L. C. Phenix Company

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 15, 1939

12 N.L.R.B. 993 (N.L.R.B. 1939)

In the Matter of LE Roy C . PHENIx, AN INDIVIDUAL DOING BUSINESS
AS L. C. PHENI% COMPANY and UNITED FURNITIIRE WORKERS OF
AMERICA, LocAL 576, C. I. O.
Case No. B-1192.-Decided May 15,1939
Furniture Manufacturing Industry-Investigation of Representatives: con-
troversy concerning representation of employees: rival unions; refusal of Com-
pany to recognize either-Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining: all em-
ployees and supervisors not working at a trade; no controversy as to-Repre-
sentatives: proof of choice: cards authorizing union as bargaining agency com-
pared with pay roll-Certification of Representatives: upon proof of majority
representation.
Mr. Charles M. Brooks, for the Board.
Mr. James S. Woollacott, of Los Angeles, Calif., for the Company.
Mr. Ernest Marsh, of Los Angeles, Calif., for the United.
Mr. Arthur Garrett, of Los Angeles, Calif., and Mr. Joseph A.
Padway and Mr. H. Kaiser, of Washington, D. C., for the Furniture
Workers.
Mr. Gilbert V. Rosenberg, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On December 21, 1938, United Furniture Workers, Local 576,
affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, herein called
the United, filed with the Regional Director for the Twenty-first
Region (Los Angeles, California) a petition alleging that a question
affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of em-
ployees of Le Roy C. Phenix, an individual, doing business as
L. C. Phenix Company,' Los Angeles, California, herein called the
Company, and requesting an investigation and certification of rep-
resentatives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Rela-
tions Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act. On January 3, 1939,
the National Labor Relations Board, herein called the Board, acting
pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the Act and Article III, Section 3, of
'Incorrectly referred to in the pleadings as "L. C. Phenix Co."
12 N. L. R. B., No. 99.
993
994 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 1,
as amended, ordered an investigation and authorized the Regional
Director to conduct it and to provide for an appropriate hearing
upon due notice.
On January 7, 1939, the Regional Director issued a notice of hear-
ing, copies of which were duly served upon the Company, the United,
and Furniture Workers Union, Local 1561, United Brotherhood of
Carpenters and Joiners of America, affiliated with the American
Federation of Labor, herein called the Furniture Workers, a labor
organization claiming to represent employees directly affected by
the investigation.-
Pursuant to the notice, a hearing was held at Los Angeles, Cali-
fornia, on January 16 and 17, 1939, before Albert L. Lohm, the
Trial Examiner duly designated by the Board. At the opening of
the hearing the Furniture Workers filed a petition to intervene,
which the Trial Examiner granted. The Board, the Company, the
United, and the Furniture Workers were represented by counsel and
participated in the hearing. Full opportunity to be heard, to ex-
amine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing
upon the issues was afforded all parties.
At the hearing on January 16, 1939, after the United had com-
pleted its case, the Trial Examiner granted an adjournment until
the following morning upon the request of counsel for the Furniture
Workers who stated that John Murray, international representative
of the Furniture Workers, was absent from Los Angeles but would be
present at the hearing on January 17. At the opening of the hearing
on January 17, counsel renewed his request for an adjournment,
stating that Murray had not returned to the city and that he had
been unable to communicate directly with him. Counsel being un-
able to indicate the nature of the evidence, if any, that Murray would
introduce, the Trial Examiner denied the request. During the course
of the hearing the Trial Examiner made several other rulings on
motions and 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.
At the request of the Furniture Workers, and pursuant to notice,
a hearing for the purpose of oral argument was held before the
Board in Washington, D. C., on February 23, 1939. The Furniture
Workers appeared by counsel and requested that the hearing be
indefinitely postponed.2 The Board granted the request. The Fur-
2 Counsel for the Furniture Workers made no reference to the evidence, if any, which
would have been offered had Murray been present at the hearing before the Trial
Examiner. He based his request for postponement upon the fact that charges of unfair
labor practices on the Company 's part had been filed by the Furniture Workers. Such
charges had been filed but were thereafter withdrawn.
LE ROY C. PHENIX 995
niture Workers thereafter withdrew its request for oral argument.
On April 20, 1939, the Board, pursuant to notice to all the parties,
ordered that the hearing for the purpose of oral argument be
canceled. -
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Le Roy C. Phenix, an individual, doing business as L. C. Phenix
Company, is engaged in the manufacture and sale of furniture at a
plant in Los Angeles, California.
During 1938, the Company purchased raw materials, consisting
principally of lumber, textiles, springs, paint, and filling materials,
valued at approximately $84,000, of which approximately 20 per
cent originated outside the State of California. During the same
period the Company sold finished products valued at approximately
$250,000, of which approximately 16 per cent were shipped to desti-
nations outside the State of California; approximately 10 per cent
directly by the Company, and approximately 6 per cent by customers
of the Company. The Company stipulated that it is engaged in
interstate commerce.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
United Furniture Workers of America, Local 576, is a labor or-
ganization affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations,
admitting to membership all employees of the respondent, excluding
clerical and supervisory employees.
Furniture Workers Union, Local 1561, United Brotherhood of
Carpenters and Joiners of America, is a labor organization affiliated
with the American Federation of Labor. It did not adduce any
evidence relative to its requirements for membership.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On or about December 21, 1938, the United, claiming that it rep-
resented a majority of the Company's employees, requested the Com-
pany to recognize it as the representative of the Company's employees
for collective bargaining. The Company refused this request but
agreed to recognize the labor organization that would prove its
majority by a pay-roll cross-check. Thereafter, at a meeting in the
office of the Regional Director between the Company, the United,
and the Furniture Workers, the latter refused to agree to a consent
election or a pay-roll cross-check. Under these conditions the Com-
169134-39-vol. 12-64
996 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
pany has refused to negotiate with either labor organization until
the Board certifies the one representing the majority.
We find that a question has arisen concerning the representation
of employees of the Company.
1V. 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 among the several States,
and tends to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing com-
merce and the free flow of commerce.
V. THE APPROPRIATE 'UNIT
The petition filed by the United alleges that all production em-
ployees of the Company, excluding office help and supervisors, con-
stitute an appropriate bargaining unit. At the hearing, the United
contended that it was an industrial union admitting to membership
all employees of the Company except clerical employees and super-
visors not working at a trade, and that it desired to include shipping-
department employees and the janitor with the production employees
in the unit. The Company did not object to the proposed unit and
the Furniture Workers made no contention and offered no evidence
concerning it. We see no reason for deviating from the unit claimed
by the United.
We find that all the employees of the Company, excluding clerical
employees and supervisors not working at a trade, constitute 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 to collective bargaining and
otherwise effectuate the policies of the Act.
VI. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
The Company and the United stipulated at the hearing that the
pay roll of December 24, 1938, was the last normal pay roll preceding
the hearing. On that date there were 47 employees within the unit
found appropriate. The United introduced into evidence 40 duly
authenticated authorization cards, of which 38 were signed by em-
ployees of the Company within the appropriate unit. It is clear,
therefore, that a majority of the employees of the Company within
the appropriate unit desire the United to represent them as their
bargaining agent. No evidence was introduced as to representation
by the Furniture Workers of employees within the appropriate unit.
LE ROY C. PHENIX 997
We find that the United has been designated and selected by a
majority of the employees in an appropriate unit as their representa-
tive for the purposes of collective bargaining. It is, therefore, the
exclusive representative of all the employees in such unit for the
purposes of collective bargaining, and we will so certify.
Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and upon the entire
record in the case, the Board makes the following :
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. A question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the repre-
sentation of employees of Le Roy C. Phenix, an individual, doing
business as L. C. Phenix Company, Los Angeles, California, within
the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the
National Labor Relations Act.
2. All employees of the Company, excluding clerical employees and
supervisors not working at a trade, constitute a unit appropriate for
the purposes of collective bargaining, within the meaning of Section
9 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act.
3. United Furniture Workers of America, Local 576, affiliated with
the Congress of Industrial Organizations, is the exclusive representa-
tive of all employees in such unit for the purposes of collective
bargaining, within the meaning of Section 9 (a) of the National
Labor Relations Act.
CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National
Labor Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Re-
lations 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 United Furniture Workers of America,
Local 576, affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations,
has been designated and selected by a majority of the employees of
Le Roy C. Phenix, an individual, doing business as L. C. Phenix Com-
pany, Los Angeles, California, excluding clerical employees and
supervisors not working at a trade, as their representative for the
purposes of collective bargaining and that, pursuant to the provi-
sions of Section 9 (a) of the Act, United Furniture Workers of
America, Local 576, affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Or-
ganizations, is the exclusive representative of all such employees for
the purposes of collective bargaining in respect to rates of pay,
wages, hours of employment, and other conditions of employment.
MR. DONALD WAKEFIELD SMITH took no part in the consideration
of the above Decision and Certification of Representatives.