Lufkin Telephone Exchange, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 30, 1971

191 N.L.R.B. 856 (N.L.R.B. 1971)

856 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Lufkin Telephone Exchange , Inc., Conroe Telephone
Company, and Alto Telephone Company and Local
6218 , Communications Workers of America, AFL-
CIO. Case 16-CA-4250
June 30, 1971
DECISION AND ORDER
BY MEMBERS FANNING, BROWN, AND KENNEDY
Upon a charge duly filed on February 1, 1971,' by
Local 6218 , Communications Workers of America,
AFL-CIO, hereinafter called the Union , and thereafter
amended on March 19, the General Counsel of the
National Labor Relations Board , by the Regional Di-
rector for Region 16 , issued a complaint and notice of
hearing on March 19 , against Lufkin Telephone Ex-
change , Inc., Conroe Telephone Company , and Alto
Telephone Company , hereinafter called Respondent.
The complaint alleged that Respondent had engaged in
and was engaging in unfair labor practices within the
meaning of Section 8 (a)(5) and (1) of the National
Labor Relations Act., as amended , by refusing to meet
with the representatives duly appointed and chosen by
the Union for the purposes of collective bargaining as
long as the representatives included E . T. Culp, presi-
dent of the Union . On April 2, Respondent filed an
answer denying the commission of any unfair labor
practices.
On April 27, the parties executed a stipulation of
facts, by which the parties waived a hearing before a
Trial Examiner and the issuance of a Trial Examiner's
Decision and recommended Order and agreed to sub-
mit the case to the Board for findings of fact , conclu-
sions of law , and an order , based upon a record consist-
ing of the stipulation of facts , together with the charge,
the first amended charge, the complaint and notice of
hearing, and the answer . On that same date the Re-
gional Director for Region 16 referred the stipulation
to the Board for decision.
On May 3 , the Board approved the stipulation of the
parties and ordered the case transferred to the Board,
granting permission for the filing of briefs . Thereafter,
the General Counsel filed a brief, the Respondent filed
a brief and a letter proposing an additional stipulation
or alternatively requesting a hearing , and the Charging
Party filed a brief and a letter objecting to the Com-
pany 's aforementioned proposals.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the Na-
tional Labor Relations Board has delegated its powers
in connection with this case to a three -member panel.
I All dates hereinafter are in 1971, unless otherwise stated.
Upon the basis of the stipulation, the briefs, and the
entire record in this case, the Board makes the follow-
ing:
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. JURISDICTION
Lufkin Telephone Exchange, Inc., Conroe Tele-
phone Company, and Alto Telephone Company are
now, and have been at all times material herein, Texas
corporations engaged in the business of telephone com-
munication. They are affiliated businesses with a com-
mon president and common ownership and constitute
a single, integrated business enterprise. The aforesaid
president formulates and administers a common labor
policy for the aforenamed companies affecting the em-
ployees of these companies. The president acting jointly
for the companies has negotiated a collective-bargain-
ing agreement with the Union Which was binding on all
of said companies. All of the companies maintain an
office located at 321 North First Street, Lufkin, Texas.
In the course and conduct of its business operations,
Respondent during the past 12 months, a representa-
tive period, received gross revenues in excess of $100,-
000.
The parties stipulated, and we find, that Respondent
is, and at all times material herein has been, an em-
ployer engaged in commerce and in operations affecting
commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7)
of the Act.
II. THE LABOR ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
The parties stipulated, and we find, that Local 6218,
Communications Workers of America, AFL-CIO, is a
labor organization within the meaning of Section 2(5)
of the Act.
III. THE ALLEGED UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
A. Facts
At all times since October 16, 1969, and continuing
to date, the Union has been the representative for the
purposes of collective bargaining of the following ap-
propriate unit of employees:
All employees of Lufkin Telephone Exchange,
Inc., Conroe Telephone Company, and Alto Tele-
phone Company, exclusive of executive secretar-
ies, parttime house service employees, watchmen,
guards and supervisors as defined in the Act.
On or about August 15, 1970, the Union requested
Respondent to bargain collectively with respect to rates
of pay, wages, hours of employment, and other terms
and conditions of employment of all the employees of
Respondent in the aforesaid appropriate unit. On Sep-
tember 21, 1970, the Union Representative T. O. Moses
191 NLRB No. 151 .
LUFKIN TELEPHONE EXCHANGE 857
stated at the first collective-bargaining session between
Respondent and the Union that the Union would pro-
ceed with negotiations, but that it was doing so under
protest in that Respondent had refused to allow Union
President and Negotiating Committee Member E. T.
Culp to sit at the negotiating table.
The representatives of Respondent did in fact bar-
gain with Moses and Durell Gray, a union member and
an employee of Respondent, as the Union's representa-
tives. As a result of these negotiations the parties en-
tered into a contract for a period effective from 12:01
c.s.t. October 18, 1970, until 12 midnight, c.s.t., October
17, 1971. This contract was ratified by a vote of Re-
spondent's employees and executed by Respondent
through its president and chairman of its board of di-
rectors, and by Moses and Gray on behalf of the Union.
B. Contentions of the Parties
The General Counsel and the Charging Party con-
tend that Respondent violated Section 8(a)(5) and (1)
by refusing to meet with the representatives duly ap-
pointed and chosen by the Union for the purposes of
collective bargaining, as long as said representatives
included E. T. Culp, the Union's president. Respond-
ent contends that by virtue of the fact that the Union
negotiated with it and that a contract was actually
ratified by all parties concerned, the Union waived the
right to file and prosecute the instant unfair labor prac-
tice proceeding and has estopped itself therefrom.
C. Conclusion
Section 1 of the Act specifically declares that it is the
policy of the United States to protect "the exercise by
workers of full freedom of association, self-organiza-
tion and designation of representatives of their own
choosing." In addition, Section 7 of the Act guarantees
to employees "the right to bargain collectively through
representatives of their own choosing." Section 8(a)(5)
of the Act prohibits an employer from refusing to bar-
gain collectively with the representatives of his em-
ployees and Section 8(a)(1) enjoins an employer from
interfering with, restraining, or coercing employees in
the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the
Act. In protecting these explicit rights, the Board and
courts have repeatedly held that an employer has no
voice in the selection by its employees of their collec-
tive-bargaining representative and that, absent excep-
tional circumstances, an employer's refusal to bargain
collectively with the agents duly appointed to represent
its employees at the negotating table constitutes a viola-
tion of Section 8(a)(5) and (1) of the Act.' Nor does the
z Roscoe Skipper, Inc., 106 NLRB 1238, enfd 213 F.2d 793 (C.A. 5);
The American Laundry Machinery Company, 76 NLRB 981, enfd. 174 F 2d
124 (C.A. 6); North Bros. Foid, Inc., 187 NLRB No 106.
fact that a union proceeded with negotiations without
the person to whom the employer objected preclude a
finding of a refusal to bargain.3
Applying these principles to the present case, we find
that Respondent's refusal to meet with representatives
of the Union for the purposes of collective bargaining
as long as the representatives included E. T. Culp, the
Union's president, constituted unfair labor practices
within the purview of Section 8(a)(5) and (1) of the
Act.' In order to effectuate the policies of the Act we
shall order Respondent to cease and desist from such
unlawful conduct and to take certain affirmative action.
ORDER
Purusant to Section 10(c) of the National Labor Re-
lations Act, as amended, the National Labor Relations
Board hereby orders that Respondent, Lufkin Tele-
phone Exchange, Inc., Conroe Telephone Company,
and Alto Telephone Company, Lufkin, Texas, its offic-
ers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall:
1. Cease and desist from:
(a) Refusing to meet with the representatives duly
appointed and chosen by the Union for the purposes of
collective bargaining on behalf of the employees in the
appropriate unit described in section III, A. above, as
long as the representatives include E. T. Culp, the
Union's president.
(b) In any like or related manner interfering with,
restraining, or coercing employees in the exercise of
their rights under Section 7 of the Act.
2. Take the following affirmative action which ap-
pears necessary and appropriate to effectuate the poli-
cies of the Act:
(a) Notify the Union forthwith in writing that it will
upon request meet with the representatives of the
Union for the timely negotiation of a new collective-
bargaining agreement or concerning matters pertaining
to the admission of the existing collective-bargaining
agreement irrespective of the fact that one of the
Union's representatives is E. T. Culp.
(b) Post on Respondent's bulletin board copies of the
attached notice marked "Appendix."5 Copies of said
The Oliver Corporation, 74 NLRB 483
° In its letter, Respondent stated its desire to have the stipulation include
the factual statements contained in the affidavit of Respondent's president,
Marion A Clay In reaching our decision we have considered Clay's affida-
vit, which was attached to Respondent's brief, as an offer of proof. However,
we deem the factual statements contained therein, assuming arguendo that
they are true, insufficient at law to support a dismissal herein. See North
Bros. Ford, Inc., 187 NLRB No 106, In 1, wherein the Board, in finding
a refusal to bargain, rejected respondent's defense based upon the fact that
a union grievance committee included employees of competitors. In view of
our consideration of Clay's affidavit as an offer of proof, we hereby deny
Respondent's alternative request for a hearing
' In the event that this Order is enforced by a Judgment of a United States
Court of Appeals, the words in the notice reading "Posted by Order of the
National Labor Relations Board" shall be changed to read "Posted Pursuant
to a Judgment of the United States Court of Appeals Enforcing an Order
(Cont.)
858 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
notice, on forms provided by the Regional Director for
Region 16, after being duly signed by the Respondent's
authorized representative, shall be posted by it immedi-
ately upon receipt thereof, and be maintained by it for
60 consecutive days thereafter, in conspicuous places,
including all places where notices to employees are
customarily posted. Reasonable steps shall be taken by
the Respondent to insure that said notices are not al-
tered, defaced, or covered by any other material.
(c) Notify the Regional Director for Region 16, in
writing, within 20 days from the date of this Order,
what steps the Respondent has taken to comply here-
with.
lectively with Local 6218, Communications
Workers of America, AFL-CIO, as long as the
representatives of said Union include E. T. Culp,
the Union's president.
WE WILL meet upon request with the represent-
atives of the aforesaid labor organization, whether
or not they include E. T. Culp, the Union's presi-
dent.
WE WILL NOT refuse to meet with E. T. Culp or
in any like or related manner interfere with, re-
strain, or coerce employees in the exercise of rights
under the National Labor Relations Act, as
amended.
of the National Labor Relations Board "
APPENDIX
NOTICE To EMPLOYEES
POSTED BY ORDER OF THE
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
An Agency of the United States Government
The National Labor Relations Act gives all em-
ployees these rights:
To engage in self-organization
To form, join, or help unions
To bargain collectively through a repre-
sentative of their own choosing
To act together for collective bargaining or
other aid or protection
To refrain from any or all of these things.
WE WILL NOT refuse to meet and bargain col-
LUFKIN TELEPHONE
EXCHANGE, INC.,
CONROE TELEPHONE
COMPANY, AND
ALTO TELEPHONE
COMPANY
(Employer)
Dated By
(Representative) (Title)
This is an official notice and must not be defaced by
anyone.
This notice must remain posted for 60 consecutive
days from the date of posting and must not be altered,
defaced, or covered by any other material.
Any questions concerning this notice or compliance
with its provisions may be directed to the Board's
Office, Room 8A24, Federal Office Building, 819 Tay-
lor Street, Fort Worth, Texas 76102, Telephone 817-
334-2921.