Houde Engineering Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 22, 1942

42 N.L.R.B. 713 (N.L.R.B. 1942)

In the' Matter of HOUDE ENGINEERING CORPORATION and INTERNA-
TIONAL UNION, U A. W.-C. I. 0 LOCAL 850'
In the Matter of HOUDAILLE-HERSHEY CORPORATION AND HOU'DE ENGI-
NEERING CORPORATION and INTERNATIONAL UNION, UNITED AUTO-
MOBILE, AIRCRAFT AND AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF
AMERICA (C I O }
Cases Nos R-3059 and 0-2185, respectively -Decided July 22, 1942
Jurisdiction : automobile and airplane parts manufacturing industry
Unfair Labor Practices
Interference, Rest?aint, and Coeicion interference with Boaid election found
upon stipulated evidence
Company-Dominated Union; domination of organization found upon stipulated
evidence, by support afforded such organization, namely, pioviding meeting
facilities, perinittiing elections to be held on company time and property, per-
mitting sale of raffle and dance tickets and operation of candy wagon by which
organization secured its income, and enhancing organization's prestige by
attributing announced,wage increase to its bargaining efforts
Remedial Orders : dominated organization ordered disestablished, contract with
dominated organization abrogated '
Practice and Procedure : knowledge of Board agents at time of Board's Direction
of Election of certain aspects of employer's unlawful conduct held not to pre-
clude Board from finding employer to have engaged in unfair labor practices;
where agents were not apprised of all of employer's unlawful activities, and
where employer continued its unlawful conduct after election was directed and
devised new and different means of interference -election set aside and
petition dismissed without prejudice
J
Mr Peter J Crotty,,for the Board
Beaumont, Smith, and Harris. by Mr Melville C Mason, of Detroit,
Mich, for the respondent -
Mr. Maurice Sugar, of Detroit, Mich, and Leider, Watt, and Cam-
mer, by Mr. Harold I Cammer, of New York City, for the C I O.
Mr Holland V Williams, of Buffalo, N Y, for the Association.
Mr. Marvzn C Wahl, of counsel to the Board
DECISION
AND
ORDER
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On August 20, 1941, International Union, United Automobile Air-
craft and Agricultural Implement Workers of America, C. I. 0,
42NLRB,No142
713
714 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
herein called the C. I. 0., filed with the Regional Director for the
Third Region ( Buffalo, New York) a petition alleging that a question
affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of em-
ployees of Houde Engineering Corporation, Buffalo, New York, and
requesting an investigation and certification of representatives, pur-
suant to Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat.
449, herein called the Act On October 31, 1941, the National Labor
Relations Board , herein called the Board, issued its Decision and
Direction of Election 1 On November 25, 1941, pursuant to the afore-
said Direction of Election, an election-by secret ballot was conducted
among certain employees in a unit found appropriate to determine
whether they desired to be represented by the C I. 0., or by Houde
Welfare & Athletic Association, herein called the Association, a labor
organization claiming to represent employees of Houde Engineering
Corporation, or by neither On November 26, 1941, the Regional Di-
rector issued an Election Report, showing that a majority of the em-
ployees had voted in favor of the Association 2 On December 1, 1941,
the C I. O. filed objections to the conduct of the election, alleging in
substance that, by specified statements and conduct, a free choice of
representatives had been prevented In his Report on Objections,
dated December 26,1941, the Regional Director found that the matters
to,which the objections were directed raised "substantial and material
issues with respect to the conduct of the election . . ."
On December 11, 1941, and on January 12 and April 8, 1942, respec-
tively, the C I 0 filed charges and amended charges with the Regional
Director against the Houde Engineering Corporation and Houdaille-
Hershey Corporation, herein called Houde and the respondent, respec-
tively. In the meantime, by order dated March 20, 1942, the Board,
having found that the C I O"s objections raised substantial and mate-
rial issues with respect to the conduct of the ballot of November 25,
1941, directed that a hearing be held on the objections and, pursuant
to Article II, Section 36 (b) and Article III, Section 10 (c) (2), of
National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as
amended, ordered that the unfair labor practice proceeding be con-
solidated with ,the representation proceeding On April 8, 1942, the
Board, by the Regional Director, issued its amended complaint against
Houde and the respondent, alleging that they had engaged in and
1 Matter of Houde Engcneering Corporation and International Union, U A. W -0 L 0.,
Local 850, 36 N L R. B 587
2 As to the results of the balloting, the Regional Director reported, in part, as follows :
Total on eligibility list------------------------------------------ 2218
Total ballots cast-------------------------------------- --------- 2049
Total valid votes counted--------------------------------------- 2022
Votes cast for the Association------------------------------------ 1048
Votes cast for the C I 0--------------------------------------- 937
Votes cast for neither------------------------------------------ 37
HOUDE ENGINEERING CORPORATION 715
were'engaging in unfair labor practices affecting commerce,'within the
meaning of Section 8 (1), (2), and (3) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of
the Act. Copies of the amended complaint and of the C. I O's objec-
tions to the election, together with notice, of hearing thereon, were
duly served upon the parties.
With respect to the unfair labor practices, the complaint alleged in
substance that Houde and the respondent at the Buffalo, New York,
plant : (1) since on or about July 5, 1935, by various specified acts and
conduct, openly discouraged membership in the Union and encouraged
membership in the Association; (2,) since on or about July 5, 1935,
dominated and interfered with the formation and administration of
the Association and contributed financial and other support to it;
and (3) by the , foregoing 'acts, interfered with, restrained, and
coerced its employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in
Section 7 of the Act 3
On April 30, 1942, during the course of the hearing, the respondent
Houdaille filed an answer in which it denied that it had committed
any of the unfair labor practices alleged in the complaint On the
same date, a motion by" Houde, requesting that the complaint be
dismissed as to it, was denied by the Trial Examiner and Houde
thereupon filed its answer interposing a general denial to the allega-
tions of the complaint. 'Thereafter, counsel for the Board moved,
with the consent of all parties, that the complaint be dismissed as to
Houde, and the respondent Houdaille, in a stipulation entered into by
all parties, formally assumed "any responsibility or liability which
the Board in this proceeding might find would have attached to the
Houde Engineering Corporation in the absence of the motion ..."
The motion to dismiss as against Houde is hereby granted.
Pursuant to notice, a hearing was held at Buffalo, New York, from
April 20 to 22, 1942, inclusive, before A. Bruce Hunt, the Trial Ex-
aminer duly designated by the Chief Trial Examiner. All parties
were represented by counsel and participated in the hearing , After
some testimony had been adduced through certain witnesses and
counsel for all parties had had full opportunity to examine and
cross-examine such witnesses, the parties entered into a stipulation,
agreeing upon a statement of facts to serve as the basis for our De-
cision and Order herein, and expressly waiving further hearing, the
issuance of an Intermediate Report or Proposed Findings of Fact,
or other proceedings before the Board.
The stipulation provides as follows •
' The complaint also alleged that on December 26, 1941, Joseph Peacock and Thomas
Nelson were discriminatorily transferred from their regular jobs to less remunerative
employment in violation of Section 8 (3) of the Act Upon motion of counsel foi the
Board, in which all parties joined, these allegations were stricken from the complaint
716 DECISIONS ' OF 'NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
The Houdaille-Heishey Corporation, in this stipulation called
the Respondent, the Regional Attorney for the Thnd Region of
the National Laboi Relations Board, in this stipulation called the
Regional Attorney, the Houde Welfare & Athletic Association,
in this stipulation called the Association, and the International
Union, United Automobile, Ancraft & Agricultuial Implement
Workers of America (CIO), in this stipulation called the Chaig-
ing Union (said person and panties being refeiied to in this
stipulation as "The Parties") hereby enter into the following
stipulation, which shall be supplemental to the testimony and
exhibits pieviously given and received in evidence
I
i
The Board may find the following facts with the same foice
and effect as though supported by evidence in the iecoid
(a) The name of the Association at all times since its forma-
tion in 1933 has been "Houde Welfare & Athletic Association"
(b) The Association has had two constitutions, the first being
its constitution in effect fi om the date 'of its formation until
October, 1941 And the second being its constitution adopted
during October, 1941 and now in effect' These constitutions are
Board's Exhibits 8 and 9
(c) Commencing in 1933, representatives of the Houde Engi-
neering Corporation and the Association niet on more than one
occasion each year for the purpose of discussing wages, hours
and working conditions in the plant
During these discussions annual agreements were aiiived at
Up. to and including the year 1936 these agreements weie oral
and, when arrived at, the terms thereof were posted on the bulletin
boards by the management and the Association for the informa-
tion of the employees
Subsequent to the year 1936, the agreements weie reduced to
writing and were signed by the parties
On March 11'.1942, Houde Engineering Division of the Hou-
daille-Hershey Corporation and the Association entered into
a written agreement which is presently in effect and which, by
its terms, is effective until January,31, 1943
During one or more years subsequent to 1933, there were other
meetings between representatives of the Houde Engi ieeiing Cor-
poration and the Association, at which such i epi esentatives dis-
cussed and agreed upon modifications of the woiking agreement
then in existence
Copies of the written agreements referred to are marked as
Board's Exhibits 10 to 16, inclusive
HOIIDE ENGINEERING CORPORATION 717
(d) Duiing the period from its formation in 1933 until De-
cember 31, 1937, the Association held its annual elections, on
company time and property In 1938 and theieaftei, by direc-
tion of the Houde Engineering Coipoi ition, such elections on
company time and property were ceased The Association there-
aftei conducted its elections elsewhere on employees' time.
(e) Fionm the time of its formation in 1933, through December
31, 1937, meeting facilities for the bond of iepiesentatives of the
Association were piovicled by the Houcle Engineeiing Coipora'-
tion on company property without cost to the Association In
1938 and thereafter, by direction of Houde Engineering Corpora-'
tion, such meetings on company piopeity were ceased Such
meetings thereaftei were conducted elsewhere
(f) Fi om sometime during the yeai 1933 until November 25,
1941, the Association operated a candy wagon in the plant, with
the permission of the management, for the sale of candy, novelties
and notions to employees No charge was made by the manage-
ment therefor The Association retained the pi ofit s thei efrom,
averaging about $1000 annually, foi its own use On November
25, 1941, upon direction of the Houde Engineering Coipoiation,
such activity was ceased
(g) Fiom the date of its formation in 1933 until December 31,
1939, members 'of the Association, with the knowledge of the
management, occasionally sold raffle and dance tickets on com-
pany property during working horns foi the purpose of iaisrng
funds for the Association
(h) The Association collected no dues from its menibeis until
November 25, 1941 Thereafter the Association assessed its mem-
bers the sum of fifty cents (500) each per month as dues Prior
to that date the Association's sole income was derived from the
activities mentioned in Paragraphs (f) and (g) above Subse-
quent to that date, its sole income has been by means of dues
II
The Charging Union hereby amends its objections previously
filed to the election of November 25, 1941, in Case No R-3059,
so that the specifications of objections therein contained shall
read as set out below in the paragraphs of II The Regional.
Attorney, the Association and the Respondent hereby stipulate
that the objections as so amended are meritorious and that the
National Labor Relations Board may find them as facts with the
same force and effect as though supported by evidence' in the
record The parties agree that the stipulated facts set out below
in the said paragraphs of IT, occurred between the dates of the
718 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Boaid's direction of election in Case No R-3059 and November
25, 1941 _
(a) Two foremen made wagers with employees that the Charg-
ing Union would lose the election
(b) A supervisory employee charged employees who wore CIO
buttons, in the presence of other employees , with being paid
agents of outsiders
(c) Foremen fraternized openly with officials of the Associa-
tion in the presence of employees in the plant during working
hours ,
(d) Foremen maintained surveillance over known CIO ad-'
herents while certain Association officials had access to various
parts of the plant and campaigned without interference.
,(e) Officers of the Association engaged in solicitation and elec-
tioneering on company property
,(f) Supervisory employees charged adherents of the Charging
Union with the commission of minor factory offenses when they
knew that such charges were unfounded
(g) A foreman of a department said to an employee in the
plant "The Association is a good thing "
(h) A supervisory employee spoke of the CIO in the presence
of employees as a "Communist-racketeering " organization.
(i) The Houde Engineering Corporation and the Association
entered into discussions which resulted in a wage increase and
announced it nineteen ( 19) days before the election Photostatic
copies of the wage increase were posted by the management on
plant bulletin boards
III
The parties recognize that some or all of the agreed facts set
forth in all the paragraphs of I and II above, have been held in
various cases by the National Labor Relations Board, in this
stipulation called "The Board ," and the Appellate Courts to
constitute evidence of unfair labor practices within the meaning
of Section 8 (1) and ( 2) of the National Labor Relations Act
IV
The parties agree that the admitted facts set , forth in the
paragraphs of I above were fully known to the charging Union
and to the Third Regional Office of the Board, through the
Regional Director and the Regional Attorney , prior to the filing
of the petition by the Charging Union in Case No. R-3059 and
prior to the holding of the election thereunder.
i
HOUDE ENGINEERING CORPORATION 719
The parties also agree that the facts mentioned in the para-
graphs of I, were discussed at meetings held on November 6th
and 18,.1941, for the purpose of making arrangements for the
election to be held on November 25, 1941. Said meetings were
attended by representatives of the Board, the Charging Union, the
Association, and, Houde Engineering Corporation.
The parties further agree that no charge alleging unfair labor
practices within the meaning of Section 8 (1) and (2) of the
National Labor Relations Act was filed by the Charging Union
in Case No III-C-531 with any office of the National Labor
Relations Board until December 11, 1941.
V
It is the position of the Respondent and the Association that,
notwithstanding the admitted facts set forth in the paragraphs
of II above, the filing of said petition by the charging union and
the issuance by the Board of its direction of election thereunder
at a time when the charging union and the Third Regional Office
of the Board, through the Regional Diiector and the Regional
Attorney , had full knowledge of the facts admitted in the para-
graphs of rand IV above, together with the failure of the union
to file charges of unfair labor practices on account thereof, con-
stitute a bar under the Board's policy to a finding in this pro-
ceeding of unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section
8 (1) and ( 2) of the National Labor Relations Act and also con-
stitute a bar to the issuance by the Board in this proceeding of an
order requiring the disestablishment of the Association and the
withdrawal of recognition therefrom by the Respondent.
VI
The Regional Attorney moves, and the charging union joins
in his motion, to strike from the amended complaint the follow-
ing subdivisions of Paragraph 7: (c), (d), (e), (f), (g), and
(k) ; and the words "time and" from Subdivision (a) of Para-
graph 7; and all of Paragraphs 9 and 10
VII,
The Respondent and Houde Engineering Corporation move
to amend their separate answers so that in said answers the
Respondent and Houde Engineering Corporation will deny all
allegations of the amended complaint, as modified by motions of
the Board's attorney in this stipulation, except as,such allega-
tions are admitted in said separate answers and by this stipulation.
720 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
VIII
If the Board shall be of the opinion that no finding of unfair
labor practices should be made against the Respondent based upon
the record in this proceeding and the present stipulation, and
should also be of opinion that no older should be entered direct-
ing the Respondent to disestablish the Association, then the parties
hereby request that the Board direct an election to be held be-
tween the dates of July 25, 1942, and July 31, 1942, in the unit
previously found to be appropriate by the.Boaid in Case R-3059
(except that the parties now request that watchmen and produc-
tion clerks, whose duties have recently been changed be excluded
from the appropriate unit) The parties further request that in
such election both the Association and the Charging Union be
on the ballot and that the employees eligible to vote thereat be
the employees within the appropriate unit as shown by the Re-
spondent's payroll of April 18, 1942, excluding all employees who
may quit or may be discharged for cause prior to the holding of
the election The parties further request that no mail ballots
/be used in the election.
IX
The Association hereby withclra-N-,s any claim that it be certi-
fied as the exclusive representative of the employees of the Re-
spondent on the basis of the election of November 25, 1941, if
another election is ordered by the Board
X
The parties agree that the agreement now in existence between
the Association and the Respondent is not a bar to the conduct of
the election requested in VIII above.
XI
The Regional Attorney hereby moves that there be stricken from
the amended complaint all allegations charging Houde Engineer-
ing Corporation with the commission of unfair labor practices.
The Respondent hereby assumes any responsibility or liability
which the Board in this proceeding might find would have at-
tached to the Houde Engineering Corporation in the absence of
the motion made by the Regional Attorney in this paragraph
XII
The Respondent , the Association and the Charging Union agree
that the Board's decision on the questions of whether the Asso-
i HOUDE ENGINEERING CORPORATION 721
ciation shall be disestablished by the Respondent and whether
secognition•shall be withdrawn from the Association by the Re-
spondent, shall be complied with by the parties and they will not
appeal from the Board's decision and order to the appropriate
Circuit Court o1 Couits of Appeals
XIII
Should the Boaid oidei Case No III-0-531 transferred to
itself and direct that the Trial Examiner not prepare an inter-
mediate report, the parties hei eby agree to waive such report and
to accept, without question, such older
XIV
The Respondent, the Association, and the Chaiging Union
heieby iequest that an opportunity be given them to argue orally
befoie the Boaid in Washington, D C, on the issues in this
pi oceeding,
XV
The pasties heieby AN aive the filing of an answer by the Asso-
ciation in case No III-C-531 and it is understood by all parties
that the Association denies all allegations of the amended com-
plaint, as modified by the above motions of the Regional Attorney,
except as such allegations ate admitted by this stipulation.
XVI
This stipulation is entered into with the express understanding'
that should the Board decline to approve the same, the hearing in
the consolidated pioceeduig, presently to be recessed, will be re-
sumed upon five days' notice to all paities
XVII
The above stipulation constitutes the entire agreement between
the paities and there is no oral of written understanding between
the pasties or any statement which varies the terms of the stipu-
lation ,
Puisuant to notice, a hearing was held before the Maid at Washing-
ton, D C , on June 11, 1942, for the pin pose of oral argument. The
respondent, the C I 0 , and the Association were represented by coun-
sel and participated in the argument The parties also filed briefs
which the Board has considered
472814-42-vol 42-46
722' DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE RESPONDENT
The respondent, Houdaille-Hershey Corporation, is a Michigan
corporation operating a plant at Buffalo, New York, where it is en-
gaged in the manufacture of automobile and airplane parts During
1941; in connection with the operations at its Buffalo plant, the re-
spondent purchased materials valued in excess of $1,000,000, over 20
percent of which represented receipts from sources outside the State
of New York. During the same period, over 50 percent of its finished
products, having a value in excess of $3,000,000, were shipped to points
outside the State of New York At the time of the hearing, the re-
spondent employed approximately 2,700 persons at its Buffalo plant 4
II THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
International Union, United Automobile, Aircraft and Agricultural
Implement Workers of America (C I O) is a labor organization affili-
ated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations Houde Welfare
& Athletic Association is an unaffiliated labor organization Both
admit to member ship employees of the respondent
III THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
'A Domination and interference with, the forinataon and administra-
tion of the Association -
The parties stipulated, and we find, the following facts concern-
ing assistance and support accorded the Association by Houde up to
the date of the election in the representation proceeding From Octo-
ber 1933 to December 31, 1937, the respondent provided free meeting
facilities for the board of representatives of the Association and per-
mitted the Association to hold its annual elections on the respondent's
time and property From the time of the Association 's formation in
October 1933 to December 31, 1939, the Association, with the respond-
ent's knowledge, was permitted to sell raffle and dance tickets on the
respondent's property during working hours for the purpose of rais-
ing funds for the Association Up to November 25, 1941, the date
' Houde, a New York corporation , was until February 28, 1942, a wholly owned sub-
sidiary of the respondent On that date , Houde filed a certificate of dissolution , conveying
all its assets , subject to its liabilities , to the respondent Houdaille , which thereupon
commenced operation of the Houde plant as one of its divisions Since Houdaine assumed
responsibility for the acts of Houde, the unfair labor, practices are herein directly attrib-
uted to Houdaille as the respondent and oui order will be directed to it
- HOUDE ENGINEERING CORPORATION 723
upon which the election was held, the Association, with the respond-
ent's permission, opeiated a candy wagon in the plant and sold candy
and novelties to the employees The respondent did not charge the
Association for such privilege and the Association retained the profits
from its sales, which averaged $1,000 annually This sum, together
with the 'moneys derived from the sale of dance and raffle tickets,
represented the Association's total income, inasmuch as that organ-
ization did not levy any dues until November 25, 1941 It further
appears from the stipulation that since 1933, the respondent and the
Association met at least once annually to discuss wages, hours, and
working conditions Agreements were reached which, until 1937,
were oral, thei eafter, the agreements were reduced to writing
The parties stipulated that the Regional Director and the Regional
Attorney, at conferences with the parties hereto prior to the filing
of the petition in the representation proceeding and again on No-
vember 6 and 18, 1941, discussed the facts which are hereinabove set
forth and thus acquired full knowledge of them However, it does
not appear from the stipulation, and we are unable to find, that
the agents of the Board were, aware, on the date of their last con-
ference, of the conduct which pei sisted after such conference, i e,
the operation of the candy wagon and the sale of dance and iaffle
tickets until November 25, the date of the election
Between October 31, 1941, the date of the Direction of Election,
and November 25, 1941, the date of the election, ` the respondent
engaged in other unlawful conduct,. different in character from the
acts of support and assistance of which the Board's agents were ap-
prised on November 18 - These new and diffeient acts, of which the
Board's agents were ignorant, are covered by the complaint and also
form the basis of the C I O's objections to the conduct of the
election They are agieed upon by the parties and' may be summa-
rized as follows- Foremen of the respondent made wagers with the
employees that the C I 0 would lose the election and openly fiat-
ernized with officials of the Association in the piesence of other
employees during working hours. One supervisoi accused employees
who wore C I. O. buttons of being "paid agents of outsiders"; others
charged adherents of the C I 0 with the commission of minor fac-
toryoffenses, knowing that such charges were unfounded A super-
visory employee characterized the C I. 0 to othei employees as a
"Communist-racketeering" organization; other supervisors main-
tained surveillance over known C. I O. adherents A foreman of
one of the departments indicated to an employee his preference for
the Association. During this period, Association officials had access
to various parts of the plant and, before the election, campaigned and
solicited -without interference Following the Board's Direction of
i
724 DECISIONS OF, NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Election and 19 days piior to the election, the respondent announced
that a wage mciease had been granted as a iesult of discussions with
the Association and copies of the announcement Ai ere 'posted on the
plant bulletin boards
B Conclusions
The respondent does not seriously deny that the activities in which
it has engaged constitute a violation of Section 8 (1) and (2) of
the Act, as alleged in the complaint In addition, the respondent
admits that its conduct between October 31 and Novembei 25, 1941,
set forth above, inteifeied with a free choice of representatives by
the employees and constituted "meritorious" objections to the elec-
tion However, the respondent contends that the Boaid is precluded
from finding that the respondent has engaged in unfair labor prac-
tices in violation of Section 8 (1) and (2) of the Act, and flout
issuing an oidei requiting the disestablishment of the Association and
the wvithdiawal of recognition therefrom, for the ieason that at the
time of issuance of the Direction of Election, the Board, through its
Regional Diiector and Regional Attorney, had full knowledge of cer-
tain aspects of the unlawful conduct engaged in by the respondent
We find this contention to be without mei it The instant pi oceed-
ing is to be distinguished fiom those cases where all paities, including
an agent of the Boaid, having knowledge of an employer's un-
lawful conduct under Section 8 (2), nevertheless agiee to the holding
of an election In such cases, we have held that effective administra-
tion of the Act requited us to dismiss the complaint insofar as it was
based upon the employei's unlaii ful acts preceding the election 5 We
are confronted here, however, with a situation requiring the applica-
tion of a different piinciple Not all the respondent's unlawful ac-
tivities which occurred prior to November 18, 1941, were known to
the agents of the Board Thus, for example, they did not know that
the respondent's foremen had made disparaging comments to the'
employees concerning the C I 0 nor that they had-indicated their
preference foi the Association Nor did the Boaid's agents have
any knowledge that, in the campaign preceding the election, the
Association's officers were given access to various parts of the plant
while the activities of the C. I 0 adherents were subject to sur-
veillance Furthei, it does not appear that the agents of the Board
knew that the respondent had announced a wage increase, just prior
to the election, attributing it to, bargaining efforts of the Associa-
tion Moreovei, the Board had no ieason to believe that the unlawful
'Matte) of Wickwire Bi others and Amalgamated Ass'n of lion, Steel & Tin Workers
of North America, etc, 16 N L R B 316, Matter of Hope Webbing Company and Textile
Workers Organizing ConVinittee of the C 10, Local No 14, 14 N L R B 55
HOUDE ENGINEERING CORPORATION 725
activities of which its agents were apprised would continue or that the
respondent would devise new and different means of inteifeience,
for these is inherent in the Boaid's willingness to conduct an elec-
tion under such circumstances an understanding that the iespondent's
unfair labor piactices shall cease 6 Where, after the Board has thus
directed an election, an employer persists in a course of conduct
violative of the Act, the prior knowledge of our agents becomes im-
material and inopeiative, and we will consider the whole of the em-
ployer's conduct in determining whether or not he has infringed
Section 8 (2) of the Act A contrary policy would in effect reward
the employer for violating* a trust we had lodged in him. Further-
more, lack of knowledge on the part of the Board's agents concerning
the acts of interference with the C I 0 and the disparity of the
respondent's treatment of the rival organizations during the election
campaign would in any event distinguish this case from those upon
which the respondent relies in its defense '
We find that, by providing, without cost, meeting facilities to
the Association, by permitting it to sell tickets and candy on its
premises and to retain the profits therefrom, by disparaging the
C I 0 and voicing its preference for the Association, by permitting
officers of the Association to circulate freely among the employees
prior to the election, but maintaining"surveillance over the activities
of the C. I 0 , and by attributing an announced wage increase to the
bargaining efforts of the Association shortly before the election, the
respondent has dominated and Interfered with the administration of
the Association and contributed financial and other support to it,
thereby interfei ing with, i esti aining, and coercing its employees in the
exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act
We also find that the respondent by the above-described acts has
interfered with the conduct of the election and has thereby prevented
a fiee choice of representatives by its employees.
IV THE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES UPON COMMERCE
We find that the activities of the respondent set forth in Section III,
above, occurring in connection with the operations of the respondent
described in Section I, above, have a close, intimate, and substantial
In Matter of nVwkwpe B,othc,s and Amalgamated Association of Wire, Steel and Tin
rl'o; ke S of Not th Anae> Ica, supra, w esheld
If the iespondent had engaged in further unfair labor practices after the consent
election , we would disregard the consent-election agrcement Any such agreement
obviously contemplates that the employer will not engage in any further unfair labor
practices , It the respondent 's conduct after the consent election showed a continuity
with its conduct prior thereto , we would consider the whole of the respondent's con-
duct' in deteimuung whether the respondent had engaged in unfair labor practices
with respect to the Association -
726 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATION'S-BOARD
relation to trade, traffic, and commerce among the several States and
tend to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce
and the free flow of commerce.
V THE REMEDY
Having found that the respondent has engaged in certain unfair
labor practices, we shall order it to cease and desist therefrom and
to take ceitam affirmative action designed to effectuate the policies
of the Act
We have found that the respondent has,dominated and interfered
with the4 administration of the Association and Conti ibuted financial
and other support to it In order to free the employees of the re-
spondent from such, domination and interference and the effects
thereof, which constitute a continuing obstacle to the exercise by the
employees of the rights guaranteed them by the Act, we shall order
the respondent to withdraw all recognition from the Association as
the representative of any of the respondent's employees for the pur-
poses of dealing with the respondent concerning grievances, laboi
disputes, wages, rates of pay, hours of employment, and other con-
ditions of work and completely to disestablish it as such represent-,
ative Nothing herein shall be taken, however, to require the re-
spondent to vary those wage, hour, and othei substantive features of
its relations with the employees themselves, if any, which the re-
spondent has established in performance of its contract with the Asso-
ciation, as extended, renewed, modified, supplemented, or superseded.
Since we have found that the respondent, by its unfair labor prac-
tices, has interfered with the conduct of the election and the free
choice of repi esentatives by its employees at the election of November
25, 1941, we shall set aside and vacate the election In view of the
fact that almost a year has elapsed since the C. I 0. filed its petition
for certification, we shall dismiss that petition without prejudice
to,the institution of a. new proceeding at any time. Since we shall
order the respondent, as above stated, to disestablish the Association
and withdraw i ecognition therefrom, we shall direct, in any election
to be conducted in the future, that the Association shall have no
place upon the ballot
Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and upon the entire
record of the case, the Board makes the following :
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1 International Union, United Automobile, Aircraft and Agri-
cultural Implement Workers of, America ( C I. 0) and Houde Wel-
HOUDE ENGINEERING CORPORATION' - 727
fare & Athletic Association are labor organizations, within the mean-'
ing of Section 2 (5) of the Act. `
2. By dominating and interfering with the administration of
Houde Welfare & Athletic Association and contributing financial and
other support thereto, the respondent has engaged in and is engaging
in unfair labor practices, within the meaning of Section 8 (2) of
the Act
3. By interfering with, restraining, and coercing its employees in
the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act, the
respondent has engaged in and is engaging iii unfair labor practices,
within the meaning of Section 8 (1) of the Act.
4. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair labor practices
affecting commerce, within the meaning of Section 2 (6) and, (7)
of the Act.
ORDER
Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and conclusions of
law, and pursuant to Section 10 (c) of the National Labor Relations
Act, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that the
respondent, Houdaille-Hershey Corporation, Buffalo, New York, and
its officers, agents, successors, and assigns shall
1 Cease and desist from
(a) Dominating or interfering with the administration of Houde
Welfare & Athletic Association, or with the formation or the ad-
ministration of any other labor organization of its employees, and
contributing financial or other support to Houde Welfare & Athletic
Association, or to any other labor organization of its employees;
(b) Recognizing Houde Welfare & Athletic Association as the
representative of any of its employees for the purposes of dealing
with the respondent concerning grievances, labor disputes, wages,
rates of pay, hours of employment, or other conditions of work;
(c) Giving effect to any agreement which it may have with Houde
Welfare & Athletic Association;
(d) In any other manner interfering with, restraining, or coerc-
ing its employees in the exercise of the right to self-organization, to
form, join, or assist labor organizations, to bargain collectively
through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in
concerted activities for the purposes of collective bargaining or other
mutual aid or protection, as guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act.
2 Take the following affirmative action which the Board finds will
effectuate the policies of the Act
(a) Withdraw all recognition from Houde Welfare & Athletic
Association as the -representative of any of its employees for the
purpose of dealing with the respondent concerning grievances, labor
728 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
disputes, wages, iates of pay, hours -of employment, or other con-
ditions of work and completely disestablish Houde Welfare & Ath-
letic Association as such representative;
(b) Immediately post in conspicuous places thioughout its Buffalo,
New York, plant, and maintain for a period of at least sixty (60)
consecutive days from the date of posting, notices to its employees,
stating (1) that the respondent will not engage in the conduct from
which it is ordered to cease and desist in paragraphs 1 (a), (b), (c),
and (d) hereof, and (2) that the respondent will take the affirmative
action set forth in paragraph 2 (a) hereof,
(c) Notify the Regional Director for the Thiid Region in writing
within ten (10) days from the date of this Order, what steps the
respondent has taken to comply herewith
AND IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the election previously held on
November 25, 1941, be, and it hereby is, vacated and set aside and
the petition is hereby dismissed without prejudice.
MR GERARD D REILLY took no part in the consideration of the
above Decision and Order