Rachman Bag Co., Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Feb 28, 1962

135 N.L.R.B. 1353 (N.L.R.B. 1962)

RACHMAN BAG COMPANY, INC. 1353
,Rachman Bag Company, Inc. and District 65, Retail , Wholesale
and Department Store Union , AFL-CIO. Case No. 2-CA-8175.
Februa"y 28, 1962
.,DECISION AND ORDER
On December 19, 1961, Trial Examiner C. W. Whittemore issued
his Intermediate Report in the above-entitled proceeding, finding
that the Respondent had engaged in and was engaging in certain un-
fair labor practices and recommending that it cease and desist there-
from and take certain affirmative action,. as set forth in the
'Intermediate Report attached hereto. Thereafter, the Respondent
filed exceptions to the Intermediate Report and a supporting brief.
The Board 1 has reviewed the rulings made by the Trial Examiner
at the hearing and Ands that no prejudicial error was committed.
The rulings are hereby affirmed. The Board has considered the In-
termediate Report, the exceptions and brief, and the entire record in
this case, and hereby adopts the findings, conclusions, and recom-
mendations of the Trial Examiner.
ORDER
Upon the entire record in this case, and pursuant to Section 10(c)
of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor
Relations Board hereby orders that the Respondent, Rachman Bag
Company, Inc., New York, New York, its officers, agents, successors,
and assigns, shall:
1. Cease and desist from:
(a) Threatening employees with reprisals if they remain members
of District 65, Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union, AFL-
,CIO, or any other labor organization, or if they continue to engage in
protected concerted activities, or promising them benefits if they
cease engaging in protected concerted activities.
(b) Telling employees it will not deal with or sign a contract with
their duly certified bargaining representative.
(c) In any like or related manner interfering with, restraining, or
coercing employees in the exercise of the right to self-organization, to
bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing,
and to engage in concerted activities for the purpose of collective bar-
gaining or other mutual aid or protection, or to refrain from any or
all such activities, except to the extent that such rights may be affected
by an agreement requiring membership in a labor organization as a
condition of employment, as authorized in Section 8(a) (3) of the,
'Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the Act, the Board has delegated its.
powers in this case to a three-member panel [Members Rodgers, Fanning , and Brown].
135 NLRB No. 115.
1354 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Act, as modified by the Labor- Management Reporting and Disclosure
Act of 1959.
2. Take the following affirmative action which the Board finds will
effectuate the policies of the Act :
(a) Post at its place of business in New York, New York, copies
of the notice attached hereto marked "Appendix." 2 Copies of said
notice, to be furnished by the Regional Director for the Second Re-
gion, shall, after being duly signed by the Respondent' s representa-
tive, be posted by the Respondent immediately upon receipt thereof,
and be maintained by it for a period of 60 consecutive days thereafter,
in conspicuous places, including all places where notices to employees
are customarily posted. Reasonable steps shall be taken by the Re-
spondent to insure that said notices are not altered, defaced, or
covered by any other material.
(b) In the event the above-described strike is still in progress at
the time of the Order, forward to the Regional Director for the Sec-
ond Region signed copies of the said notice for transmittal to District
65, Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union, AFL-CIO.
(c) Notify the Regional Director for the Second Region, in writ-
ing, within 10 days from the date of this Order, what steps the Re-
spondent has taken to comply therewith.
2In the event that this Order is enforced by a decree of a United States Court of
Appeals, the words "Pursuant to a Decree of the United States Court of Appeals, Enforcing
an Order" shall be substituted for the words "Pursuant to a Decision and Order."
APPENDIX
NOTICE TO ALL EMPLOYEES
Pursuant to a Decision and Order of the National Labor Relations
Board, and in order to effectuate the policies of the National Labor
Relations Act, as amended, we hereby notify you that :
WE WILL NOT threaten employees with reprisals if they remain
members of District 65, Retail, Wholesale and Department Store
Union, AFL-CIO, or any other labor organization, or if they con-
tinue to engage in protected concerted activities.
WE WILL NOT promise benefits if employees cease engaging in a
strike or other protected concerted activities.
WE WILL NOT tell employees that we will not deal with or sign
a contract with the above-named labor organization, the duly cer-
tified bargaining representative of our employees.
WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner interfere with, re-
strain, or coerce employees in the exercise of the right to self-
organization, to become or remain members of the above-named
RACHMAN BAG COMPANY, INC. 1355
,or any other labor organization, to bargain collectively through
representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in concerted
activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual
aid or protection, or to refrain from any or all such activities,
except to the extent that such rights may be affected by an agree-
ment requiring membership in a labor organization as a condition
,of employment, as authorized in Section 8(a) (3) of the Act, as
modified by the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure
Act of 1959.
RACHMAN BAG COMPANY, INC.,
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.
Employees may communicate directly with the Board's Regional
`Office (745 Fifth Avenue, New York, New York; Telephone Number,
Plaza 1-5500) if they have any question concerning this notice or
compliance with its provisions.
INTERMEDIATE REPORT AND RECOMMENDED ORDER
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
A charge in the above -entitled case having been filed and served , a complaint and
notice of hearing thereon having been issued and served by the General Counsel of
the National Labor Relations Board, and an answer having been filed by the above-
named Respondent , a hearing involving allegations of unfair labor practices in viola-
tion of Section 8 (a) (1) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended , was held
in New York , New York, on November 20, 1961 , before the duly designated Trial
Examiner.
All parties were represented at the hearing and were afforded full opportunity to
present evidence pertinent to the issues , to argue orally, and to file briefs . The filing
of briefs was waived.
Upon the record thus made , and from his observation of the witnesses , the Trial
Examiner makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE RESPONDENT
Rachman Bag Company, Inc., is a New York corporation , with principal office
,and place of business in the city of New York , where it is engaged in reprocessing,
reconditioning , manufacture, sale, and distribution of burlap bags and related
products.
During the year preceding issuance of the complaint the Respondent sold and
distributed products valued at more than $50,000 which were shipped directly in
interstate commerce to points outside the State of New York.
The complaint alleges, the answer admits , and it is found that the Respondent is
engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act.
H. THE CHARGING UNION
District 65, Retail , Wholesale and Department Store Union , AFL-CIO, is a labor
-organization admitting to membership employees of the Respondent.
1356 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
III. THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
A. Setting and issue
The setting in which occurred the incidents here involved is described by the fol-
lowing excerpts from a written stipulation of the parties placed in evidence at the
opening of the hearing:
District 65 [the Charging Union] . was certified as collective bargaining
representative on June 2, 1961, for the production and maintenance employees.
.. . Negotiations between Respondent and District 65 did not result in the
execution of a collective bargaining contract and on September 19, 1961, ap-
proximately 7 of Respondents' 10 employees struck and commenced picketing
Respondent. . . . Picketing has continued to date... .
The sole issue is whether or not Jerome Rachman, an officer of the Respondent,
shortly after the strike began made remarks to striking employees which constituted
unlawful restraint and coercion.
B. The facts
On the basis of credible and undisputed testimony the Trial Examiner finds that
Jerome Rachman, a few days after the strike began, engaged in the following conduct:
,(1) Telling employee Castro and a group of other strikers that he wanted them
to come back, but if they did not he would fire them.
(2) Informing the same group that if they continued as members of this Union
he would have no jobs for them.
(3) Stating to the same employees that he did not want a contract with this
Union, but would himself give them benefits.
(4) Telling Foreman Santiago in a group of strikers that he did not want the
Union, but would give the employees the same benefits he had offered this organiza-
tion.
(5) Stating to employee Evans, in the presence of several other strikers, that he
would not deal with District 65.
(6) Telephoning to the same employee and telling her that he would not sign
a contract with District 65.
C. Conclusions
The Trial Examiner concludes and finds that the above -quoted remarks of Jerome
Rachman constituted interference , restraint , and coercion of employees in the exer-
cise of rights guaranteed by Section 7 of the Act.'
IV. THE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES UPON COMMERCE
The activities of the Respondent set forth in section III, above, occurring in con-
nection with the operations of the Respondent described in section I, above, have
a close, intimate, and substantial relation to trade, traffic, and commerce among the
several States, and tend to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing com-
merce and the free flow of commerce.
V. THE REMEDY
Having found that the Respondent has engaged in unfair labor practices the Trial
Examiner will recommend that it cease and desist therefrom and take certain affirma-
tive action to effectuate the policies of the Act.
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact, and upon the entire record in
the case, the Trial Examiner makes the following:
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. District 65, Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union, AFL-CIO, is a
labor organization within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act.
2. By interfering with, restraining, and coercing employees in the exercise of
rights guaranteed by Section 7 of the Act, the Respondent has engaged in and is
engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8(a)(1) of the Act.
3. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair labor practices within the mean-
ing of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
[Recommendations omitted from publication.]
1 While no 8(a ) ( 5) -refusal to bargain-issue Is here involved, it is, of course, a denial
of employees' rights under Section 7 of the Act (to bargain through representatives of
their own choosing) to tell them that their certified representative will not be dealt with.