Lonsdale Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 31, 1945

63 N.L.R.B. 751 (N.L.R.B. 1945)

In the Matter of LONSDALE COMPAN Y ( BLACKSTONE COTTON MILL) and
TEXTILE WORKERS UNION OF AMERICA, C. 1. O.
Case No. 1-R-2420.Decided August 31,,1945
Mr. William C. Waring, Jr., of Providence , R. I., for the Company.
Mr. Joseph C. Novo, of Woonsocket , R. I., for the C. I. O.
Messrs. James J. McAleer , of Providence , R. I., and Eugene Thi-
beault, of Woonsocket , R. I., for the I. T. U.
Mr. Bruce C . Heath, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon a petition duly filed by Textile Workers Union of America,
C. I. 0., herein called the C. I. 0., alleging that a question affecting
commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of
Lonsdale Company (Blackstone Cotton Division), of North Smith-
field, Rhode Island, herein called the Company, the National Labor
Relations Board provided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice
before Robert E. Greene, Trial Examiner. Said hearing was held at
Woonsocket, Rhode Island, on June 4, 1945. The Company, the
C. I. 0., and the Industrial Trades Union of America,' herein called
the I. T. U., appeared and participated. All parties were afforded
full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses,
and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues. At the close of the
hearing, the Company and the I. T. U. moved that the petition be dis-
missed on the ground that the present contract between the Company
and the I. T. U. constitutes a bar to the instant proceedings. For
reasons set forth in Section III, infra, said motion is hereby denied.
The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are free from
prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. All parties were afforded
an opportunity to file briefs with the Board.
I At the hearing the Industrial Trades Union of America moved to intervene. Said
motion was allowed by the Trial Examiner.
63 N. L. R B., No. 110.
751
752 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
The Lonsdale Company, a Rhode Island corporation, is engaged
in the spinning and weaving of cotton textiles at its several mills
in the State of Rhode Island. The only mill with which we are
concerned in this proceeding is the Blackstone Mill Division of the
Company. The principal raw material used by the Company is
cotton, the annual purchases of which are valued in excess of
$1,000,000; all is received from points outside the State. The fin-
ished products manufactured annually by the Company are valued
in excess of $1,000,000, all of which are shipped to points outside
the State of Rhode Island.
The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
H. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
Textile Workers Union of America, affiliated with the Congress
of Industrial Organizations, is a labor organization admitting to
membership employees of the Company.
Industrial Trades Union of America is a labor organization admit-
ting to membership employees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On March 16, 1943, the Company and the I. T. U. entered into a
collective bargaining agreement for a period of 1 year. The con-
tract contained a 60-day automatic renewal clause which provided
that if either party desired any changes therein it should notify
the other 60 days prior to any yearly expiration date. The con-
tract automatically renewed itself in March 1944. On or about
November 24, 1944, the I. T. U. notified the Company by letter re-
questing changes and modification in the existing contract. During
the early part of March 1945, the I. T. U. and the Company held
several conferences in an attempt to reach a new bargaining agree-
ment; however, not being able to resolve some of the disputed issues,
the Company and the I. T. U. on March 15, 1945, entered into writ-
ten agreement to continue the old contract in force until such time
as a new agreement could be reached and ratified by the member-
ship of the I. T. U. On March 28, 1945, the I. T. U. notified the
Company that the proposed new agreement had been ratified by
its membership and the contract was formally reduced to writing
LONSDALE COMPANY 753
and executed by the parties on April 5, 1945. At the time of the
execution of the April 5 contract, the Company and unions
representing employees at other plants of the Company had pend-
ing before the National War Labor Board issues concerning wage
increases, vacation pay, and insurance benefits. When the Com-
pany and the I. T. U. executed the April 5 contract, they also en-
tered into a "supplemental agreement," which bound the parties to
accept as final the determination of disputed issues by the National
War Labor Board and incorporate same in the new contract.2
On March 21, 1945, prior to execution of the contract between
the I. T. U. and the Company, the C. I. O. notified the Company
by letter that it desired recognition as the collective bargaining rep-
resentative of the Company's employees. The Company replied by
letter dated March 24, 1945, stating that it could not comply with
the C. I. O.'s request because of its existing contract with the I. T. U.
The C. I. O. thereafter filed its petition herein on April 18, 1945.
The Company and the I. T. U. contend that the extension agree-
ment ,entered into on March 15, 1945, and the April 5 contract consti-
tute a bar to a present determination of representatives. The exten-
tion agreement was one of indefinite duration and as such cannot
operate as a bar to a present determination of representatives .3 Nor
do we find merit in the contention of the Company and the I. T. U.
that the April 5 contract is a bar to the instant proceeding. The record
clearly shows that the new contract was formally executed on April
5, 1945, 15 days after notice of the rival claim of the C. I. O. on March
21, 1945. The Board has repeatedly held that where a contract is
„onsummated after notice of a rival claim, it is not a bar to a present
determination of representatives.
The Company and the I. T. U. further contend that the principle
enunciated in the Allis-Chalmers 4 case is applicable here. In that
case the Board refused to direct an election because consummation of
the results of collective bargaining conducted by a newly certified
representative were delayed by submission of disputed issues to the
War Labor Board. Here, however, the I. T. U. is not in the position
of a newly certified bargaining agent which is entitled to a reasonable
opportunity to act as the exclusive representative and to secure for
the employees the benefits of such representation.5 The evidence
2 The "supplemental agreement" was executed primarily for the purpose of making the
decision of the War Labor Board uniformly applicable throughout the various mills of
the Company.
2 See Matter of American Chain and Cable Co., Inc., 59 N. L. R. B . 644, and cases there
cited.
! 50 N. L. R. B. 306.
' See footnote 2, supra, Matter of American Chain and Cable Company, Inc, 59 N L R B.
1644; Matter of Diamond Magnesium Co., 57 N. L. R. B. 393; Matter of American Car h
Foundry Company (Chicago Plant), 60 N. L. R B 735
754 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
shows that the Company and the I. T. U. have had contractual relations
since 1936 and that the I. T. U. has obtained for the employees substan-
tial benefits throughout such period. Moreover, in the instant case.
there was no delay occasioned by the pendancy of proceedings before
the War Labor Board which prevented the Company and the I. T. U.
from entering into a contract prior to a disposition thereof. Accord-
ingly, we find the contention of the Company and the I. T. U. to be
without merit.
A statement of the Field Examiner, introduced into evidence at
the hearing, indicates that the C. I. 0. represents a substantial number
of employees in the unit hereinafter found appropriate.,
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concern-
ing the representation of employees of the Company, within the mean-
ing of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The C. I. 0. seeks a unit of all production and maintenance em-
ployees including watchmen and truck drivers, but excluding office and
clerical employees, laboratory employees, designing and technical
employees, and supervisory employees. The Company and I. T. U.
agree as to the general composition of the unit, but would exclude
the watchmen and the truck drivers.
Truck drivers and watchmen: Although the Board, under certain
circumstances, has included employees in these categories in plant-
wide units of production and maintenance employees, it is our cus-
tomary practice not to disturb the contract unit established as the
result of collective bargaining absent any compelling circumstances
which would warrant a departure therefrom. The record here re-
veals that truck drivers and watchmen were specifically excluded
from the unit covered by the I. T. U.'s contract with the Company.
Accordingly, we shall adhere to the unit thus established by col-
lective bargaining and exclude both the truck drivers and the watch-
men from the unit hereinafter found appropriate.7
' We find that all production and maintenance employees of the
Company, excluding office and clerical employees, truck drivers,
watchmen, laboratory employees, designing and technical employees,
supervisors and all or any other supervisory employees, with author-
ity to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes
in the status of employees, or effectively recommend such action,
6 The Field Examiner reported that the C I. O. submitted 142 membership cards ; that
the names of 125 persons appearing on the cards were listed on the Company 's pay roll of
April 21, 1945 , which contained the names of 598 employees in the appropriate unit ; and
that the cards were dated from February to May 1945 . In view of the maintenance of
membership provisions in the contract between the Company and the I . T. U., the showing
made by the . C. I. O. is adequate.
7 Matter of Peterson & Lytle, 60 N. L. R. B. 1070.
LONSDALE COMPANY 755
constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining
within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
V. TITE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
We shall direct that the question concerning representation which
has arisen be resolved by an election by secret ballot among the em-
ployees in the appropriate unit who were employed during the pay-
roll period immediately preceding the date of the Direction of Elec-
tion herein , subject ' to the limitations and additions set forth in the
Direction.
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 Rela-
tions Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor
Relations Board Rifles and Regulations-Series 3, as amended, it is
hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Lonsdale Com-
pany (Blackstone Mill Division), of North Smithfield, Rhode Island,
an election by secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but
not later than thirty (30) days from the date of this Direction, under
the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the First
Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National Labor Rela-
tions Board, and subject to Article III, Sections 10 and 11, of said
Rules and Regulations, among the employees in the unit found ap-
propriate in Section IV, above, who were employed during the pay-
roll period immediately preceding the date of this Direction, includ-
ing employees who did not work during said pay-roll period because
they were ill or on vacation or temporarily laid off, and including em-
ployees in the armed forces of the United States who present them-
selves in person at the polls, but excluding any who have since quit
or been discharged for cause and have not been rehired or reinstated
prior to the date of the election, to determine whether they desire to
be represented by Textile Workers Union of America, affiliated with
the Congress of Industrial Organizations, or by the Industrial Trades
Union of America, for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by
neither.
862514-46-vo1 63-49