R. E. Rappeport & Sons

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 3, 1945

62 N.L.R.B. 1118 (N.L.R.B. 1945)

In the Matter of RUBIN E. RAPPEPORT , SIGMUND RAPPEPORT , AND MILTON
RAPPEPORT , CO-PARTNERS , D/B/A R. E. RAPPEPORT & SONS; WILT
TRUNK COMPANY ; SPECIALTY SUIT CASE Co.; LEO STEIN AND EDWARD
STEIN, CO-PARTNERS , D/B/A FRANK MASHEK COMPANY, LEO STEIN,
EDWARD STEIN , AND JANE STEIN OGUSS, D/B/A STEIN BROTHERS
MANUFACTURING Co.; LIBERTY LEATHER FINISHING COMPANY, INC.;
CENTRAL LEATHER COMPANY , A CORPORATION ; UNIVERSAL TRUNK
COMPANY; SIDNEY POSTER, VIOLET POSTER, DAVIS POSTER, AND FAN-
NIE POSTER , CO-PARTNERS , D/B/A POSTER BROTHERS ; MANDEL DOPPELT
AND MAX DOPPELT, CO-PARTNERS , D/B/A CHICAGO LEATHER HANDLE
CO.; SIMON B . REUBEN AND IDA REUBEN , CO-PARTNERS , D/B/A SIMON
B. REUBEN & Co .; EVER-WEAR TRUNK WORKS, INC .; BEN PLATT,
PAUL PLATT, SYLVIA PLATT, SIDNEY PLATT, AND HILDA PLATT, CO-
PARTNERS, D/B/A ATLAS LEATHER CASE Co.; BENNO HAHN, D/B/A
BENNO HAHN & COMPANY ; AMERICAN TRUNK & CASE CO., INC.;
BERNARD ERPENBECK AND HARRY C. SEGESSMAN , CO-PARTNERS, D/B/A
ERPENBECK AND SEGESSMAN ; HERCULES TRUNK WORKS, INC.,
GENERAL TRUNK CO., INC.; JACOB A. LEVINSON AND JOSEPH
WEIN, CO-PARTNERS , D/B/A BETTER-BUILT TRUNK & CASE Co.;,
CHARLES DOPPELT AND RUTH DOPPELT , AND CHARLES DOPPELT
AND RUTH DOPPELT AS TRUSTEES UNDER RUTH DOPPELT IRREVOC-
ABLE TRUSTS No. 1 AND 2, AND SHIRLEY DOPPELT IRREVOCABLE
TRUSTS No . 1 AND 2 , A CO-PARTNERSHIP , D/B/A CHARLES DOPPELT
AND COMPANY ; S. DRESNER & SON, INC., GLADSTONE CASE MFG. CO.,
A CORPORATION , NATIONAL BRIEF CASE MFG. CO., INC.; EDWARD
COHEN, D/B/A SUPREME LEATHER GOODS CO.; EMANUEL DRESNER,
EVELYN DRESNER , DANIEL H . MENDELSON , AND MARGARET MENDEL-
SON, CO-PARTNERS , D/B/A VOGUE LUGGAGE COMPANY; HARRY WELL-
INGTON, D/B/A WELLINGTON TRUNK AND CASE CO.; P. BECKER & CO.,
A CORPORATION ; AARON FALSTEIN , MAX M. SIMPSON , AND MAURY
FALSTEIN , CO-PARTNERS , D/B/A ACME LEATHER COMPANY; ROYAL
LEATHER GOODS MFG. CO ., INC.; SINGER BROS. CO., INC.; MURRAY
VARAT, D/B/A MURRAY VARAT CO.; MAX HALPERIN , HERMAN HA1.-
PERIN, NORMAN HALPERIN , AND MAURICE HALPERIN , CO-PARTNERS,
D/B/A PROGRESS CASE & BAG COMPANY and INTERNATIONAL FUR and
LEATHER WORKERS UNION, C. I. 0
62N.L R. B., No 142.
1118
R. E. RAPPEPORT & SONS 1119
Jacobson, Nierman & Silbert, by Mr. David Silbert, of Chicago, Ill, for
the Association and the Members.
Messrs. Robert Herbin and Frank Mierkiewicz, of Chicago, Ill., for the
C. I. O.
Mr. Joseph M. Jacobs, of Chicago, Ill., for the A. F. L.
Mr. Harry H. Kahn, of Chicago, Ill., for Atlas.
Mr. Herbert Portes, of Chicago, Ill., for Doppelt.
Mr. Henry Miller, of Chicago, Ill., for Liberty.
Mr. Charles Slivnick, of Chicago, Ill., for Central.
Mr. Hyman Brickinan, of Chicago, Ill., for Ever-Wear.
Mr. Edward Blumenfeld, of Chicago, Ill., for General
Dlr. Sam Cohen, of Chicago, Ill., for Supreme.
Mr Max M. Simpson, of Chicago, Ill., for Acme.
Mr. Al C. Gost, of Chicago, Ill., for American.
Mr. Sidney Poster, of Chicago, Ill., for Poster.
Mr. S. Nordenberg, of Chicago, Ill., for Specialty.
Mr. Max Halperin, of Chicago, Ill., for Progress.
Mr. Allen Cowen, of Chicago, Ill., for Vogue.
Mr. Max Doppelt, of Chicago, Ill., for Chicago.
Mr. D. C. Massie, of Chicago, Ill., for Hercules.
Mr. Donald H. Frank, of counsel to the Board.
Cases Nos. 13-R-2955 through 13-R-2974, inclusive;
13-R-2982 through 13-R-2986, inclusive; 13-R-2991; 13-R-2996.
13-R-2997, 13-R-3022, 13-R-3031, 13-R-3032, and
13-R-3080.-Decided July 3, 1945
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon petitions and amended petitions duly filed by International Fur
& Leather Workers Union, C. I. O., herein called the C. I. 'O., alleging that
questions affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of
employees of each of the members of Chicago Luggage-& Leather Goods
Manufacturers Association, Chicago, Illinois, herein called the Association,
being the employers listed in Appendix A, herein jointly called the Mem-
bers, all of Chicago, Illinois, and alleging that questions affecting commerce
had arisen concerning the representation of employees of each of the 15
companies listed in Appendix B, herein jointly called the Independent, all
of Chicago, Illinois, the National Labor Relations Board provided for an
1120 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
appropriate consolidated hearing upon due notice before Robert R. Riss-
man, Trial Examiner. Said hearing was held at Chicago, Illinois, on May
9, 10, and 12, 1945. The Association,' the Independents, the C. I. 0., and
Luggage Workers Local No. 50, A. F. L., herein called the A. F. L., ap-
peared 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. The A. F. L. and Central moved the dismissal of the
petitions upon various grounds. The Trial Examiner referred these motions
to the Board for determination. For reasons stated in Sections III and IV,
infra, the motions are 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.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE MEMBERS AND THE INDEPENDENTS
The record reveals that all of the companies involved herein, both Mem-
bers and Independents, are engaged.in one or more phases of the leather
industry at Chicago, Illinois. Each Member and Independent either re-
ceives a substantial amount of the raw materials used by it in its manufac-
turing processes from points outside the State of Illinois, or a substantial
amount of the finished products of each is shipped to points outside the
State of Illinois, or both.'
I Counsel for the Association also appeared on behalf of the Members.
a The following chart indicates the approximate total value of purchases and sales made by each
of the Members and Independents , and the percentage of such purchases and sales received from or
shipped to points outside the State of
Value of raw
materials purchased in
Illinois.
Percentage
coming from outside Amount of sales
Percentage
going outside
1944 Illinois in 1944 Illinois
Rappeport $ 55,000 40 $ 310,000 75
Wilt 40,000 90 115,000 50
Mashek 50 ,000 50 100,000 90
Stein 50,000 50 100,000 90
Universal 75,000 75 200,000 50
Reuben 15 , 000 50 25,000 90
Hahn 20,000 75 60,000 65
Erpenbeck 125,000 76 400,000 43
Better-Built 25,000 50 50,000 90
Dresner 300 ,000 75 1,000,000 75
Gladstone 50,000 75 100,000 75
National 50,000 50 100,000 90
Wellington 46,000 41 252,000
Becker 100 ,000 75 350,000 50
Royal 50,000 50 100,000 50
Singer 25,000 50 50,000 90
Varat 15,000 50 25,000 90
Liberty 32,000 38 75,000
Ever-Wear 39,000 75 95,000 40
General 300 ,000 60 400,000 80
Acute 65,000 75 140,000 15
R. E. RAPPEPORT & SONS 1121
Each of the Members and each of the Independents admits that, for the
purposes of this proceeding, it is engaged in commerce within the meaning
of the National Labor Relations Act
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED -
International Fur & Leather Workers Union, affiliated with the Congress
of Industrial Organizations, is a labor organization admitting to member-
ship employees of the Members and of the Independents.
Luggage Workers Local No. 50, affiliated with the American Federation
of Labor, is a labor organization admitting to membership employees of the
Members and of the Independents.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
It is apparent from the record that neither the Members nor the Inde-
pendents will bargain collectively with either the C. I. O. or the A. F. L. in
the absence of a certification by the Board.
A statement of a Board agent, introduced into evidence at the hearing,
indicates that the C. I. O. represents a substantial number of employees in
the units hereinafter found appropriate.'
Supreme 25 , 000 75 100,000 75
Doppelt 131 ,000 75 476,000 75
Poster 82,000 60 200,000 80
American 20,000 40 35 , 000 30
Vogue 35,000 50 100,000 90
Atlas 250,000 70 500,000 85
Central "" 15,000 33
Specialty 17,000- 75 50,000 75
Chicago 15,000 80 38,000 10
Hercules 33,000 50 78,000 90
Progress 10,000 75 60,000 95
All of the finished products of this Member are manufactured for the United States Government
""Almost the entire sales of this company are to luggage and leather goods manufacturers located
in Chicago, Illinois.
-This company was unable to estimate the approximate value of the raw materials used during
1944
3 Central admitted that it was engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act during the
year 1944.
4 The report of the Field Examiner is summarized in the following chart:
e
Number of
employees on
pay roll
Number of
C. I. O. cards
submitted
Number of
cards
checked on
pay roll
Additional cai cis
submitted at hearing
but not checked
against pay roll
Rappeport 17 11 10 0
Wilt 17 15 15 0
Mashek 71 55 44 23
Stein 176 100 93 14
Universal 21 20 0
Reuben - 22 19 17 0
Hahn 7 7 7 0
Erpenbeck 48 45 44 10
Better-Built 31 21 21 1
Dresner 236 111 105 17
1122 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
The Trial Examiner referred to the Board the motion of the A F L
that the petitions in' this case be dismissed upon its allegation that the cards
submitted by the C 10. were obtained by fraud in that a C. I. 0. union
organizer used his position of trust as an official of the A. F. L. to obtain
the signatures of employees who signed unwittingly or under a misappre-
hension as to what they were signing. The Trial Examiner refused to admit
evidence sought to be adduced by the A.,F: L. in substantiation of this claim
We have frequently held that the authenticity of cards submitted for the
purpose of showing the interest of a labor organization in a proceeding
before the Board is not a subject matter for challenge by the other parties
thereto since the cards are submitted only in order to satisfy the Board's
own administrative requirements.' It is clear that the best method by which
to determine the desires of employees is to conduct elections by secret ballot
We have therefore denied the motion and affirmed the Trial Examiner's
ruling.
The C. I. 0. presented no authorization cards signed by employees of
Singer and Varat. The A, F. L. moved at the hearing that the petitions
involving the employees of these two Members be therefore dismissed. In
view of our finding in' Section IV, infra, that employees of the Members of
the Association constitute a single appropriate unit, and in view of the
fact that the C. 1. 0. has made a substantial showing of interest concerning
the employees in that unit, we have denied the motion.
Gladstone 64 - 32 31 4
National 48 15 12 8
Wellington 19 19 19 0
Becker 38 34 3,l 7,
Royal 9 3 3 0
Singer 0 0 0
Varat 0 0 0
Total for the Members (above ) 824 507 427 84
Specialty 9 8 8 - 0
Liberty 8 9 **** 0
Central 2 3 **** 0
Poster 19 15 15 0
Chicago 8 6 6 2
Ever-Wear 7 6 6 0
Atlas 29 29 2
American 6 6 6 0
Hercules 13 12 '12 4
General 51 51 42 3
Doppelt 42 29 24 1
Supreme 17 14 10 1
Vogue 30 28 **** 3
Acme 18 14 14 4
Progress 7 0 5***** 5
The A F. L relies on its recently expired contracts with the Association and the Independents to
establish its interest herein
****These companies refused or failed to submit lists of their employees
*****The five cards submitted by the C 1 0 at the hearing were checked against the pay roll
of Progress
5 Mattes of Champion Sheet Metal Company, Inc , 61 N L R B 511, and cases cited therein
k. E. kAPPEPORT & SONS 1123
In addition, Central, one of the Independents, moved that the petition
involving that company be dismissed, contending that it has only one em-
ployee. The record indicated, however, that Central has not ceased opera-
tions, and continues to fill such orders as it receives when it is possible to
do so, its operations being curtailed due to the manpower shortage and the
scarcity of materials. In filling these orders, it hires certain part-time and
temporary employees. It is entirely possible that Central may have several
employees eligible to vote in the election hereinafter ordered, and in light
of, this possibility, we have denied the motion.
The contracts between the A. F. L. and the Association and between the
A. F. L. and the Independents expired on April 20, 1945. These contracts
contained no automatic 'renewal provisions, and were extended by the
parties for additional 30-day periods, pending the outcome of the instant
proceeding. The contracts, therefore, contrary to the position taken by Atlas,
do not constitute a bar to present determinations of representatives.
We find that questions affecting commerce have arisen concerning the
representation of employees of the Members and the Independents, within
the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The C. I. 0. seeks a single unit consisting of all the employees of the
Members and Independents involved herein, specifically including, among
other employees, machinists, machine repairmen, operators, mechanics, cut-
ters, embossers, dopers, and frame coverers, but excluding firemen, engi-
neers, oilers, steam fitters, plumbers, watchmen, porters, and all other
building maintenance workers, chauffeurs, truckers, errand boys, shipping
clerks, salesmen, office and clerical employees, executives and all other
employees serving in a fiduciary capacity,' and foremen and all other super-
visory employees with authority to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or
otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or effectively recom-
mend such action. The categories which would thus be excluded are those
expressly or impliedly excluded from the units established in the past con-
tracts between the A. F. L. and the Association, and between the A. F. L.
and the Independents. The C. I. 0. stated that, as an alternative, it seeks a
single unit of the employees of the Members and single units of the employ-
ees of each of the Independents. It stated, moreover, that if the Board
should determine that single units of the employees of each of the com-
panies, whether Members or Independents, are appropriate, it desires to
participate in the resultant elections. All of the parties involved herein are
agreed as to the propriety of the inclusions and exclusions sought by the
B It is apparent that the parties have reference to those categories of employees which the Boaid
calls confidential and managerial
1124 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
C. I. 0., but not all of the companies involved agree as to the scope of the
unit, and considerable divergence of opinion among the parties appears in
the record on that question.
The history of collective bargaining
In 1937, a general strike among the employees in the luggage industry in
Chicago was precipitated by the refusal of employers to bargain with the
A. F. L., which in that year had begun to organize these employees. As a
consequence of the strike, the Association and those Independents involved
herein which were then in existence agreed to bargain with the A. F. L.,
and said Independents agreed that the term of any contract resulting from
negotiations between the Association and the A. F. L. would be applictLble
to those Independents. The first contract was formulated and signed the
same year, and subsequent contracts were negotiated and executed in 1938,
1939, 1941, and 1943. The last two contracts were for 2-year terms, and
the final contract terminated on April 20, 1945. The procedure involved
in the negotiations of each of these contracts was similar. The A. F. L.
and the Association met, discussed terms, and submitted a draft of their
proposed contracts to the Independents. However, the latter have not,
in recent years, participated ' in the negotiations of the Association, and
have not attempted to do so. In outline and in most of the particulars the
contracts of the Independents and the Association have been identical;
however, the record revealed that on some occasions the contract of an
Independent varied in important phases from the Association's contract.
These variations were due not only to dissimilarity of the business and
method of operation of the companies but to separate negotiations of the
Independents' contracts, and in part to the fact that in general the A. F. L.
was able to achieve more favorable conditions from the Independents than
from the Association. On the other hand, the Members were bound to accept
the contracts negotiated by the Association, and an official of the Associa-
tion signed the contracts for all of the Members. There was no negotia-
tion concerning the terms of the contracts between any individual Mem-
ber and the A. F. L.
In the Chicago area there are between 10 and 15 companies engaged
in various phases of the leather industry similar to those of the companies
involved herein. These companies have not negotiated any contracts with
the A. F. L. and were not made parties to this proceeding. In addition,
2 Chicago companies engaged in like production and under contract with
the A. F. L. were not made parties to the proceeding.
Conclusion
We are of the opinion that the history of collective bargaining in the
leather industry in Chicago indicates clearly the propriety of a unit corn-
R. E. RAPPEPORT & SONS 1125-
prised of employees of the Members. It is apparent that the Members dele-
gated authority over a period of years to the Association to bargain collec-
tively on their behalf, and that the negotiations and resultant contracts of
the Association were the negotiations and contracts of the Members.
On the other hand, we are not persuaded that the history of collective
bargaining compels a finding that the employees of the Independents should
be a part of this bargaining unit. The Independents did not participate in
the negotiations between the Association and the A. F. L., after the
negotiation of the original contracts. The evidence indicates considerable
divergence between the Association's contracts and those signed by the
individual Independents. This course of conduct cannot be considered as
true collective bargaining on a city-wide basis, covering employees of both
the Members and the Independents, particularly in view of the fact that
the Independents are in no way obligated to follow the Association's lead.
We conclude, therefore, that the employees of each of the Independents
comprise a separate appropriate unit.'
The A. F. L. moved at the hearing that the petition be dismissed on
the ground that a city-wide unit is appropriate and that therefore all com-
panies engaged in the leather industry in Chicago should have been named
as parties to the proceeding. In view of our findings above, the motion
has been denied.
We find that all employees of the Members, excluding firemen, engi-
neers, oilers, steam fitters, plumbers, watchmen, porters, and all other
building maintenance workers, chauffeurs, truckers, errand boys, shipping
clerks, salesmen, office and clerical employees, executives and all other
employees serving in a confidential or managerial capacity, and foremen
and all other supervisory employees with authority to hire, promote, dis-
charge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees.
or effectively recommend such action, constitute a unit appropriate for
the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b)
of the Act.
We further find that the employees of each of the Independents, exclud-
ing firemen, engineers, oilers, steam fitters, plumbers, watchmen, porters,
and all other building maintenance workers, chauffeurs, truckers, errand
boys, shipping clerks, salesmen, office and clerical employees, executives
and all other employees serving in a confidential or managerial capacity,
and foremen and all other supervisory employees with the authority to
hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the
status of employees, or effectively recommend such action, constitute
separate units appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within
the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
Matte+ of Advance Tanning Company, et a!, 60 N L R B. 923
`1126 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
We shall direct that the questions concerning representation which have
arisen be resolved by 16 elections by secret ballot.
Among the employees in the categories included in the units hereinbefore
deemed appropriate are certain part-time and so-called temporary employ-
ees e Nothing is revealed in the record which would indicate a disparity
of interest in the conditions of employment between these employees and
the other employees in those categories. We shall, therefore, in accordance
with the agreement of the parties, accord the regular part-time and "tem-
porary" employees a voice in the determination of their representatives.
We shall direct that the employees of the Members and of the Independents
eligible to vote in the elections shall be those employees in the appropriate
units who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding
the date of the Direction of Elections herein, subject to the limitations
and additions set forth in the Direction.'
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National Labor
Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act,
and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor Relations Board
Rules and Regulations-Series 3, as amended, it is hereby
DIRECTED that , as part of the investigation to ascertain representatives
for the purposes of collective bargaining with Chicago Luggage & Leather
Goods Manufacturers Association , Chicago, Illinois , as representative of
its member companies , and for the purposes of collective bargaining with
Specialty Suit Case Co., Liberty Leather Finishing Company, Inc ;
Central Leather Company , a corporation ; Sidney Poster, Violet Poster,
Davis Poster , and Fannie Poster, co -partners , d/b/a Poster Brothers ;
Mandel Doppelt and Max Doppelt , co-partners , d/b/a Chicago Leather
Handle Co.; Ever-Wear Trunk Works, Inc . ; Ben Platt, Paul Platt,
Sylvia Platt , Sidney Platt , and Hilda Platt , co-partners , d/b/a Atlas
Leather Case Co.; American Trunk & Case Co., Inc.; Hercules Trunk
Works, Inc .; General Trunk Co., Inc .; Charles Doppelt and Ruth Dop-
pelt, and Charles Doppelt and Ruth Doppelt as Trustees under Ruth
Doppelt Irrevocable Trusts No . 1 and 2, and Shirley Doppelt Irrevoc-
able Trusts No. 1 and 2, a co-partnership , d/b/a Charles Doppelt and
Company; Edward Cohen, d/b/a Supreme Leather Goods Co.; Eman-
uel Dresner , Evelyn ` Dresnerl Daniel H. Mendelson , and Margaret Men-
delson , co-partners , d/b/a Vogue Luggage Company ; Aaron Falstein,
sIt appears that the employees whom the parties call "temporary employees " are'in fact proba-
tionary employees
9 The A F . L requested at the hearing that it be designated on the ballot as "Luggage Workers
Union, Local No. 50, American Federation of Labor " This request is hereby granted.
R. E. RAPPEPORT,& SONS 1127
Max M. Simpson, and Maury Falstem, co-partners, d/b/a Acme Leather
Company ; and Max Halperin, Herman Halperin, Norman Halperin, and
Maurice Halperin, co-partners, d/b/a Progress Case & Bag Company, all
of Chicago, Illinois, 16 separate elections by secret ballot shall be con-
ducted 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 Thirteenth Region, acting in this matter as agent for the
National,Labor Relations Board, and subject to Article III, Sections 10
and 11, of said Rules and Regulations, among the employees in the units
found appropriate in Section IV, above, who were employed during the
pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of this Direction, including
employees who did not work during the said pay-roll period because they
were ill or on vacation or temporarily laid off, and including employees
in the armed forces of the United States who present themselves 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
elections, to determine whether they desire to be represented by Interna-
tional Fur & Leather Workers Union, C. I. 0., or by Luggage Workers
Union, Local No. 50, American Federation of Labor, for the purposes
of collective bargaining, or by neither.
APPENDIX A
Rubin E. Rappeport, Sigmund Rappeport, and Milton Rappeport, co=
partners, d/b/a R. E. Rappeport & Sons, herein called Rappeport.
Wilt Trunk Company, herein called Wilt.
Leo Stein and Edward Stein, co-partners, d/b/a Frank Mashek Company,
herein called Mashek.
Leo Stein, Edward Stein, and Jane Stein Oguss, d/b/a Stein Brothers
Manufacturing Co., herein called Stein.
Universal Trunk Company, herein called Universal.
Simon B. Reuben and Ida Reuben, co-partners, d/b/a Simon B. Reuben
& Co., herein called Reuben.
Benno Hahn, d/b/a Benno Hahn & Company, herein called Hahn.
Bernard Erpenbeck and Harry C. Segessman, co-partners, d/h/a Erpen-
beck and Segessman, herein called Erpenbeck.
Jacob A. Levinson and Joseph Wein, co-partners, d/b/a Better-Built
Trunk' & Case Co., herein called Better-Built.
S. Dresner & Son, Inc., herein called Dresner.
Gladstone Case Mfg. Co., a corporation, herein called Gladstone
National Brief Case Mfg. Co., Inc., herein called National.
Harry Wellington, d/b/a Wellington Trunk and Case Co., herein called
Wellington.
P. Becker & Co., a corporation, herein called Becker.
1128 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Royal Leather Goods Mfg. Co., Inc., herein called Royal.
Singer Bros. Co., Inc., herein called Singer.
Murray Varat, d/b/a Murray Varat Co , herein called Varat.
APPENDIX B
Specialty Suit Case Co., herein called Specialty.
Liberty Leather Finishing Company, Inc., herein called Liberty.
Central Leather Company, a corporation, herein called Central.
Sidney Poster, Violet Poster, Davis Poster, and Fannie Poster, co-partners,
d/b/a Poster Brothers, herein called Poster'°
Mandel Doppelt and Max Doppelt, co-partners, d/b/a Chicago Leather
Handle Co., herein called Chicago.
Ever-Wear Trunk Works, Inc., herein called Ever-Wear.
Ben'Platt, Paul Platt, Sylvia Platt, Sidney Platt, and Hilda Platt, co-
partners, d/b/a Atlas Leather Case Co., herein called Atlas "
American Trunk & Case Co., Inc., herein called American.
Hercules Trunk Works, Inc., herein called Hercules.
General Trunk Co., Inc., herein called General.
Charles Doppelt and Ruth Doppelt, and Charles Doppelt and Ruth Dop-
pelt as Trustees under Ruth Doppelt Irrevocable Trusts No. I and 2,
and- Shirley Doppelt Irrevocable Trusts No. 1 and 2, a co-partnership,
d/b/a Charles Doppelt and Company, herein called Doppelt."
Edward Cohen, d/b/a Supreme Leather Goods Co., herein called Supreme.
Emanuel Dresner, Evelyn Dresner, Daniel H. Mendelson, and Margaret
Mendelson, co-partners, d/h/a Vogue Luggage Company, herein called
Vogue "
Aaron Falstein, Max M. Simpson, and Maury Falstein, co-partners,
d/b/a Acme Leather Company, herein called Acme.
Max Halperin, Herman Halperin, Norman Halperin, and Maurice Hal-
perin, co-partners, d/b/a Progress Case & Bag Company, herein called
Progress 1f
10 The designation of Poster appears herein as amended at the hearing.
11 Atlas was a member of the Association until about March 1, 1945
12 Doppelt was a member of the Association until about December 1, 1944.
1s The designation of Vogue appears herein as amended at the hearing. N
14 The petition involving Progress was filed May 10, 1945, and this company consequently appeared
and participated in the instant proceeding on the final day of the hearing All of the parties involved
herein, including Progress , agreed to the appearance of Progress at the hearing and to the proposed
consolidation of the case involving Progress into the proceeding We hereby order, pursuant to
Article III, Section 13 (c) (2) of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regul ations-Series 3,
as amended , that Case No. 13•R • 3080 be, and it hereby is, consolidated with the others cases listed in
the caption , heretofore consolidated
10