New York Central Iron Works

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 23, 1944

56 N.L.R.B. 812 (N.L.R.B. 1944)

In the Matter of NEW YORK CENTRAL IRON WORKS and CONGRESS OF
INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATIONS
Case No. 5-R-1498.-Decided May 03, 1944
Lame, Bushong & Byron, by Messrs. David W. Byron and E. Stuart
Bushong, of Hagerstown, Md., for the Company.
, Messrs. Abe Klein and Robert J. Brylke, of,Hagerstown, Md., for
the C. I. O. '
Mr. Leslie L. Myers, of Washington, D. C., Mr. Joseph S. Stamm,
of-Baltimore, Md., Mr. Carl Hubbell, of Hagerstown, Md., and Mr.
William C. Waldeaker, of Baltimore , Md., for the A. F. L.
Mr. Robert E. Tillman, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
ORDER
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon petition duly filed by Congress of Industrial Organizations,
herein called the C. I. 0., alleging' that a question affecting commerce
had arisen concerning the representation of employees of New York
Central Iron Works, Hagerstown, Maryland, herein called the Com-
pany, the National Labor Relations Board provided for an appropri-
ate hearing upon due notice before Robert A. Levett, Trial Examiner.
Said hearing was held at Hagerstown, Maryland,,on March 31, 1944_
The Company, the C. I. 0., and International Association of Bridge,
Structural & Ornamental Iron Workers, Shopmen's Local Union No.
603, A. F. L., herein called the A. F. L.,1 appeared, participated, and
were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to examine,' and cross-
examine witnesses, and to -introduce evidence bearing on the issues.
The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are free from
prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. All parties were afforded
opportunity to file briefs with the Board.
i The appearance of the A. F. L. was' both in the name of the Local, and in the name of
the International.
56 N. L . R. B., No. 150.
812
NEW YORK CENTRAL, IRONN, WORKS 813
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
New York Central Iron Works is a partnership engaged in the
operation of a single steel plate fabricating plant in Hagerstown,
Maryland. The Company constructs tanks, towers, flumes and other
similar structures. During the year 1943 the Company purchased
materials consisting of steel plate and structural steel, ,having a value
in excess of $150,000, of which approximately 75 percent was shipped
to the plant from points outside the State of Maryland. During the
same period the Company's products were valued in excess of $290,000,
of which approximately 75 percent was shipped from the plant to
points outside the State of Maryland.,
The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED '
Congress of Industrial Organizations is a labor organization ad-
mitting to membership employees of the Company.
International Association of Bridge , Structural & Ornamental Iron
Workers, Shopmen 's Local Union No. 603; is a labor organization
affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, admitting to mem-
bership employees of the Company.
III. THE ALLEGED QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On February 6, 1942, the A. F. L. was certified by the Board as the
collective bargaining representative of the Company's production
and maintenance employees.2 On April 1, 1942, the Company and
the A. F. L. entered into a collective bargaining agreement for a fixed
term of 1 year, which provided, inter alia, that in the event neither
party gave notice to the other in writing of a desire to terminate or
change the contract at least 4 months' prior to its anniversary date, it
would be automatically renewed from year to year. No notice to
terminate was given prior to December 1, 1942, the automatic renewal
date',. and 'accordingly the contract' was renewed for another year
commencing on Apri11, 1943.' Nor was any notice to terminate given
prior to December 1, 1943. It is the position of the A. F. L. and the
Company that the contract was thereby automatically renewed for a
2 Matter of New York Central Iron Works, Hagerstown, Maryland, 37 N. L. R. B. 894;
38 N. L. R. B. 978. The A. F. L. was the sole participant, in a prior consent election con-
ducted on April 4, 1941, among the Company's production and maintenance employees. In
that election, a majority of the votes were cast against the A. F. L.
814 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL"LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
third 1-year term, and constitutes a bar to the present proceeding,
since the evidence is undisputed that the C. I. 0. did not inform the
Company of its representation claim until January 21, 1944. The
C. I. 0. apparently contends that the A. F. L. ceased,to function
,as a labor organization prior to' December 1, 1943, the automatic
renewal date of the contract, so that the contract was made ineffective
and thus could not renew itself, or, in the alternative, that if the con-
tract was legally renewed, it is no bar because the A. F. L. has since
ceased to function as a labor organization, and, consequently, there
is.no .party capable of administering the contract for the Company's
employees. The A. F. L. denies that it has ceased to exist.
There 'is evidence in the record which tends to support the C. I. O.'s
contention. Thus, since November.1943, the A. 'F. L. has not pre--'
sented any grievances to the Company 3 and has 'not sent `any written
communication to it. It has collected no dues in 1944, and has no
members who are fully paid up; some of- the, original members are
over a year behind in their payments. It has held no meeting of
members since November 1943. In January 1944, upon the informal
approval of the officers of the A. F. L., the bulk of the money remain-
ing in the treasury was used for social purposes.
On the other hand; 'there is no evidence that, the A. F. L. has, been
formally dissolved or that a change in affiliation 'was voted by the
membership. 4 The A. F. L. has- not been suspended by the Inter-
national' and still retains its charter.6 There is no evidence to in-
dicate a wholesale transfer of, membership from the A. F. L. to the
C. I. 0.7 Furthermore, the A. F. L. has entered an appearance in the
proceeding and denied that it has ceased to exist. A full slate of offi-
cers was elected in June 1943. - A member of the grievance committee
of the A. F. L. testified that the reason there had been no recent meet-
ings of members was the fact that the employees had been working
overtime on war production ' in the evenings. 'He further testified
that relations with the Company had been good and hence there was
no need to present grievances in recent months. Grievances have,
however, been presented between June and December 1943. It ap-
pears, moreover, that no changes have been made in the A. F. L.'s
'contract, and, in general, its terms have been observed by the Com-
pany. We'conclude that the evidence is not sufficient to support a
' There is some vague testimony in the recoid that a grievance was presented 8 weeks
prior to the hearing in the instant proceeding.
4Cf. Matter of. The Connor Lumber and Land Co., 27 N. L. R. B. 306, 309 ;1Matter,of
United Stove Company, 30 N. L R. B..305, 307-8; Matter of Armstrong Rubber Company,
35 N. L' R. B. 368, 370; Matter of Godchaux- Sugars,.-Inc, 36 N. L. R. B. 926, 928;
and Matter of Sealed Power Corporation and The Accuralite Co., 41 N. L R B 1225, 1227.
Cf. Matter of Dominion Electrical Manufacturing Company, Inc, 27 N L. R B 722, 726.
Cf Matter of Armstrong'Rubber Company, 35 N. L. R B. 368, 370; and Matter of-E. T.
Fraim Lock Company, et at., 39 N L R. B 202, 204.'
7 Cf. Matter of Sound Timber Company, 8 N. L R. B. 844, 846-7.
NEW YORK CENTRAL IRON WORKS 815
-finding that the-A. F. L. at any time ceased to function as-a labor
organization.
In accordance with the above findings, we find that the contract be-
tween the Company and the A. F. L., was renewed on December 1,
1943, and constitutes a bar to a present. investigation and certifica-
tion of representatives. Our finding in this respect does not necessarily
indicate approval of all automatic renewal clauses regardless of their
length. In cases where evidence is adduced to indicate that 4 months',
notice clauses-are not customarily included in contracts in the industry
in question, we will hold that the absence of such custom limits the
authority. of the contracting union. Since there is no such evidence
in the present proceeding, we are constrained to regard all the pro-
visions of the A. F. L.'s contract as valid and therefore the claim of
the C. I. O. was made 7 weeks after 'the legal deadline.
We find that no question affecting commerce has arisen concerning
the representation of employees of the Company, within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act. We shall,
therefore, dismiss the petition, but without prejudice to the C. I. O.'s
right seasonably to file a new petition.
ORDER
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact, the National
Labor Relations Board- hereby orders that the petition for investiga-
tion and certification of representatives of, employees of New York
Central Iron Woiks, Hagerstown, Maryland; filed by Congress of
Industrial Organizations, be, and it hereby is, dismissed, without
prejudice to the latter's right seasonably to file a new petition.
CHAIRMAN Miii,is took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Order.