Interlake Iron Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 26, 1937

2 N.L.R.B. 1036 (N.L.R.B. 1937)

In the Matter Of INTERLAKE IRON CORPORATION and TOLEDO COUNCIL,
COMMITTEE FOR INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATION
Case No. R-149.-Decided June 06, 1937
Iron. and Steel Industry-Election Ordered : prior collective agreement with
rival organization recognizing it as exclusive representative no bar to ; con-
troversy concerning representation of employees: rival organizations ; substan-
tial doubt as to majority status ; refusal by employer to recognize petitioning
union as exclusive representative-Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining:
hourly rate employees ; eligibility for membership in both rival organizations-
Certification of Representatives.
Mr. Harry L. Lodish for the Board.
Mr. Edward W. Ford, of Chicago;-Ili., and, Mr. Leland, L. Lord,
of Toledo, Ohio, for the Company.
Mr. Edward Lamb, of Toledo, Ohio, for Toledo Council, Commit-
tee for Industrial Organization.
Mr. Arthur E. Reyman, of New York City, for Blast Furnace
and Coke Oven Workers' Union Local No. 20572.
Mr. Alexander B. Hawes, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
STATEMENT OF CASE
On, April 29, 1937, Toledo Council, Committee for Industrial Or-
ganization, hereafter referred to as the Toledo C. I. 0., filed a peti-
tion with the Regional Director of the Eighth Region (Cleveland,
Ohio), alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen con-
cerning the representation of employees in the Toledo, Ohio, plant
of Interlake Iron Corporation, hereafter referred to as the Company,
and requesting the National Labor Relations Board to conduct an
investigation and certify representatives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of
the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449. On May 6, 1937, the
Board, acting pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the Act and Article III,
Section 3 of the National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regu-
lations-Series 1, as amended, authorized the Regional Director to
conduct an investigation and provide for an appropriate hearing.
On May 11, 1937, the Regional Director issued a notice of hearing
to be held at Toledo, Ohio, on May 20, 1937. Thereafter, the Re-
gional Director, by telegram, notified the parties of the postpone-
ment of the hearing to May 21, 1937. Pursuant to notice, a hearing
1036
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1037
was held on May 21 and 22, 1937 , at Toledo , Ohio, before Emmett
P. Delaney , duly designated by the Board as Trial Examiner. The
Company, the Toledo C. I. 0., and Blast Furnace and Coke Oven
Workers' Union Local No. 20572 , hereafter referred to as the Blast
Furnace Union, were represented by counsel and participated in the
hearing. `
At the hearing , after the close of the petitioner 's case, counsel for
the Blast Furnace Union moved to dismiss the proceedings on the
grounds ( 1) that the petitioner was not a real party in interest or
authorized to file the petition on behalf of employees of the company,
and (2 ) that there was no proof of the existence of the union for
which the petitioner claimed the right of representation . Ruling on
this motion was reserved by the Trial Examiner . At the close of the
hearing, counsel again moved to dismiss the proceedings on the same
grounds and on the additional ground that the dispute involved is
an internal dispute within the body of a labor organization, the
American ' Federation of Labor. Ruling was again reserved by the
Trial Examiner , and none was thereafter made by him . In support
of this motion , the Blast Furnace Union filed a brief with the Board
on June 16, 1937. The motion is hereby denied, on all three grounds.
Certain testimony and exhibits were received in evidence over the
objections of counsel for the various parties. The Board has re-
viewed these rulings of the Trial Examiner and finds that no errors
were committed . The admission of certain evidence in rebuttal
offered by counsel for the Toledo C. I. O. was refused by the Trial
Examiner. While such refusal appears to have been erroneous, in
view of the conclusion which we have reached the error was not
prejudicial.
Upon the entire record, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE COMPANY AND ITS BUSINESS
Interlake Iron Corporation is a corporation organized and exist-
ing under the laws of the State of New York, with its principal
place of business in Chicago, Illinois. It is engaged in the business
of manufacturing pig iron, coke , and coal by-products ; has manu-
facturing plants and blast furnaces located in Duluth, Minnesota,
Chicago, Illinois, Erie , Pennsylvania , and Toledo , Ohio; and is
qualified to do business in Minnesota , Illinois, Pennsylvania, and
Ohio.
Its plant at Toledo manufactures pig iron, coke , and coal by-prod-
ucts. The capacity of the plant for the production of pig iron is
approximately 340,000 tons per year, and during the past three years
1038 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
production has been at 80 per cent of capacity. The production force
at the plant numbers about 600 men.
Approximately 85 per cent of the raw materials used in manufac-
ture at the Toledo plant, consisting chiefly of iron ore, coal, and
limestone, are obtained from outside Ohio. Practically all of the
iron ore is obtained in Minnesota , being brought from that State by
lake steamer direct to the Company's dock on Lake Erie. The coal
used is obtained from West Virginia, Kentucky, and Pennsylvania.
About 40 per cent of the products manufactured at the Toledo plant
are shipped to customers outside Ohio.
II. ORGANIZATION OF THE COMPANY 'S EMPLOYEES
About March 30, 1937, Tim McCormick and others, representing
the Toledo Council of the Committee for Industrial Organization,
commenced organizing activities among the employees of the Com-
pany's Toledo plant. At first, group meetings were held at workers'
homes. Then, early in April, open meetings were held. The organ-
izers solicited applications for membership in the Amalgamated As-
sociation of Iron, Steel and Tin Workers of North America, hereafter
referred to as the Amalgamated, an international union which as a
result of its affiliation with the Committee for Industrial Organiza-
tion stands suspended from the American Federation of Labor.
Through McCormick, the applicants for membership made applica-
tion to the international union for a charter as a local lodge. The
charter was issued under date of April 25 or 27, 1937. The lodge
thus formed is a labor organization. Membership therein is appa-
rently open, and confined , to the hourly rate employees of the Com-
pany's Toledo plant, except supervisory employees, watchmen, and
police.
Prior to April 20, 1937, a company union had been in existence in
the plant . On or about that date , as a result of the Supreme Court's
decisions of April 12 , upholding the constitutionality of the National
Labor Relations Act, the Company notified the company union it
was no longer legal. A meeting of this union on April 20 voted to^
dissolve and then to organize as a new union and apply to the Amer-
ican Federation of Labor for a charter. Under date of April 23, the
American Federation of Labor issued a charter to this organization
designating it as Blast Furnace and Coke Oven Workers' Union Local
No. 20572, and at this time , or slightly before, a drive for member-
ship in the Blast Furnace Union began. This Union, like the local
lodge of the Amalgamated , is a labor organization , in which mem-
bership is open and confined to hourly rate employees of the Toledo
plant, except supervisory employees, watchmen , and police.
The organization campaigns of the C. I. O. and A. F. of L. unions
at the Company 's plant had become a matter of public knowledge by
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1039
April 23, when the contest was described in Toledo newspapers. Ap-
parently even before this, at latest about April 20, McCormick had
begun telephoning the office of the plant manager, Edward Clair,
to ask for an appointment to discuss a collective agreement. He was
met repeatedly by the statement that Clair was out of town or other-
wise unable to see him.
Nevertheless, on April 26 Clair met with a committee of the Blast
Furnace Union and an organizer of the American Federation of
Labor. He entered into an agreement with them, confirmed by a
letter of the same date, recognizing the Blast Furnace Union as the
exclusive representative of all the employees in the plant for the
purposes of collective bargaining. According to the letter, such
recognition was based on the Union's claim, which, the letter stated,
appeared to be well founded, that the Union represented a majority
of the employees.
On April 28 McCormick and another representative of the Com-
mittee for Industrial Organization finally secured an appointment
with Clair sand presented a proposal for an agreement to be entered
into by the company and the Amalgamated Association of Iron, Steel
and Tin Workers. The agreement provided that the Company
should recognize representatives of that organization as a collective
bargaining agency for all the employees of the Company. Clair in-
formed McCormick that he was too late, that the Company had al-
ready recognized the Blast Furnace Union as the sole bargaining
agency.
The next day the petition in this proceeding was filed.,
III. THE QUESTION OF REPRESENTATION
Both the Amalgamated local and the Blast Furnace Union claim
to have the membership or applications of a majority of the em-
ployees. On this ground, among others, the Blast Furnace Union
contends that a secret ballot of the employees is unnecessary. On the
other hand, while the Amalgamated also claims a majority, it does
not seek certification without a poll.
On the basis of the application cards of the unions introduced into
evidence, it is impossible to find that either has a majority. The
appropriate bargaining unit, as indicated below, appears to consist
of all the hourly rate employees, except supervisory employees, watch-
men, and police. According to the payroll submitted by the Com-
1There was considerable dispute at the hearing as to the relative dates of the conference
between McCormack and Clair and of the filing of the petition. The petition is dated
April 27, but McCormack insisted that it was filed after the conference, while Clair's
secretary insisted the conference was on April 28 It appears likely that both witnesses
are correct, and that, though dated and probably prepared April 27, the petition was
actually filed April 29, the date of the receiving stamp of the Regional office appearing
on it
1040 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
pany as of April 30, 1937, for April 16-30, these employees numbered
600. This payroll, however, appears to have excluded all clerical
employees, of whom there were, according to oral testimony, about 12.
If it is assumed that all such employees were paid on an hourly basis,
t he unit would consist of 612 employees. The cards submitted by the
Blast Furnace Union number 301,2 less than a majority of this total.
If the clerical employees be eliminated, however, the cards still show
less than a majority, for among the 301 are found the cards of eight
men not shown on the payroll submitted, presumably because not
within the classification set forth. In addition, there are included
the cards of two men who appear on the payroll as foremen. If
these ten are deducted from the total, the remaining cards, numbering
291, constitute less than a majority of a unit of 600.
In this proceeding it should be noted that the Blast Furnace Union
relies on the contract entered into with the Company on April 26
as a bar to an election. But, as indicated above, the Union has not
even now a majority among the employees. And at the time the
contract was made, it had even fewer members or applicants; of the
301 cards it introduced in evidence, 23 were dated April 26, and 32
subsequently.
The cards of the Amalgamated local likewise fail of a majority.
Nevertheless, it appears that 274 employees have made application
for membership in that union.3 With the strengths of the two unions,
as shown by this evidence, each so close to a majority, it appears
that a question of representation has arisen which can best be settled
by a secret ballot.
We find that the question of representation which has arisen, in
connection with the operations of the Company described in Section
I above, has a close, intimate, and substantial relation to trade, traf-
fic, and commerce among the several States, and tends to lead to
labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce and the free flow
of commerce.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE BARGAINING UNIT
It appears that membership in both the contending unions is open,
and confined, to hourly rate employees at the Company's Toledo
plant, except supervisory employees, watchmen, and police. Accord-
ing to oral testimony, both unions admit to membership clerical em.-
21n addition to those submitted, the Union claimed that there were in existence
about ten cards which had been sent to Washington in applying for the charter Since
these were not produced in eyidence we are unable to consider them, or the 45 additional
cards claimed by the Toledo C I. O. to have been sent to Pittsburgh in applying for the
charter of the Amalgamated local
3 Two hundred and seventy-nine cards were submitted in evidence. Four of these
cards, however, were signed by employees of Southern Wheel Foundry Co. The name of
the employer on the fifth card is illegible, and the name of the applicant does not appear
on the payroll submitted by the Company.
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1041
ployees who are paid on an hourly rate basis . In the absence of any
other evidence , the classification stated appears to be the appropriate
bargaining unit. Therefore , in order to insure to employees the full.
benefit of their right to self-organization and to collective bargaining,
and otherwise to effectuate the policies of the National Labor Rela-
tions Act, we find that all of the hourly rate employees at the Com-
pany's Toledo plant , except supervisory employees , watchmen, and
police, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective
bargaining.
V. THE MOTION TO DISMISS
A motion to dismiss the proceedings was made by counsel for the
Blast Furnace Union on grounds briefly indicated above. It may be
well to indicate the reasons why the Board is overruling such motion.
The first ground stated for the motion was that the petitioning
Toledo Council of the Committee for Industrial Organization was
not the real party in interest . It is true that a petition for investi-
gation and certification of representatives is generally filed by a labor
organization which claims to represent the employees involved. But
there is nothing in the Act or Board's Rules and Regulations which
requires this. Article III, Section 1 of the Rules and Regulations
provides that "a petition may be filed by any employee or any person
or labor organization on his behalf . . ." Counsel for the Blast
Furnace Union further contended that it was not shown that the
petitioner was a labor organization or that it was authorized to file
the petition on behalf of any of the employees . We think that it is
sufficiently clear that the petitioner is a labor organization. As for
the authority of the petitioner , it was the organization which spon-
sored the formation of the Amalgamated local , in which it secured
the membership or applications for membership of the 274 employees
whose cards have been introduced into evidence . It purports to be
acting on behalf of such members . If, in fact , it is not authorized
thus to act on their behalf , that is an objection which is for them to
raise. There is not the slightest indication of any such objection.
So far as procedure under the Act or Rules and Regulations-of the
Board is concerned, there is, of course, no requirement that the peti-
tioner obtain a formal resolution of either the Amalgamated local or
the Toledo Council authorizing the filing of the petition.
The second ground stated for the motion was the alleged absence
of proof of the existence of the Amalgamated local. - There was evi-
dence of its organization and of its receipt of a charter from the
international union, and we therefore cannot take this argument
seriously.
Finally, - a third ground was stated , that the rivalry between the two
unions was an internal dispute within the body of the American Fed-
1042 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
eration of Labor, in which the Board should not intervene. Matter
of Axton-Fisher Tobacco Company and International Association of
Machinists, Local No. 681, and Tobacco Workers' International Union,
Local No. 16, I N. L. R. B. 604; Matter of Standard Oil Company of
California and International Association of Oil Field, Gas Well and
Rely nery Workers of America, I N. L. R. B. 614; Matter of Aluminum
Company of America and Aluminum Workers Union No. 19104,
I N. L. R. B. 530. In these cases involving disputes between two or
more unions affiliated with the American Federation of Labor or be-
tween two groups of officials in the same labor organization, we took
the position that we should not intervene, since an existing labor
organization possessed the authority to render a decision in the
matter.
In the present case, however, although technically both the con-
tending unions may be said to be affiliated with the same organiza-
tion, the American Federation of Labor, we should be blind, indeed,
to facts of common knowledge if we therefore concluded that both
unions would submit to the authority of that body. Since the action
by the Executive Council of the American Federation of Labor on
September 5, 1936, suspending the international unions affiliated with
the Committee for Industrial Organization, if not for a long time
before, those unions have ceased to obey the orders of the Federation.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Upon the basis of the above findings of fact, the Board makes the
following conclusions of law :
1. All hourly rate employees in the Toledo, Ohio, plant of Inter-
lake Iron Corporation, except supervisory employees, watchmen, and
police, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bar-
gaining, within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the National Labor
Relations Act.
2. A question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the repre-
sentation of the employees in the aforesaid unit, within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) and Section 2, subdivisions (6) and (7) of the
National Labor Relations 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 Relations
Act, 49 Stat. 449, and pursuant to Article III, Section 8 of National
Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 1, as amended,
it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation authorized by the Board
to ascertain representatives for collective bargaining with Inter-
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1043
lake Iron Corporation, an election by secret ballot shall be conducted
within 15 days, from the date of this Direction, under the direction
and supervision of the Regional Director for the Eighth Region, act-
ing in this matter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board,
and subject to Article III, Section 9 of said Rules and Regulations,
among all of the hourly rate employees in the Toledo, Ohio, plant
of Interlake Iron Corporation on its payroll during the payroll period
last preceding such election, except supervisory employees, watch-
men, and police, to determine whether they desire to be represented
by Amalgamated Association of Iron, Steel and Tin Workers of North
America, Lodge No. 1611, or by Blast Furnace and Coke Oven Work-
ers' Union Local No. 20572, for the purposes of collective bargaining.
[SAME TITLE]
AMENDED DIRECTION OF ELECTION
June 09, 1997
The Board having directed on June 26, 1937 that an election be
conducted within 15 days from said date among the hourly rate em-
ployees in the Toledo, Ohio, plant of Interlake Iron Corporation on
its payroll during the payroll period last preceding such election,
except supervisory employees, watchmen, and police, to determine
whether they desire to be represented by Amalgamated Association
of Iron, Steel and Tin Workers of North America, Lodge No. 1611, or
by Blast Furnace and Coke Oven Workers' Union Local No. 20572,
for the purposes of collective bargaining ;
The intervener having moved on June 29, 1937, that said Direction
of Election be set aside and that proceedings thereunder be stayed
pending the determination of its motion;
And the Board having issued on the same date notice of a hearing
for oral argument upon said motion to be `held on July 7, 1937, in
Washington, D. C., it is hereby
DIRECTED that the holding of the aforesaid election shall be post-
poned until further direction by the Board.
[SAME TITLE
AMENDED DIRECTION OF ELECTION
July 9, 1937'
The Board having directed on June 26, 1937-that an election be
conducted within 15 days from said date among the hourly rate
employees in the Toledo, Ohio, plant of Interlake Iron Corporation
on its payroll during the payroll period last preceding such election,
5727-37-vol. ii-67
1044 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
except supervisory employees, watchmen, and police, to determine
whether they desire to be represented by Amalgamated Association
of Iron, Steel and Tin Workers' of North America, Lodge No. 1611, or
by Blast Furnace and Coke Oven Workers' Union Local No. 20572,
for the purposes of collective bargaining;
Upon motion of the intervener that said Direction of Election be
set aside and that proceedings thereunder be stayed pending the
determination of its motion, the holding of the aforesaid election
having been postponed on June 29, 1937, until further direction of
the Board;
And oral argument by counsel for the intervenor, the petitioner,
and the Company upon'said motion having been heard by the Board
on July 7, 1937, it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation authorized by the Board
to ascertain representatives for collective bargaining with Interlake
Iron Corporation, an election by secret ballot shall be conducted
within 15 days from the date of this Amended Direction, under the
direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Eighth
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 of the hourly rate employees in the Toledo,
Ohio, plant of Interlake Iron Corporation on its payroll during the
payroll period last preceding such election, except supervisory em-
ployees, watchmen, and police, to determine whether they desire to
be represented by Amalgamated Association of Iron, Steel and Tin
Workers of North America, Lodge No. 1611, or by Blast Furnace
and Coke Oven Workers' Union Local No. 20572, for the purposes of
collective bargaining.
[ SAME TITLE]
AMENDMENT OF DECISION
AND
CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
August 4, 1937
Oh April 29, 1937, Toledo Council, Committee for Industrial
Organization, herein called the Toledo C. I. 0., filed a petition with
the Regional Director of the Eighth Region (Cleveland, Ohio) alleg-
ing that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the
representation of employees in the Toledo, Ohio, plant of Interlake
Iron Corporation, herein called the Company, and requesting the
National Labor Relations Board to conduct an investigation and
certify representatives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the National
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1045
Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449. On May 6, 1937, the Board,
acting pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the Act and Article III, Section 3
of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 1,
as amended, authorized the Regional Director to conduct an investi-
gation and provide for an appropriate hearing. On May 11, 1937,
the Regional Director issued a notice of hearing to be held at Toledo,
Ohio, on May 20, 1937. Thereafter, the Regional Director, by tele-
gram, notified the parties of the postponement of the hearing to May
21, 1937. Pursuant to notice, a hearing was held on May 21 and 22,
1937, at Toledo, Ohio, before Emmett P. Delaney, duly designated by
the Board as Trial Examiner. The Company, the Toledo C. I. 0.,
and Blast Furnace and Coke Oven Workers' Union Local No. 20572,
herein called the Blast Furnace Union, were represented by counsel
and participated in the hearing.
On June 26, 1937, the Board issued a Decision in which it found
that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the repre-
sentation of all the hourly rate employees in the Toledo, Ohio, plant.
of Interlake Iron Corporation, except supervisory employees, watch-
men, and police, and that such employees constitute a unit appropri-
ate for the purposes of collective bargaining in respect to rates of
pay, wages, hours of employment, and other conditions of employ-
ment. In its Decision the Board directed that an election be held
among such employees to determme whether they desired to be-
represented by Amalgamated Association of Iron, Steel, and Tin
Workers of North America, Lodge No. 1611, or by Blast Furnace
and Coke Oven Workers' Union Local No. 20572.
Upon motion of the Blast Furnace Union, that the Direction of
Election be set aside and that proceedings thereunder be stayed
pending the determination of its motion, the holding of the election
was postponed on June 29, 1937, until further direction. On this
motion oral argument by counsel for the Blast Furnace Union, the
petitioner, and the Company was heard by the Board on July 7, 1937_
On July 9, 1937, an Amended Direction of Election was issued by
the Board in the same terms as the original Direction, except for
the period within which the election was directed to be held.
Pursuant to the Board's Decision and Amended Direction of Elec-
tion, an election by secret ballot was conducted on July 20, 1937, by
the Regional Director of the Eighth Region among the employees of
the Company constituting the bargaining unit found appropriate by
the Board. On July 22, 1937, the Regional Director issued and duly
served upon the parties to the proceeding his Intermediate Report on
the ballot. No exceptions to the Intermediate Report have been filed'
by any of the parties.
1046 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
As to the results of the secret ballot the Regional Director reported :
Total number of employees eligible to vote----------------------- 623
Total number of ballots counted--------------------------------- 596
Total number of ballots for Blast Furnace and Coke Oven Workers'
Union, Local No. 20572---------------------------------------- 343
Total number of ballots for Amalgamated Association of Iron,
Steel and Tin Workers of North America. Lodge No 1611 ------- 252
Total number of blank ballots------------------------------------ 0
Total number of void ballots------------------------------------- 1
Blast Furnace and Coke Oven Workers' Union, Local No. 20572,
having been selected by a majority of the hourly rate employees of
the Toledo, Ohio, plant of the Company. except supervisory em-
ployees, watchmen, and police, as their representative for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining, is, by virtue of Section 9 (a) of the
Act, the exclusive representative for the purposes of collective bar-
gaining of all of such employees, and we will so certify it.
CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
Now THEREFORE, by virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in
the National Labor Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 8 of
National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 1, as
amended,
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED that Blast Furnace and Coke Oven Workers'
Union, Local No. 20572 has been selected by a majority of all of the
hourly rate employees of the Toledo, Ohio, plant of Interlake Iron
Corporation, except supervisory employees, watchmen, and police,
as their representative for the purposes of collective bargaining, and
that pursuant to Section 9 (a) of the National Labor Relations Act,
Blast Furnace and Coke Oven Workers' Union, Local No. 20572 is
the exclusive representative of all of such employees of Interlake
Iron Corporation for the purposes of collective bargaining in respect
to rates of pay, wages, hours of employment, and other conditions of
employment.
AMENDMENT OF DECISION
Since the issuance of the Decision, the Board's attention has been
called to the fact that the letter of the Company to the Blast Furnace
Union, referred to therein, is not technically a contract, but merely
a communication recognizing the union's status as representative of
the Company's employees. The wording of the opinion must there-
fore be changed; with the necessary changes made, however, the con-
clusion reached appears even less open to dispute.
The Board therefore hereby amends its decision in the above
entitled case as follows :
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1047
1. In the fourth paragraph of Section II of the Findings of Fact,
by striking out the words, "entered into an agreement", and substi-
tuting in their place the words, "reached an understanding" ; and
2. By striking out the third paragraph of Section III of the Find-
ings of Fact, and substituting in its place the following:
"In this proceeding it should be noted that the Blast Furnace
Union relies on the letter of April 26 from the Company as a
bar to an election. But, as indicated above, the union has not
even now a majority among the employees. And at the time
the letter was written it had even fewer members or applicants ;
of the 301 cards it introduced in evidence, 23 were dated April
26, and 32 subsequently."
MR. DONALD WAKEFIELD SMITH took no part in the consideration
of the above Amendment of Decision and Certification of
Representatives.