Hoover Ball and Bearing Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Dec 23, 1970

187 N.L.R.B. 428 (N.L.R.B. 1970)

428 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Tote Systems Division, Hoover Ball and Bearing
Company and Local Lodge 543 and Local Lodge
2289, International Association of Machinists and
Aerospace Workers , AFL-CIO (Jointly). Case
17-CA-4267
December 23, 1970
DECISION AND ORDER
BY CHAIRMAN MILLER AND MEMBERS BROWN
AND JENKINS
Upon a charge and amended charge filedjointly by
Local Lodge 543 and Local Lodge 2289, International
Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers,
AFL-CIO, hereafter referred to individually as
Local 543 and Local 2289, respectively, and jointly as
Charging Party, the General Counsel for the National
Labor Relations Board, by the Acting Regional
Director for Region 17, issued a complaint dated June
16, 1970, against Respondent, Tote Systems Division,
Hoover Ball and Bearing Company. The complaint
alleges , in substance, that Respondent had engaged in
and was engaging in certain unfair labor practices
within the meaning of Section 8(a)(5) and (1) and
Section 2(6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations
Act, as amended, by refusing to and continuing to
refuse to bargain collectively with Charging Party as
the duly designated representative of its employees for
purposes of collective bargaining by, unilaterally and
without notice to Charging Party, suspending its
practice of distributing Christmas gift certificates to
all employees at its Beatrice, Nebraska, and Lenox,
Iowa , plants. Respondent filed a timely answer
denying the commission of any unfair labor practices
and affirmatively pleading that while it did not
distribute the Christmas gifts as the complaint alleges,
such gifts were discretionary and not a subject of
collective bargaining.
On July 16, 1970, Respondent, Charging Party, and
counsel for the General Counsel jointly filed with the
Board in Washington, D.C., a "Motion to Transfer
Proceeding to the Board and Stipulation of Parties."
The motion stated that the parties agreed that the
stipulation of facts, together with the attached
exhibits, should constitute the entire record; that the
parties waive their right to a hearing before a Trial
Examiner and the issuance of a Trial Examiner's
Decision; and that the case be submitted directly to
the Board for findings of fact, conclusions of law, and
for decision and order.
On July 23, 1970, the Board approved the aforesaid
stipulation, and transferred the matter to the Board.
Thereafter, the General Counsel and Respondent
filed briefs with the Board.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the
National Labor Relations Board has delegated its
powers in connection with this case to a three-member
panel.
Upon the basis of the aforesaid stipulation, the
briefs, and the entire record in this case, the Board
makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. JURISDICTION
Respondent, a Delaware corporation, is engaged in
the manufacture of sheet metal products, including
material handling systems, fertilizer spreaders and
applicators, and beer barrels at its plants in Beatrice,
Nebraska, and Lenox, Iowa. During the past year, in
the course and conduct of its business, Respondent
shipped goods valued in excess of $50,000 from both
its Beatrice, Nebraska, and Lenox, Iowa, plants
directly to points located outside the States of
Nebraska and Iowa, respectively, and received goods
valued in excess of $50,000 for its separate plants
directly from points outside the State of their
respective locations.
We find that Respondent is, and at all times
material herein has been, an employer engaged in
commerce and in operations affecting commerce
within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act,
and that it will effectuate the policies of the Act to
assert jurisdiction herein.
II. THE LABOR ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
Local Lodge 543 and Local Lodge 2289 , Interna-
tional Association of Machinists and Aerospace
Workers, AFL-CIO, are labor organizations within
the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act.
III. THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
The stipulated facts show that Respondent pur-
chased its Beatrice, Nebraska, plant in May 1960.
Production and maintenance employees were then
represented, and continue to be represented, for
collective-bargaining purposes by Local 543. The
Lenox, Iowa, plant was purchased by Respondent in
April 1965; Local 2289 did not become the represent-
ative for collective-bargaining purposes of Respon-
dent's production and maintenance employees until
March 1967. Separate collective-bargaining agree-
ments between Respondent and respective locals were
in effect at all times material herein.
The stipulated facts indicate that Respondent
adopted the practice of the predecessor employer at
the Beatrice plant by staging a Christmas party for all
employees in 1960. The party consisted of a family
dinner and gifts for children of employees. Respon-
187 NLRB No. 56
TOTE SYSTEMS DIV., HOOVER
dent changed this practice in 1962 by giving each
employee , at his choice , a ham or a turkey . In 1964,
Respondent again changed the nature of its Christmas
gift (after consulting with some of its employees)
whereby each employee at the Beatrice plant received
a gift certificate valued at $15 . All employees,
including office , management , and other nonunit as
well as unit employees , received the same gift
certificate , regardless of their particularjob , wage rate
or salary, seniority , or work performance . The only
condition was that the recipient of the gift certificate
had to be on Respondent ' s payroll on the day the
certificates were distributed . The amount of the gift
certificate was unilaterally determined by Respon-
dent by dividing the cost incurred by Respondent in
its last Christmas party by the number of employees
employed at that time at the Beatrice plant . Respon-
dent has not withheld Federal income taxes from the
amount of the gift certificates . The gift certificates
were distributed by mailing them directly to the
recipient ' s home , accompanied by a letter signed by
Respondent 's president.
Respondent also gave identical gift certificates,
under identical circumstances , to its employees at the
Lenox , Iowa, plant beginning with the Christmas of
1965. The practice of distributing such gift certificates
at both the Beatrice and Lenox plants was continuous
through Christmas 1968.
The Respondent ' s practice of giving these gift
certificates has never been a subject of collective
bargaining during any negotiation between either
Local 543 or Local 2289 . No reference to gift
certificates can be found in either of the current
collective-bargaining agreements covering unit em-
ployees at the Beatrice and Lenox plants. The
Respondent did not notify and attempt to bargain
429
with the Charging Party concerning its decision to
refrain from giving the gift certificates in 1969 to its
employees at each of the aforesaid plants . In this
regard , the Respondent 's practice has not been
eliminated but merely suspended in 1969 for econom-
ic reasons.
The facts stipulated in this case support Respon-
dent's contention that the Christmas gift certificates
were merely discretionary gifts and not compensa-
tion. The subject of Christmas gift certificates has
been regarded , throughout the course of the collec-
tive-bargaining history at both plants , as a matter
resting solely within the discretion of Respondent.
Further , the practice of Christmas gifts was unilateral-
ly instituted and unilaterally changed in form by
Respondent and has never been made a subject of
collective bargaining . It is also apparent from the
record that the gift certificates were in no way related
to an employee 's job performance , hours worked, or
seniority . The gift certificates were nominal in
amount and were distributed to all employees without
regard to their tenure or position . We find , upon the
foregoing facts , that the Christmas gift certificates are
not terms and conditions of employment , and that
Respondent 's decision to suspend , and its suspension
of, the distribution of Christmas gift certificates in
1969 to all employees for economic reasons did not
violate Section 8(a)(5) and ( 1) of the Act. Accordingly,
we shall dismiss the complaint in its entirety.
ORDER
Pursuant to Section 10(c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, as amended , the National Labor
Relations Board hereby orders that the complaint
herein be , and it hereby is, dismissed in its entirety.