Mack Manufacturing Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 28, 1954

108 N.L.R.B. 1181 (N.L.R.B. 1954)

MACK MANUFACTURING COMPANY 1 181
All our employees are free to become or remain members of the above-named Union or any
other labor organization. We will not discriminate in regard to their hire or tenure of em-
ployment or any term or condition of employment because of their membership in or activity
on behalf of any such labor organization.
MONTGOMERY WARD & COMPANY,
Employer.
Dated ................ By.................. .......................................... .......................
(Representative) (Title)
This notice must remain posted for 60 days from the date hereof, and must not be altered,
defaced, or covered by any other material.
MACK MANUFACTURING COMPANY and AMALGAMATED
PLANT GUARDS LOCAL 506, UNITED PLANT GUARD
WORKERS OF AMERICA, Petitioner . Case No . 4-RC-2258.
May 28, 1954
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before William Nai-
mark, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at
the hearing are free from prejudicial error are 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 Petitioner seeks to be certified as representative of
the plant guards employed at the Employer's Allentown, Penn-
sylvania, plant. The Employer contends that the Petitioner is
not eligible to represent the Employer's guards, because it is
indirectly affiliated with a nonguard union, contrarytothe pro-
visions of Section 9 (b) (3) of the Act, as amended.' The
Employer asserts that the filing of the instant petition by the
Petitioner has not altered the indirect affiliation recentlyfound
by the Board to have existed between the Petitioner's coaffiliate,
Local 504, and Local 677, UAW-CIO,' a nonguard union repre-
senting the Employer's production and maintenance employees,
as the Petitioner has succeeded to the benefits of the guard
organizational work done by Local 677. The Employer urges
that the Board should not certify either the Petitioner's inter-
national or any of its locals until (a) the international prevails
upon Local 677 to post a notice to the employees stating that
it no longer is interested in organizing the Employer' s guards,
i Section 9 (b) (3) provides, inter aha, that " . . . no labor organization shall be certified
as the representative of. . , guards if such organization' admits to membership, or is
affiliated directly or indirectly with an organization which admits to membership, employees
other than guards." (Emphasis supplied.)
2107 NLRB 209.
108 NLRB No. 157.
1 182 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
and (b) either a reasonable time has elapsed after such a notice,
or the guards, without prior solicitation by any union, request
the international, or one of its locals, to represent them.
On November 2, 1952, as a result of an election conducted
pursuant to a decision and direction of election,' the Board
certified Local 504 as the bargaining representative of the
guards involved herein. About a year later, on November 25,
1953, the Board dismissed a complaint alleging that the
Employer had refused to bargain with Local 504 in violation
of Section 8 (a) (5) of the Act, and decertified that union as bar-
gaining representative of the guards because of an indirect
affiliation with the UAW-CIO local.4 The Board, inter alia,
found that an official of the UAW-CIO local had solicited most
of the members for the guard local, had witnessed their appli-
cations for membership, and had warned the Employer not to
permit any supervisors to perform any "rank-and-file" work
during a then pending layoff because the guards, whom he had
organized, would report to him about any work done by super-
visors.
Upon learning about the Board's order decertifying Local 504,
the international wrote that local on November 27, 1953, advising
the local that the international had revoked its charter, and
requesting its return. Several days later the president of Local
504 wrote the international stating that the Employer's guards
were still interested in being organized and inquiring whether
they could organize through the international. The international
later communicated with the chief steward of Local 504, advising
that the guards could be organized, and that they should contact
the international representative located in another city. There-
after, the chief steward communicated with the international
representative, who met with the guards several days later at
which time he secured their authorization cards, witnessing
their signatures himself. He wrote the Employer requesting
recognition on December 5, 1953, and filed the instant petition
on January 6, 1954.
The evidence shows that the Petitioner, Local 506, which was
chartered in September 1952 for the sole purpose of repre-
senting plant guards, received-no assistance from any other
union in connection with its organizing the guards or processing
this petition. The funds of Local 504 presently are deposited in
a bank, awaiting action of that local's former members as to
their disposition. No money has been turned over to Local 506.
The charter issued to Local 504 has been surrendered to the
international, in compliance with the latter's request. No Local
504 meetings have been held since its decertification by the
Board.
A careful consideration of all the foregoing facts convinces
us that there is insufficient basis on this record for finding that
3 Case No. 4-RC-1665 (not reported in printed volumes of Board Decisions and Orders.)
4See footnote 2, supr.
GLADDING McBEAN & COMPANY 1183
the Petitioner in this case is affiliated indirectly with Local
677, UAW -CIO. 5 Accordingly, we find that the Petitioner is a
labor organization which does not admit to membership, and
is not affiliated directly or indirectly with an organization which
admits to membership, employees other than guards.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the
representation of employees of the Employer within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. We find that all plant guards, employed by the Employer
at its Allentown, Pennsylvania, plant, including all other
employees performing plant guard duties as defined in Section
9 (b) (3) of the Act, but excluding all other employees, pro-
fessional employees, and all supervisors as defined in the Act,
constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective
bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
5. The Petitioner contends that six guards , laid off on
December 6, 1953, were temporarily laid off, and are eligible
to vote. The Employer asserts that these employees were ter-
minated on that date, and there is no possibility of their being
rehired within the next 6 months. Because of cutbacks in pro-
duction, the Employer has reduced its overall working force by
one-third since March 1953. Even further reductions might be
necessary if present economic conditions continue. As it is
clear that these laid-off employees do not have a reasonable
expectation of reemployment in the near future, we find that
they are not eligible to participate in the election.6
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
5Cf. Brooklyn Piers, Inc., 88 NLRB 1364, at 1364-1365.
As we have found the Petitioner not to be disqualified by the taint of indirect affiliation
with the nonguard representative, we find it unnecessary to consider the remedial measures
proposed by the Employer. We have, however, taken into consideration in deciding this case
the fact that in our earlier decision we did not prescribe any period of time that must elapse
before the Board would entertain a petition by a coaffiliate of Local 504, or prescribe any
remedy other than the decertification of Local 504 for the indirect affiliation there found to
exist.
6Avco Manufacturing Corporation, 107 NLRB 295, (footnote 6); Underwood Corporation,
107 NLRB 1132.
GLADDING McBEAN & COMPANY and LOCAL UNION 11,
INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL
WORKERS, AFL, Petitioner. Case No. 21 -RC-3480. May
28, 1954
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before L. A. Gordon,
hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the
108 NLRB No. 153.