New England Retinning, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 31, 1947

74 N.L.R.B. 938 (N.L.R.B. 1947)

In the Matter of NEW ENGLAND RETIN NING, INC., EMPLOYER and
UNITED STEELWORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO, PETITIONER
Case No. 1-R--966'4.-Decided July 31, 1947
Mr. Harris E. Albert, of Everett, Mass., for the Employer.
Mr. Sidney Grant , of Boston , Mass ., for the Petitioner.
Mr. Irving D. Rosenman , of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
Upon a petition duly filed, the National Labor Relations Board on
May 23, 1947, conducted a prehearing election among the employees of
the Employer in the alleged appropriate unit, to determine whether
or not they desired to be represented by the Petitioner for the purposes
of collective bargaining.
At the close of the election a Tally of Ballots was furnished the
parties. The Tally shows that-there were approximately 30 eligible
voters, and that 29 of these eligible voters cast ballots, of which 19
were for the Petitioner, 6 were against the Petitioner, and 4 were
challenged.
Thereafter, a hearing was held at Boston, Masachusetts, on June 16,
1947, before Robert E. Greene, 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 the case the National Labor Relations
Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
New England Retinning, Inc., a Massachusetts corporation, is en-
gaged in the business of retinning and servicing milk cans and dairy
and creamery equipment at its plant in Everett, Massachusetts. Dur-
ing a 12-month period, the Employer purchases raw materials valued
at over $25,000, of which approximately 95 percent represents ship-
74 N. L R. B., No. 149.
938
A
NEW ENGLAND RETINNING, INC. 939
ments to its plant from points outside the Commonwealth of Massa-
chusetts. During a similar period the Employer's service charges
amount to approximately $100,000, of which approximately 75 percent
represents services to milk and dairy companies located outside the
Commonwealth.
The Employer admits, and we find, that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED 1
The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress
of Industrial Organizations, claiming to represent employees of the
Employer.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Employer refuses to recognize the Petitioner as the exclusive
bargaining representative of its production and maintenance em-
ployees until the Petitioner has been certified by the Board in an
appropriate unit.
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning
the representation of employees of the Employer within the meaning
,of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
We find, in substantial accord with the agreement of the parties,
that all production and maintenance employees at the Everett, Mas-
sachusetts, plant of the Employer, excluding executives, office and
-clerical employees, and all supervisory employees, constitute a unit
appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the
meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
V. THE DETEI:DIIN ATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
The Employer takes the position (1) that the election should not
have been held until unfair labor charges previously filed by the
Petitioner against the Employer had been disposed of by the Board,
even though a waiver had been filed 2 and (2) that the Board has no
authority to conduct prehearing elections.
IThe following organizations were requested in writing to submit to the Board repre-
sentation evidence. if any, but failed to do so International Association of Machinists,
International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers, of America,
International Jewelry Workers, A F of L , and the American Federation of Laboi. Nor
was any appearance entered in behalf of any of these organizations at the hearing
2 The Petitioner has waived any right to object to an-election held in the instant proceed-
ing on the basis of any acts alleged as unfair labor practices in Case No I-C-2034.
940 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
With respect to the first contention, it is clear that the conducting`
of an election, in the face of unfair labor charges which have been
waived by the charging union, is in conformity with well-established
Board precedents.' As to the second contention, no reason has been
advanced to show wherein the holding of the election operated to the
prejudice of any party, or that the holding of prehearing elections is-
violative of Section 9 of the Act. Moreover, the Board has previously
considered and rejected similar contentions.' Accordingly, we find
no merit in the Employer's position.
The results of the election held previous to the hearing show that
the Petitioner has secured a majority of the valid votes cast, irrespec-
tive of the counting of the four challenged ballots.' Under these cir-
cumstances, we shall certify the Petitioner as the collective bargaining
representative of the employees in the appropriate unit.
CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED that United Steelworkers of America, C. I. 0.,
has been designated and selected by a majority of all the production
and maintenance employees at the Everett, Massachusetts, plant of the
Employer, excluding executives, office and clerical employees, and all
supervisory employees as their representative for the purposes of
collective bargaining, and that pursuant to Section 9 (a) of the Act,,
the said organization is the exclusive bargaining representative of all
such employees for the purposes of collective bargaining, with respect
to rates of pay, wages, hours of employment, and other conditions of
employment.
CHAIRMAN HERZOG took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Certification of Representatives.
3 Matter of A. Gross Company, Inc, 72 N. L R. B 879; Matter of Norris Stamping and
Manufacturing Co , 65 N L R B 789
4 Matter of It R Squibb it Sons, 67 N. L. R. B. 557.
s No testimony was adduced at the hearing with respect to the four ch.Ellenged ballots
In any event , a determination as to whether the ballots should be opened and counted is,
unnecessary because it is insufficient to affect the election results