Law Tanning Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 21, 1954

109 N.L.R.B. 268 (N.L.R.B. 1954)

268 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Accordingly, we shall direct that an election be held in the follow-
ing group of employees of the Employer at its Simpson and Carbon-
,,dale, Pennsylvania, plants : All machine shop employees, including
-welders, tool- and die-makers, machinists, machine operators, setup
man, and tool-crib attendant, but excluding all other employees, office
,employees, professional employees, watchmen, guards, and supervis-
ors within the meaning of the Act.
If a majority of the employees in the voting group above vote for
-the Petitioner they will be taken to have indicated their desire to
rconstitute a separate appropriate unit, and the Regional Director con-
ducting the election directed herein is instructed to issue a certifica-
-tion of representatives to the Petitioner for such unit, which the
Board, under such circumstances, finds appropriate for purposes of
collective bargaining. In the event a majority vote for the Inter-
venor, the Board finds the existing unit to be appropriate and the
Regional Director will issue a certification of results of election to
-such effect.
[The Board dismissed the petition in Cases Nos. 4-RC-2157, 4-RC-
`2158, 4-RC-2160, 4-RC-2161, 4-RC-2163, and 4-RC-3164.]
![Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
_LAW TANNING COMPANY , PETITIONER and LOCAL 47, INTERNATIONAL
FuR AND LEATHER WORKERS UNION OF THE UNITED STATES AND
CANADA. Case No. 13-RM-195. July 21, 1954
Decision and Order
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Joseph Cohen, hear-
ing officer. - The-hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing,are.,free
-from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
-the Act.
2. On December 19, 1952, after a Board-ordered election,l the Union
was certified as the collective-bargaining representative of the pro-
duction and maintenance employees at the Employer's Milwaukee,
Wisconsin, split leather processing plant. There is no contractual
relationship between the parties. On December 24, 1953, ,the 'Em-'
-ployer filed the instant petition.
We must, however, decline to pursue this investigation of repre-
sentatives any further. The Board, on May 28, 1954, found that
1 Case No. 13-RC-3008
109 NLRB No. 46.
NORTH AMERICAN AVIATION, INC. 269
the International Fur and Leather Workers Union of the United
States and Canada is not in compliance with Section 9 (h) of the Act,
and ordered that no further benefits under the Act be accorded to
that labor organization or to any of its affiliates or constituent units
until said labor organization has complied with the requirements of
Section 9 (h) of the Act.2 As the only union involved herein is an
affiliate of the International Fur and Leather Workers of the United
States and Canada and as the latter organization is still out of com-
pliance, a continuance of this investigation would contravene the
order of May 28 by permitting a noncomplying union to be the bene-
ficiary of a Board investigation.3 We must therefore dismiss the
petition.-'
[The Board dismissed the petition.]
2 Compliance Status of International Fur & Leather Workers Union of the United States
and Canada, 108 NLRB 1190.
3 The Federal Refractories Corporation, 100 NLRB 257.
4 We accordingly find it unnecessary to pass upon any of the issues raised in this
proceeding,
NORTH AMERICAN AVIATION, INC. and INDEPENDENT AIRCRAFT
WORKERS ASSOCIATION , PETITIONER . Case No. 9-RC-2140. July
21,1954
Decision and Order
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Orville E. Andrews,
hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are
free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the Act.
2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent employees
of the Employer.,-
3. No question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9
i International Union, United Automobile, Aircraft and Agricultural Implement Workers
Union of America, UAW-CIO, and its Local 927, hereinafter called UAW, were permitted
to intervene on the basis of a contract covering the Employer's employees.
The Petitioner, Employer, and UAW contend that the motion of the International Union
of Operating Engineers, Local 89, AFL, hereinafter called Engineers, to Intervene should
be denied on the ground that its request was untimely. Although the Engineers did not
seek to intervene until the close of the first day of a 4-day hearing, we shall permit it to
intervene; as., the record shows It, had acquired a -suiilent representative status prior to
the close of the hearing. United Boat Service Corporation, 55 NLRB 671 ; Heintz Manu-
facturing Company, 100 NLRB 1521.
The UAW's request for oral argument Is hereby denied, as the record and briefs, in
our opinion , adequately present the issues and the positions of the parties.
109 NLRB No. 44.