L. Russ and Mr. Frank Weikel, of Washington, D. C.,
for the Union.
Mr. Wallace Cooper, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On October 28, 1939, Industrial and Ordinary Insurance Agents
Union #21354 and Industrial and Ordinary Insurance Agents Coun-
cil, herein called the Union, filed with the Regional Director for the
Fifth Region (Baltimore, Maryland), a petition alleging that a ques-
tion affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of
employees of Equitable Life Insurance Company, Washington, D. C.,
herein called the Company, and requesting an investigation and cer-
tification of representatives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act. On January
4, 1940, the National Labor Relations Board, herein called the Board,
acting pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the Act and Article III, Section
i The petition incorrectly stated the location of this branch office of the Company to be
"1730 L N.W." At the hearing the petition was amended to coriect this error.
21 N. L. R. B., No. 6.
37
25303=- 41-voi 21--4
38, DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR , RELATIONS BOARD
3, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series
2, ordered an investigation and authorized the Regional Director tb
conduct it and to provide for an appropriate hearing upon due notice.
On January 15, 1940, the Regional Director issued a notice of
hearing, copies of which were duly served upon the Company and
the Union. Pursuant thereto, a hearing was held on January 25, 1940,
at Washington , D. C., before Edward Grandison Smith, the Trial
Examiner duly designated by the Board . The Board and the Com-
pany were represented by counsel and the Union by its representa-
tives. .. All parties participated in the hearing . Full opportunity to
be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses , and to introduce
evidence bearing on the issues was afforded all parties.
At the opening of the hearing , the Company filed an "answer" (1)
denying the material allegations of the petition and (2 ) objecting to
the petition and notice of hearing as not complying with the provi-
sions of Section 9 (c) of the Act . The Trial Examiner reserved deci-
sion on a motion made by the Company at the opening of the hear-
ing to dismiss the petition on jurisdictional grounds and also on a
motion made by the Company at the close of the hearing to strike
all evidence as immaterial . These motions are hereby denied. Dur-
ing the course of the hearing , the Trial Examiner made several,rul-
ings on other motions and on objections to the admission of evidence.
The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner and finds
that no prejudicial errors were committed . The rulings are hereby
affirmed.
Pursuant to leave granted , the Company on February 7, 1940, filed
a brief in support of its motion to dismiss. Pursuant to request there-
for by the Company and notice to all parties, a hearing was had
before the Board at Washington, D. C., on February 15, 1940, for the
purpose of oral argument . The Company and the Union were repre-
sented by counsel and participated in the argument.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Equitable . Life Insurance Company is a corporation organized and
existing under the laws of the District of Columbia with its main
office in Washington, D. C. It is licensed to solicit and issue policies
of industrial and ordinary life insurance in the District of Columbia,
Maryland , Delaware, West Virginia , and Ohio. In the District of
Columbia and the Maryland suburbs, it conducts this business in two
geographical divisions through offices located at 1003 K St.; N. W.,
EQUITABLE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY 39
and 1712 L St., N. W., Washington, D. C. It has approximately
72 employees in these 2 offices with an average weekly pay roll of
approximately $2,700.
The aggregate premiums collected by the Company on its policies
during 1939 amounted to $3,620,749, of which $679,595.98 was collected
on the 56,173 policies carried on the books of the two local offices in
the District of Columbia. Approximately 11 per cent of said policies
serviced by the two offices in the District of Columbia are held by
policyholders living outside the District of Columbia.
We find that the Company is engaged in trade, traffic, and coin-
merce withiii'the District' of Columbia.
IT. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
Industrial and Ordinary Insurance Agents Union #21354 and
Industrial and Ordinary Insurance Agents Council is a labor organi-
zation affiliated with the American Federation of Labor. It admits
to membership all insurance agents employed by the Company at its
two local offices in the District of Columbia, excluding district
managers and office and clerical employees.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On October 13, 1939, the Union wrote the Company requesting a
conference on "rates of remuneration and working conditions for
your employees, members of our Washington, D. C. local." Not
having received a reply to this letter, the Union, on October 25, 1939,
prepared its `petition herein and sent it to the Regional Office for
filing. On October 27, 1939, the Union received from the Company
a letter refusing the Union's request for a conference.
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 within the District of Colum-
bia, and tends to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing
commerce and the free flow of commerce.
40 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
V. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Company employs approximately 60 agents 2 in its 2 offices in
the District of Columbia. The Union requests that the appropriate
unit include all agents employed by the Company in its two local
offices in the District of Columbia, excluding district managers, assist-
ant district managers, and office and clerical employees. The Com-
pany raises no objection to this request except for the question raised
by it as to the Board's jurisdiction.
We find that all agents employed by the Company in its two local
offices in the District of Columbia, located at 1003 K St., N. W., and
1712 L St., N. W., Washington, D. C., excluding district managers,
assistant district managers, and office and clerical employees, con-
stitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining
and that said unit will insure to employees of the Company the full
benefit of their right to self-organization and collective bargaining
and otherwise effectuate the policies of the Act.
VI. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
The Union furnished to the Trial Examiner evidence that it repre-
sents 34 of the approximately 60 employees within the unit. It re-
quests that an election be held, however. We find that the question
concerning representation which has arisen can best be • resolved by
an election by secret ballot.
Both the Union and the Company agree that if an election is di-
rected eligibility to vote in the election should be based upon a pay-
roll period as near the date of election as possible. We shall follow
our usual practice and direct that the employees of the Company
eligible to vote in the election shall be those within the appropriate
unit during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of
our Direction of Election herein, including employees who did not
work during such pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation,
and employees who were then or have since been temporarily laid off,
but excluding those 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 :
2 The Company 's agents are not sub -classified as "debit collectors " and "canvassers" as
in the case of certain other insurance companies similaily doing business within the Dis-
trict of Columbia . Matter o f Home Beneficial Association of Richmond . Va and Indus-
trial and Ordinary Insurance Agents ' Council, 17 N L R B 1027; Matter of Eureka
Maryland Assurance Corporation and Industrial and Ordinary Insurance Agents Union
No 21354, Industrial and Ordinary Insurance Agents Council, 17 N L. R. B 381;
Matter of ,Washtngton.Branch of he Sun Life Insurance Company of America and•Indus-
trial and Ordinary Insurance Agents Union No. 21354, Industrial and Ordinary Insurance
Agents Council , 15 N L. R. B 817.
EQUITABLE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY 41
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. A question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the repre-
sentation of employees of Equitable Life Insurance Company, Wash-
ington, D. C., within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6)
and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act.
2. All agents employed by the Company in its two local offices
in the District of Columbia, located at 1003 K St., N. W., and
1712 L St., N. W., Washington, D. C., excluding district managers,
assistant district managers, and office and clerical employees, consti-
tute 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 La-
bor Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Rela-
tions 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 Equitable Life Insurance Company, Washington, D. C., an
election by secret ballot 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 Direc-
tor for the Fifth Region, acting in the matter as agent for the Na-
tional Labor Relations Board, and subject to Article III, Section 9,
of said Rules and Regulations, among all agents employed by Equi-
table Life Insurance Company in its two local offices in the District
of Columbia, located at 1003 K St., N., W., and 1712 L St., N. W.,
Washington, D. C., who were employed during the pay-roll period
immediately preceding the date of this Direction of Election, includ-
ing employees who did not work during that period because they
were ill or on vacation, but excluding district managers, assistant dis-
trict managers, office, and clerical employees, and those who have since
quit or been discharged for cause, to determine whether or not they
desire to be represented by Industrial and Ordinary Insurance Agents
Union #21354 and Industrial and Ordinary Insurance Agents
Council, for the purposes of collective bargaining.