Hazel-Atlas Glass Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Dec 1, 1944

59 N.L.R.B. 706 (N.L.R.B. 1944)

In the Matter of HAZEL-ATLAS GLAss COMPANY AND CLARKSBURG
PAPER COMPANY and FEDERATION OF GLASS , CERAMIC AND SILICA
SAND WORKERS OF AMERICA , C. I. O.
Case No. 6-B-1015.-Decided December 1, 1944
Messrs. W. G. Stuart Sherman and Jerome Black, for the Board.
Messrs. James M. Guiher and Karl Weaver, of Clarksburg, W. Va.,
for the Company.
Holmes, Lewis & Menendez, by Mr. W. T. Lewis, of, Columbus,
Ohio, and Mr. Joseph Froesch, of Columbus, Ohio, for the CIO.
Messrs. Kenneth G. Jackson and George Dougherty, of Pittsburgh,
Pa., for the Association.
Mr. W. G. Stathers, of Clarksburg, W. Va., and Messrs. Richard
R. Lyman and Harry H. Cook, of Toledo, Ohio, for the Flints.
Miss Frances Lopinsky, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
ORDER
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon a petition duly filed by Federation of Glass, Ceramic &
Silica Sand Workers of America, C. I. 0., herein called the CIO,
alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the
representation of employees of Hazel-Atlas Glass Company and
Clarksburg Paper Company, Clarksburg, West Virginia, herein indi-
vidually called the Glass Company and the Paper Company, and
collectively called the Company or Companies, the National Labor
Relations Board provided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice
before Louis Plost, Trial Examiner. Said hearing was held at
Clarksburg, West Virginia, on October 17, 19, and 20, 1944. The
Company, the CIO, and National Association of Manufacturers of
Pressed and Blown Glassware, herein called the Association, and
American Flint Glass Workers Union of North America, A. F. of L.,
herein called the Flints, appeared and participated. All parties were
afforded full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine
witnesses , and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues. The trial
59 N. L . R. B., No. 142.
. 706
HAZEL-ATLAS GLASS COMPANY 707
Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial
error and are hereby affirmed. All parties were afforded an oppor-
tunity to file briefs with the Board. Inasmuch as all issues were
clearly presented at the hearing and in the briefs, oral argument
requested by the Flints and the CIO is hereby denied.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANIES
Hazel-Atlas Glass Company, a West Virginia corporation, operates
glass and mining properties throughout the United States. At its
plant in Clarksburg, West Virginia, it is engaged in the manufacture
and sale of various types of glass containers, such as glass jars, bottles,
tumblers, tableware, food containers, and specialty items. The prin.
cipal raw materials used at the Clarksburg plant are sand, soda-ash,
and limestone. The total amount of raw and other materials used by
the Glass Company at its Clarksburg plant during the year 1943
exceeded 61,000 tons in weight and $500,000 in cost, approximately 95
percent of which was procured from outside the State of West Vir-
ginia. The total amount of finished products manufactured by the
Glass Company at its Clarksburg plant in the year 1943 exceeded
$5,000,000 in value. Over 95 percent of these finished products was
shipped from the Clarksburg plant to points outside the State of
West Virginia.
Clarksburg Paper Company, a West Virginia corporation, has plants
attached or adjacent to the plants of the Glass Company, to which all
of the products of the Paper Company are sold. It is engaged in the
manufacture and sale of corrugated fiber shipping containers. Dur-
ing the year 1943, the approximate value of the raw and other materials
used by the Paper Company at its Clarksburg plant was in excess of
$1,000,000, of which approximately 100 percent was shipped to the
Clarksburg plant from points outside the State of West Virginia.
During 1943, the Paper Company sold and delivered its entire output
of corrugated fiber shipping containers to the Glass Company at its
plants within the State of West Virginia. The value of the Paper
Company's finished products in 1943 was in excess of $1,000,000.
The Companies admit and we find that they are engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
Federation of Glass, Ceramic and Silica Sand Workers of America.,
affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, is a labor
organization admitting to membership employees of the Company.
708 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
American Flint Glass Workers Union of North America, affiliatedwith
the American Federation of Labor, is a labor organization admitting
to membership employees of the Company.
M. THE ALLEGED APPROPRIATE UNIT; THE ALLEGED QUESTION CONCERNING
REPRESENTATION
Although the Paper Company is a separate corporate entity from
the Glass Company, it operates for all intents and purposes as a divi-
sion of the Glass Company. Labor policy for both companies is deter-
mined by the same man. All parties are in agreement that whether
the appropriate unit be plant-wide, as contended by the CIO, or asso-
ciation-wide, as contended by the Companies and the Flints, the Com-
panies constitute one entity for the purposes of collective bargaining.
The National Association of Manufacturers of Pressed and Blown
Glassware was organized in 1892, and exists for the sole purpose of
bargaining for its members with the Flints. It admits to membership
only glass companies engaged in what is termed the flint glass indus-
try as distinguished from the bottle making industry. The Associa-
tion is comprised of approximately 50 members, employing 20,000
individuals. In the entire industry, there are approximately 75 manu-
facturers with a total employment of approximately 30,000 individ-
uals. The Association has authority to bind its members in all matters
pertaining to collective bargaining with the Flints, with which it has
bargained for 50 years. In addition to its rules and regulations and
constitution which are reduced'to writing, the Association enforces a
set of unwritten rules and regulations which has grown by custom.
In 1937, the Company recognized the Flints as the exclusive bar-
gaining representative of its employees. It was not at that time a
member of the Association, but became a member prior to 1940. In
1940, a member of the CIO filed a charge against the Company alleg-
ing its assistance to the Flints' organization in 1937. In partial
settlement of this charge, the Company, the Flints and the CIO en-
tered into a consent election agreement covering the production and
maintenance employees of the Company. The Flints won by a vote
of 830 to 480. Thereafter the Company and the Flints entered into
a series of local agreements . Each agreement is titled "Local Agree-
ment" and contains a clause making it subordinate to the agreements
reached by the Joint Council of the Association and the Flints Inter-
national . Through the years from 1940 to 1944, the Company has
been , and it now is an active member of the Association. No pro-
vision in the local contracts runs counter to any provision of the
general contracts printed yearly by the International. The grievance
procedure , as set out in the local contracts, is taken verbatim from the
HAZEL-ATLAS GLASS COMPANY 709
master agreement . The master agreement provides for minimum
wages job by job, and for hours , working conditions , and a grievance
procedure including last resort to the Joint Council . It further pro-
vides for local handling of all local problems and for all matters not
covered by the master agreement.
The CIO contends that because the Company acceded to the consent
election agreement in 1940 without participation of the Association,
because voting in the 1940 election was confined to employees of the
Company's plant, and because the election was followed by a series
of local agreements , the association -wide unit has been repudiated by
the Company and its employees and a plant-wide unit has been estab-
lished and is appropriate .' We find no merit in this contention. The
consent election agreement concerned the legality of the Company's
recognition of the Flints in 1937 , a local problem which did not con-
cern the Association except collaterally . Not only do the circum-
stances of the election make it improbable that the issue of scope of
unit was then involved , but also, if the issue was involved , it may be
inferred that the Company's employees affirmed the multiplant unit
by selecting the Flints , because, at the time of the election , the Flints
was representing them in such a unit. In any event, the consent
election did not preclude the effective assimilation of the Company's
employees into a unit of broader scope through collective bargaining
following that election .2 Nor does the fact that the Company and
the Flints have operated under local agreement affect the scope of
the unit. The practice is common among employer associations han-
dling labor relations to allow and encourage local agreements to
implement the association -wide agreement.$
Under all the circumstances we find that the bargaining between
the Company and the Flints has been on an association -wide basis.4
We further find that the unit requested by the CIO is, therefore, in-
appropriate , and that accordingly , no question concerning representa-
tion of employees of the Company in an appropriate bargaining unit
has arisen within the meaning of Section 9 ( c) of the Act. We shall
therefore dismiss the petition.
'That the employees considered themselves as part of the association-wide unit is evi-
denced by the following resolution, passed August 3, 1944, by Local 569 of the Flints, which
represents miscellaneous employees in the Company's plant : that members of Local No. 569
"will not be a party to, or be bound by any contract or agreement entered into after this
date by or between the Manufacturing Association . . . the Hazel-Atlas Glass Company,
and the American Flint Glass Workers' Union of North America."
2 See Matter of Bethlehem-Fairfield Shipyard, Inc, 58 N. L. R. B. 579.
s See Matter of New Bedford Cotton Mfg. Association, 47 N. L R B. 1345; Matter of
Central Foundry Company, 48 N. L. R. B 5; Matter of Potlatch Forests, 51 N. L R. B. 288
and 52 N. L. R. B. 1377; Matter of Detroit Michigan Stove Company, 55 N -L R B. 1514.
4 See Matter of Alston Coal Company, 13 N. L. R. B. 683 ; Matter of Stevens Coal Com-
pany, 19 N. L. R. B. 98; Matter of Rayonier, Inc., Gray's Harbor Div., 52 N. L. R. B. 1269.
710 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ORDER
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and the entire
record in the case, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders
that the petition for investigation and certification of representatives
of employees of Hazel-Atlas Glass Company and Clarksburg Paper
Company, Clarksburg, West Virginia, filed by Federation of Glass,
Ceramic and Silica Sand Workers of America, C. I. 0., be, and it
hereby is, dismissed.