Republic Drill & Tool Co.Download PDFNational Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsMar 20, 194666 N.L.R.B. 955 (N.L.R.B. 1946) Copy Citation In the Matter Of REPUBLIC DRILL & TooL COMPANY and UNITED ELECTRICAL, RADIO & MACHINE WORKERS OF AMERICA, LOCAL 1114, C. I. O. Case No. 13-C-2386.-Decided March 20, 1946 DECISION AND ORDER On August 9, 1945, the Trial Examiner issued his Intermediate Report in the above-entitled proceeding, finding that the respondent had engaged in and was engaging in certain unfair labor practices and recommending that it cease and desist therefrom and take certain affirmative action, as set forth in the copy of the Intermediate Report attached hereto. Thereafter, the respondent filed a brief in support of the Intermediate Report ; counsel for the Board filed exceptions, and a supporting brief, to the Trial Examiner's failure to find that the respondent violated Section 8 (2) of the Act. None of the parties requested oral argument before the Board at Washington, D. C., and none was held. The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner at the hearing and finds that no prejudicial error was committed. The rul- ings are hereby affirmed. The Board has considered the Intermediate Report, the briefs and exceptions of the parties, and the entire record in the case, and hereby adopts the findings, conclusions, and recom- mendations of the Trial Examiner with the following modifications. 1. We agree with the Trial Examiner that the respondent violated Section 8 (1) of the Act by conducting polls at the plant in June 1943 and 1944 on the employees' desires concerning union affiliation, and that it did not violate the Act by the speeches fully set forth in the Intermediate Report. We also agree with the Trial Examiner that the "Republic Plan," including the "Trustees" and the "General As- sembly," but excluding the House Committees, do not constitute a labor organization, within the meaning of the Act, and that, therefore the complaint should be dismissed as to them. 2. The Trial Examiner found that "although the evidence tends to show that the House Committees are labor organizations existing in violation of Section 8 (2) of the Act, the undersigned is unable 66 N. L. R. B., No. 117. 955 956 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD to make findings of fact and conclusions of law to that effect because of the lack of service upon those organizations." We are in agree- ment with, and adopt, the Trial Examiner's ruling resulting from the lack of service upon said organizations. However, in order best to effectuate the policies of the Act, we shall direct that the allegations of the complaint that the respondent violated Section 8 (2) of the Act with respect to the House Committees be severed from the allegations of the complaint adjudicated in this Decision and that the record be reopened for the purpose of serving the House Committees and hold- ing a new hearing with respect to the allegations that the respondent violated Section 8 (2) of the Act with respect to the House Com- mittees. ORDER Upon the entire record in the case, and pursuant to section 10 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that the respondent, Republic Drill & Tool Com- pany, Chicago, Illinois, and its officers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall : 1. Cease and desist from interfering with, restraining, and coercing its employees in the exercise of the right to self-organization, to form labor organizations, to join or assist United Electrical, Radio & Ma- chine Workers of America, Local 1114, C. I. 0., or any other labor organization, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in concerted activities, for the purposes of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection, as guaran- teed in Section 7 of the Act. 2. Take the following affirmative action which the Board finds will effectuate the policies of the Act : (a) Post in its plant in Chicago, Illinois, copies of the notice at- tached to the Intermediate Report herein, marked "Appendix A." 1 Copies of said notice, to be furnished by the Regional Director for the Thirteenth Region, shall, after being duly signed by the respondent's representatives, be posted by the respondent immediately upon receipt thereof, and maintained by it for sixty (60) consecutive days there- after, in conspicuous places, including all places where notices to employees are customarily posted. Reasonable steps shall be taken by the respondent to insure that said notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by any other material; (b) Notify the Regional Director for the Thirteenth Region in writing, within ten (10) days from the date of this Order, what steps the respondent has taken to comply herewith. 1 Said notice, however, shall be, and it hereby is, amended by striking from the first paragraph thereof the words "The Recommendations of a Trial Examiner" and sub- stituting in lieu thereof the words "A Decision and Order." REPUBLIC DRILL & TOOL COMPANY 957 AND rr is HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED that the complaint be, and it hereby is, dismissed insofar as it alleges that the respondent violated Section 8 (2) of the Act with respect to the "Republic Plan," includ- ing the "Trustees" and the "General Assembly," but excluding the House Committees; AND IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED that the allegation of the com- plaint that the respondent violated Section 8 (2) of the Act with respect to the House Committees be, and it hereby is, severed from the remaining allegations in the complaint and that the record be reopened and the proceeding be remanded to the Regional Director for the Thirteenth Region for further hearing consistent with this Decision. MR. GERARD D. REILLY took no part in the consideration of the above Decision and Order. INTERMEDIATE REPORT Mr. Gustaf B. Erickson, for the Board. Mr. F. H. Towner, of Winston, Strawn & Shaw, of Chicago, Ill., for the respondent. Messrs . Henry Meihs, T. Louis Majors, and Louis Torre, of Chicago , Ill., for the Union. STATEMENT OF THE CASE Upon an amended charge duly filed on August 18, 1944 , by United Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers of America , Local 1114, C.I.O., herein called the Union , the National Labor Relations Board , herein called the Board, by its Regional Director for the Thirteenth Region ( Chicago, Illinois ), issued its complaint dated August 22, 1944, against Republic Drill & Tool Company, herein called the respondent , alleging that the respondent had engaged in and was engaging in unfair labor practices affecting commerce , within the meaning of Section 8 (1) and (2) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act. With respect to the unfair labor practices , the complaint alleged in substance that the respondent ( 1) instituted , sponsored , and interfered with the forma- tion and administration of the General Assembly , a labor organization of its employees , and contributed financial and other support thereto ; (2) instituted, sponsored , and conducted employee meetings in the plant for the purpose of handling grievances of employees through "trustees " and "house committees" appointed by the respondent ; (3) distributed publications containing questions of employees concerning wages, hours, and working conditions and sponsored and conducted elections in which employees voted as to whether they wished to he represented by a labor organization or by the respondent's supervisory employees ; and (4 ) by the aforesaid acts urged and persuaded its employees not to become or remain members of the Union , or of any labor organization other than the General Assembly. On August 30, 1944, the respondent filed a motion to dismiss the complaint, 0 958 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD which the Chief Trial Examiner , on September 1, denied . On September 9, the respondent filed an answer admitting certain of the allegations of the complaint, but denying that it had engaged in any unfair labor practices. Pursuant to notice , a hearing was held on October 3 and 4, 1944, before Henry J . Kent , a Trial Examiner duly designated by the Chief Trial Examiner. The Board , the respondent, and the Union were represented by counsel and participated in the hearing . Full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses , and to introduce evidence bearing upon the issues was afforded all parties . On October 4, at the close of the hearing , counsel for the Board and for the respondent engaged in oral argument. On November 28, 1944, pursuant to Article II, Section 30, of the Board's Rules and Regulations , Series 3 , as amended , the Chief Trial Examiner Issued an order directing that the hearing be reopened , that the General Assembly be served with a copy of the complaint and a notice of hearing as provided for in article II, Section 5 of the Rules and Regulations,' and that the General As- sembly be given an opportunity to file an answer to the complaint within 10 days from the date of service upon it. Pursuant to notice, a further hearing was held on December 19 , 1944 , partici- pated in by the Board , the respondent , and the Union. The Board , prior to the hearing, attempted to obtain service upon the General Assembly by addressing registered envelopes containing copies of the complaint and notice of hearing to the General Assembly and to H . A. Brogan, Earl F. Reinhart , and Clarence Avildsen , officers of the respondent , as "trustees" of the General Assembly.' Brogan , Reinhart , and Avildsen refused receipt of the registered articles., At the hearing , counsel for the Board moved to amend the complaint so as to substitute, In effect , Republic Plan in place of the General Assembly as a labor organization alleged to have been formed and dominated by the respondent' The Trial Examiner granted this motion . Counsel for the Board then at- tempted, in open court , to obtain service of the amended complaint upon Brogan , Reinhart , and Avildsen as "trustees" for the Republic Plan. These individuals refused service on the ground that they did not represent Republic Plan. The Trial Examiner , upon motion , granted the respondent 5 days within which to file a motion to dismiss the complaint . The respondent filed such a motion on December 21. On January 2, 1945 , the Trial Examiner issued an order denying this motion , directed that a further hearing be conducted on January 8, and granted the respondent until that date to file an answer to the amended complaint . On January 8, at the hearing , the respondent filed 1 The pertinent provision of Article II, Section 5, of the Rules and Regulations reads as follows : "Whenever the complaint contains allegations under Section 8 (2) of the Act, any labor organization referred to in such allegations shall be duly served with a copy of the complaint and Notice of Hearing." s As is hereinafter found, the General Assembly is not a labor organization , and the term "trustee" is a mere euphemism used to express Brogan 's, Reinhart's and Avildsen's purported conception of their relationship to the respondent's employees. 2 The envelope addressed to the General Assembly was returned to the Post Office, marked "refused." * This allegation of the complaint , as amended , reads as follows : The respondent by its officers and agents has, since October 1942 , had in effect and now has in effect a general scheme or plan in which employees participate and which exists for the purpose , in whole or in part, of dealing with the respondent concerning grievances , labor disputes , wages, rates of pay , hours of employment, or conditions of employment variously known and referred to as the Trustees, House Committee, Counsellors , General Assembly and Republic Plan , herein referred to in the aggregate as the Republic Plan . The Republic Plan is a labor organization within the meaning of Section 2 ( 5) of the Act. s REPUBLIC DRILL & TOOL COMPANY 959 its answer denying the allegations with respect to the unfair labor practices. On January 9, the Trial Examiner upon motion, issued an order giving Republic Plan 10 days within which to file an answer to the complaint , and adjourned the hearing to January 22.1 On January 22, the hearing was resumed and concluded before Horace A. Ruckel, the undersigned Trial Examiner, designated by the Chief Trial Exam- iner to act in place and stead of Henry J. Kent. Upon the entire record in the case, the undersigned makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. THE BUSINESS OF THE RESPONDENT Republic Drill & Tool Company is a corporation having its principal office and place of business at Chicago , Illinois, where it is engaged in the design, manufacture, sale, and distribution of high speed and carbon twist drills. The respondent, in the course and conduct of its business , uses raw materials In the amount of approximately $100,000 per month . Of these raw materials, large quantities are purchased and transported in interstate commerce from and through States of the United States other than the State of Illinois, to its plant at Chicago . The respondent 's finished products amount to approxi- mately $500,000 per month in value. Of these finished products, large quanti- ties are sold and transported in Interstate commerce from its plant in Chicago, Illinois, to and through States of the United States other than the State of Illinois. The respondent's sole customer is the United States Government . The re- spondent employs approximately 1100 employees. II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED United Electrical , Radio & Machine Workers of America , Local 1114, is a labor organization admitting employees of the respondent to membership. It is affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations. III. THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES The General Assembly, Republic Plan and the House Committees ; other alleged interference, restraint, and coercion 1. The General Assembly During the fall of 1942 the respondent Instituted the practice of calling its employees together In meetings . These meetings , usually referred to as general assemblies, took place once or twice a month , or whenever the respondent's officers believed that they had something of particular interest or importance to announce. Until February 1943 , the general assemblies were presided over by Earl Reinhart, the respondent's president , or by Clarence Jacobsen, one 5 During this interval the Board attempted to obtain service on Republic Plan by mailing to Brogan , Reinhart , and Avildsen , as "trustees", registered envelopes containing copies of the Trial Examiner 's order of January 9 giving Republic Plan 10 days from the date of service of such order to file its answer to the amended complaint. The registered articles were refused by Brogan , Reinhart , and Avildsen. 960 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD of its three executive vice presidents, and after February by H. A. Brogan, another executive vice president,' who in that month assumed charge of and devoted all his time to personnel management. It was the practice for Reinhart and Jacobsen, and thereafter for Brogan, to prepare speeches of some considerable length and to read them to the em- ployees in the general assembly. Copies of all these speeches, beginning with that delivered at the first assembly on September 16, 1942, are in evidence. It is hereinafter considered whether certain statements therein contained were violative of Sections 8 (1) of the Act as constituting interference, restraint, or coercion. It is clear, however, that these periodic assemblies did not constitute a labor organization. There was no employee participation whatsoever, aside from occasional and spontaneous questions from the floor, and even these were not encouraged. Nor was there any dealing between the respondent and the employees. The latter were present for the sole purpose of being addressed by an officer of the respondent concerning the respondent's policies and problems, and to hear announcements of one kind or another deemed to have a bearing on the safety, happiness, and general morale of the employees. In view of these facts, it is irrelevant that some of these announcements pertained to wages and working conditions. At an assembly on October 9, 1942, Reinhart announced the Installation of a number of "suggestion" boxes in the plant, and urged the employees to deposit therein suggestions designed to make the plant "a better place to work in." Some of these suggestions were read at subsequent assemblies and commented upon by the speaker. About twice a month all the suggestions received during the preceding 2 weeks were mimeographed and posted on the plant bulletin board. Later this practice was abandoned, and the suggestions, together with the respondent's reply thereto, were set forth in The Republic Forum, a plant paper issued irregularly by the personnel department , begin- ning in April, 1944? 2. Public opinion polls and "Republic Plan" On June 17, 1943, when addressing a general assembly, Brogan made refer- ence to a previously circulated petition, concerning which the record Is other- wise silent, by which, according to Brogan, 90 percent of the employees "said that they were for C. A. (Avlldsen) and not for the C. I. O." Brogan stated that he had been informed by an active adherent of the Union that this peti- tion was not representative of the employees' views because most of the union members had signed it only to avoid being conspicuous. Brogan went on to declare that for this reason the respondent would conduct a poll by secret ballot to determine whether the employees preferred the Union to the "Trustees."' The poll was conducted on June 25 , and ballots In the following form were 6 The respondent 's officers are : Clarence Avildsen , chairman of the board of directors ; Earl Reinhart , president ; and Clarence Jacobsen , George Avildsen , and H. A. Brogan, executive vice presidents. The Republic Forum contained little aside from comments and complaints about working conditions and suggestions as to how they might be improved All suggestions were numbered consecutively , and the respondent's answer was set forth after each suggestion. After three issues The Republic Forum ceased publication. s The significance of this term Is hereinafter described . It had reference to the re- spondent's officers. - REPUBLIC DRILL & TOOL COMPANY 961 distributed to the employees ° who then marked them and deposited them in ballot boxes located in the plant : Ballot for Election of Trustees q YES I am in favor of having the Management continue as our Trustees , until such time as the employees decide thru an election that the Management is no longer deserving of this trust. q NO I am not in favor of having the Management continue as our Trustees . I believe this trust should be placed with others, more capable of acting as our Trustees. q I am undecided about the question of Trustees and cannot make up my mind how to vote. Brogan testified as follows with respect to the origin of the term "Trustees," and his conception of its meaning : Q. Now, will you tell me what is meant by the term "trustees"? A. All right ; it is our philosophy about the responsibility of the manage- ment of our company * * * we feel that we have a triple responsibility. The word "trustees" is not used in a legal sense. You might say "custodian" would be an equally well suited word. We feel that we have a responsibility to the stockholders of our company to operate the company in such a way that their investment will be pro- tected and they will be able to realize a satisfactory return on that invest- ment. We also feel that we have a responsibility to the customers who buy our products . We are the custodians of their interest to the extent that we must furnish them with a product of suitable quality at a price that is consistent with the prices asked by our competitors and we also recognize a responsibility to the employees of the company. * * * We have told our employees many times that we only want to assume that full responsibility insofar as the employees are concerned as long as they are satisfied with the manner in which we are discharging that responsibility. Q. Who, by name , are the trustees? A. Those individuals that I have mentioned as the management. The term "trustee" meant less to President Reinhart than it did to Vice- President Brogan: Q. You are one of the trustees? A. I can only repeat I am one of the officers. This term "trustee" is something that is more or less-I hardly know what word to use-it is just a term. Ostensibly , the employees were asked in the poll of June , 1943 , to vote whether they wished the respondent 's officers to continue to represent their interests as employees . Thus viewed , the poll is meaningless . Actually, however, both the respondent and the employees understood that the latter were choosing between the respondent 's officers and a union . That this was the respondent's understanding is made clear not only by Brogan's remarks at the general assembly on June 17 , but also by the following incident . In the first issue of The Republic Forum for April , 1944, the following "suggestion" and answer appeared: 9 By another ballot, the employees voted also on the question as to whether Independ- ence Day should be observed by closing the plant on Sunday, July 4, or on July 5 By a third ballot, they voted on the retention of certain "extra" services provided by the respondent. 686572--46-62 962 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD NO. 136-THAT OLD RUMOR There is a rumor going around that we are again to vote on a union. If that is true we want the union to run the election and not the company. If a meeting10 is held beforehand and our trustees get up on the platform and hand the girls a lot of soft soap-the trustees , of course , knowing that a great many of the girls are saps enough to fall for their banter-We also want a representative of the Union to speak and give his views on the question at hand. If there is an election we want a fair and unbiased one. Not signed. ANSWER At the time of the last election on the Union question, The Trustees announced that if a majority desired to be represented by a union, instead of the present plan of dealing direct with the management, we could write 6 or 7 different unions to come in and talk to the employees * * * This offer was never taken up because in a secret ballot * * * the employees of Republic voted as follows : 94% voted "No union." 3% voted "For a union." Now that we will soon vote on unions again , we shall again extend our invitation to the unions * * * (Emphasis added.) Brogan virtually admitted while testifying that the balloting in June, 1943, was a vote on the question of a union : Q. Now, I will give you Board's Exhibit 6 and ask you where on that ballot an employee is given an opportunity to vote on the question of whether he wants a union. A. It is not here. I can see that very easy . The only reference that is made here that might answer your question is wherein the ballot reads : "I am not in favor of having the management continue as our Trustees. I believe this trust should be placed with others, more capable of acting as our "Trustees." Q. Now, what do you have in mind there , a Union? A. The obvious alternative would be a Union. The second poll on the question of a union, foreshadowed in the question and answer quoted above from The Republic Forum, was preceded , on June 2, by a general assembly where Brogan announced that another such poll would be taken. Brogan declared : * * * We are going to continue to act as your trustees , and we are going to continue to let you vote on the question of the union, providing, of course, that a majority of you wish to vote on that question * * * * * * Now * * * before going ahead with such an election, we plan to have each of you fill out a questionnaire which is designed to find out how you feel about our employee relations policy. If the answers to these questions show that you are in favor of voting on the Union question, we will go ahead and hold another election, but we shall not call it an "election" because that word is misleading * * *. Since the proposed election here would not be on any particular Union, it is a mistake to call it an "election." It is really a REFERENDUM. On June 3, the respondent circulated a questionnaire , in effect a sample ballot, setting forth seven propositions to be voted upon. On this questionnaire the phrase "Republic Plan" is used for the first time : 10 Unquestionably the correspondent refers to a general assembly. REPUBLIC DRILL & TOOL COMPANY 963 QUESTIONNAIRE To BE ANSWERED By The Employees of the Republic Drill & Tool Company, Chicago, Illinois Subject : EMPLOYEE RELATIONS POLICIES 1. Are you in favor of continuing the "REPUBLIC PLAN" of holding General Assemblies of the Employees, at which the Management reports on incoming orders, the prospects for new orders, current profits, produc- tion schedules, and other matters of interest to Employees, such as wages, hours, working conditions, safety, handbills of labor organizing committees, labor laws, vacations, picnics, dances, etc? YES q NO q DON'T KNOW q 2 Are you in favor of continuing the "REPUBLIC PLAN" of holding, from time to time, Secret Ballot Referendums-in which Employees act as Judges and Clerks of Election--on such questions as (1) Whether all or some of the "Extras" should be eliminated and the cost added to the pay checks ; (2) Whether the Employees should be represented by a Labor Union, and (3) other polices of general interest to Employees? YES q NO q DON'T KNOW q 3. Republic's Management has announced this Policy: In our efforts to deal honestly and fairly with all Employees, we are sure to make mistakes. Since we are eager to correct such mistakes, we urge the Employees to bring them to our attention as Complaints and Sugges- tions. At this time, these Complaints and Suggestions are being presented in several ways, as follows : a. Individually Written Suggestions (Signed or Unsigned) b. Group Petitions c House Committee Meetings d. Handbills or letters of Union Organizing Committees e Private talks with Foreman or Counselor f. Private talks with officers of the Company g. Department Meetings attended voluntarily, on Employees' own time, before or after work Are you in favor of continuing this "REPUBLIC PLAN" for handling Complaints and Suggestions? YES q NO q DON'T KNOW q 4 Are you in favor of continuing the "REPUBLIC FORUM" in which the Company publishes the Suggestions, Questions and Opinions of Repub- lic Employees, together with the answers and comment of the Personnel Department? YES q NO q DON'T KNOW q 964 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 5. Republic's Management has told the Employees : "Labor and Capital here at Republic must work together If we are to successfully compete with the Labor and Capital In other drill companies, and thereby get our fair share of the drill business of the country." Do you feel that the Employees should support this policy? YES q NO q DON'T KNOW q 6. Republic's Management has announced this Policy : Regardless of whether the Employees are represented by a Union, we shall do our best to carry out our pledge to act as Trustees for the 3 groups which must be treated fairly if the Company is to be successful, namely: (a) The Customers, (b) The Employees, (c) The Stockholders. If you were "The Management" would you adopt such a Policy? YES q NO q DON'T KNOW q 7. Are you in favor of the recently announced plan of Republic's Man- agement 'to try to get the War Labor Board's approval of a new Profit- Sharing Bonus Plan, so that eventually all Republic Employees may be fairly rewarded through Profit-Sharing Bonuses, In addition to Incentive Pay, in the form of either Individual Production Bonuses, Group Produc- tion Bonuses, or Group Efficiency Bonuses? YES q NO q DON'T KNOW q The election was held on June 8. From 72 to 88 percent of the employees casting ballots voted "yes" on the above propositions. The results were made known to the employees in a special issue of Republic News" for June 10.^ It appears clear that the respondent employed the term "Republic Plan" as an euphemism to characterize its personnel policy, in much the same way that it dubbed its officers "Trustees." There was, in fact, no existing organization by that name nor does it appear that any was contemplated. Even as a term, "Republic Plan," as contrasted with "Trustees," does not seem to have achieved much currency. It received no mention in either of two subsequent general assemblies addressed by Brogan, on July 5 and September 11, in spite of the fact that on the latter date Brogan described at some length, for the benefit of new employees, the results of the balloting on June 8. This was a strange omission if, as the Board contends, "Republic Plan" was a labor organization newly formed for the respondent's employees. Nor did "Republic Plan" re- ceive mention in subsequent issues of Republic News. The issues of The Republic Forum, with one exception," make no reference whatsoever to "Repub- lic Plan," although that publication existed for the sole purpose of publishing and answering questions pertaining to the working conditions of the employees. "Republic News was issued monthly by the respondent and contained news of genera] interest to employees. '9 The respondent published comments on the results, such as the following comment on Question 6, the "Trustee" question : MANAGEMENT COMMENT: With this support of its Trustees policy by 76% of Republic's employees, the management will continue to act as Trustees for the three groups mentioned. 'S The third and final issue of The Republic Forum, for September, 1944, states in a box on the first page that, it is published "because it is part of the 'Republic Plan' which was approved by 84 out of every 100 Republic employees in a secret ballot Opinion Poll held on June 10, 1944." REPUBLIC DRILL & TOOL COMPANY 965 The undersigned finds Brogan's testimony as to the meaning of "Republic Plan," to be in accord with the facts revealed by the record as a whole: Q. (By Mr. Towner.) Mr. Brogan , is there any organization of any kind known as Republic Plan? A.'No. Q. What Is the Republic Plan? A. Well, I would designate it as a description of the pattern we follow in our employee relations program. Q. Is it in existence as an organization at all? A. No. Q. Has it any officers? A. No. Q. Does it function in any respect as an organization? A. No. Brogan 's testimony is supported by that of Reinhart: Q. Do you know any organization or accumulation of persons or anything of that character known as Republic Plan? A. No. Q. Does it have any existence as far as you are concerned? A. No. * * * * * * * Q. As a matter of fact, it is an idea , isn't it? Isn't that about what it is? A. I suppose so. I couldn 't explain it in any other way. * * * * * * * And by that of Avildsen : Q. Have you any labor organization known as Republic Plan? A. No. * * * * * * Q. In fact, have you ever in your life heard of it as an existing corporeal thing? A. No. 3. The House Committees In January 1943, the respondent instituted the House Committees , reference to which has been made above. A House Committee composed of the oldest em- ployee from each department in point of service, was appointed by the respond- ent for each of the three shifts. Each departmental representative served for 4 months and was automatically succeeded by the employee with the next longest service in his department . A chairman and a secretary were chosen by the membership of the committee . The House Committees met once a month in meetings customarily attended by a representative from the personnel department or by the shift superintendent. Employee representatives were paid two dollars for their attendance . The House Committees received com- plaints from employees relative to working conditions , and passed them on to management for investigation and adjustment . For the purpose of channeling complaints to the House Committees, floor subcommittees were established whose duties were to receive complaints from employees during the intervals between meetings of the House Committees and to name a representative to report them at those meetings. There was no interrelation between the House Committees and the general assemblies in either their structure or functioning . Neither the grievances 966 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD presented to the House Committees nor the manner of their adjustment formed any part of the subject matter of the program of these assemblies. The House Committees, however, participated in the conduct of the public opinion poll in June, 1943, by choosing from among their own members employees chose duties were to take charge of the ballot boxes and to count the ballots. 4. Speeches made at the General Assemblies Brogan testified as follows respecting the respondent's reaction to the dis- tribution of union handbills: Q. Isn't it true, then, that every time, the Union may have distributed :i handbill advocating the joining of the Union by employees, you had a general assembly meeting following? A. Definitely. We had announced that policy to the employees, when the Union distributes a handbill, we pick up the ones that are lying on the sidewalk and get extra copies and post them up on the bulletin board in our plant and we say this handbill will be one of the subjects for dis- cussion at our next assembly. The following excerpted comments upon union organization, made by Rein- hart at a general assembly on November 21, 1942, are fairly representative of extensive remarks made by Reinhart and Brogan on that and other occasions." * * * We are trustees. We are not bosses. We are workers, and if we do not do a good job as trustees, we will be out of work, because there won't be any Republic Drill left. * * * * * * Sometimes when a group of employees are thinking about whether or not to join a union, they are led to believe that the capitalists or employers are always on one side and that the laborers are on the other side and that, therefore, they need a union to come in and represent them. Now that is undoubtedly true in some cases. * * * * * * * 1, * * There are about 14 or 15 drill companies in this country. Ac- cording to the latest information, the employees of 3 of these companies have joined unions, and the remaining 11 or 12 companies do not have unions * * * In each of these 3 cases, where the employees felt they had to have a union In order to get their rights, the drill company was run by a hired man who represented an absentee owner, usually a retired banker, who did not know what was going on and only wanted more dividends. Under such circumstances, I am sure the workers had very good grounds for joining a union. I have no doubt that the managers of these companies were so afraid of these tough old bankers whom they repre- sented, that (they) did not demand for the workers what they were en- titled to, and the result is that the workers had to join a union to get what they deserved. In this case, the managers of these 3 drill companies were trustees alright, but they were trustees not for the 3 groups the way we are, but simply the trustees for one man-a rich old banker, who probably said "I am not going to live very long anyway, and I want to make all I can before I die." Now that Is the story about the other drill companies so far as I know it. * * * Now all that leads up to this point. Since the C. I. O. know 14 The manuscript of this speech, which is in evidence, includes approximately 6,000 words. REPUBLIC DRILL & TOOL COMPANY 967 what we are saying to you at these meetings, they are going to put out more handbills in which they will make more claims and in which they will no doubt deny things which I am saying here. Therefore, when you get these handbills, don't get too excited about them and give us a chance to tell you our side of the story. That is the American way of doing things As I have told you before, the leaders of the C. I. 0. are high class citizens, who have done a swell job for the workers they represent. They are honest and conscientious men and they are very sincere in their feeling that every worker in this Country should be in a C. I. 0. union. That is only natural for them to feel that way. I don't know what they are going to say in the next handbill, but it would be very likely for them to cite cases where C. I. 0. workers are being paid higher hourly rates then some of our highest hourly rates. So when you see these rates don't get too excited and don't think we have let you down. Please remember that at our last meeting when I told you about the Fairchild rates that there were no doubt cases where C. I. C. rates were higher than at Fairchild. I also told you that there are C. I. 0. rates which are lower than at Fairchild. Naturally, you would not expect the C. I. 0. to tell you about the lower rates . They will tell you only about the higher rates. * * * All this excitement about your wage rate came about through the fact that the C. I. 0. handed out a bulletin telling you in effect that we had misrepresented the facts to you. Now when the C. I. 0. put out this bulletin, I am sure they did not know all the facts. I am sure they sincerely thought they did know all the facts and thought we were just like the average employer, trying to take advantage of the poor working girl. * * * * * * * At one of last Saturdays meetings, several girls stood up in the meeting and said-"Do we have to join a union?" I said that I would not try to answer any questions that day but would be- glad to do so at the next meeting. You may not consider this a satisfactory answer to the question but I am very sincere when I say that if a majority of the workers here at Republic want a union then I think everyone should join it and make of it 100%. Whatever we do-lets not have a lot of fighting and bad feeling. * * * * * * * * * * I just want to say one more thing and that is that no one will be fired or punished or discriminated against in any way because he or she is an organizer for a union or a shop steward for a union, All members of the C. I. 0. organizing committee are free to talk to their fellow workers in the canteen and locker rooms, during the rest period and during the lunch period. Naturally, we know you are not going to talk about unions or anything else during working hours because you can't talk and do your work.-If the members of the organizing committee wish to wear a union button or if they want to post union bulletin board, they may do so. The following excerpts are taken from a speech made by Brogan before the General Assembly on June 17, 1943, a few days prior to the polling of the employees on the question of "Trustees": If the voting shows that the majority do not wish the Management to act as their Trustees, we should be glad to invite representatives of several large Unions to come in and talk to you during your lunch hour or after 968 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD your regular working hours. We would be glad to make the cafeteria available for meetings of this nature so long as the employees attended the meetings on their own time and not during working hours. For ex- ample, we would be glad to invite representatives of the C. I. O. to tell you why they feel their union should represent you. We would also be glad to invite representatives of the American Federation of Labor. Likewise, we would invite representatives of the International Brotherhood of Machinists, who recently withdrew from the American Federation of Labor. We would also be glad to invite District 50 of the United Mine Workers, which is the division of John L. Lewis' Union which is devoted to organ- izing unions outside of the coal mines. This union has been active in the Chicago Area lately. Out at Scully-Jones Co., a tool-manufacturer here in Chicago, another Union called "The Brotherhood of Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers" have been trying to organize their employees. We could also invite this union to come in and talk with you. In fact, we would be glad to invite representatives of any other union which you might wish to suggest. If you wish to have a union, we feel that the least we can do for you is to afford you every opportunity to select the union which a majority of you feel will do the best job of representing you. * * * I am sure many of you people must say to yourself-"it seems to me that every plant has a Union now-a-days. If we don't have one here at Republic we may be missing something." The answer to that is simply this-yes, you may be missing something and maybe you would be better off if you had a Union. However, so that you will not feel you are completely off base for not having a Union so far, I do think I should remind you that there are some very large plants in this country which do not have Unions today and never did have them because the employees felt that they have nothing to gain from a union. At a general assembly held on September 11, 1944, Brogan made the follow- ing statement , among others of a similar nature: In the charges which the U. E. C. I. O. have made against us , they state that at these general assemblies which we hold from time to time really amount to a labor organization dominated by the Company and that it is illegal for us to conduct employee meetings for the purpose of handling employee grievances and that by publishing and distributing publications such as the Republic Forum, the Company sets itself up as a rival con- tender of the union for the loyalty of its employees. The C. I. O. also claims that it is illegal for us to hold elections in which employees vote whether they wish to be represented by a union. They also claim that we have urged you, warned you, and persuaded you not to join the union and that all these things constitute unfair labor practices within the meaning of the Wagner Act. After receiving this complaint from the National Labor Relations Board, we turned the matter over to our lawyers in order to get from them a legal opinion as to whether or not we have violated the Wagner Act. * * * Our old-timers know that we have frequently told you, from this platform, that we will do nothing whatsoever to interfere with the organization of a union here at Republic. In fact, you will recall that we have even offered to allow representatives of the union to come into the plant and talk to you here in the Cafeteria in your lunch period. * * * If the employees of this plant have not formed a union up to this time, it is probably because they do not want a union and not because this company REPUBLIC DRILL & TOOL COMPANY 969 has restrained them in any way whatsoever. But to be sure there is no misunderstanding, I will tell you again that any Republic employee may john any union at any time he wishes, and that the management of Republic will not discharge him or discriminate against him in any way because he has done so. On October 14, 1944, at a general assembly held after the first hearing in this case was closed, and before it was resumed on December 19, Brogan again spoke on the subject of union organization. The following excerpts are typical of his speech as a whole: At the National Labor Relations Board on Tuesday, we filed as evidence in this hearing, a complete copy of every assembly talk ever given since Republic Drill started. A complete set of these assembly talks are now available to the U. E. C. I. O. This means that the U E C. I. O. now has a complete record of everything we have ever said to you at these meetings. This is perfectly all right and the way it should be. In fact. had the U. E. C. I. O. ever asked us for a copy of these talks we would have provided them with such copies. It is quite probable that the organ- izing committees of the U. E. C. I. O. will review these talks and perhaps find instance where we may have failed to do some of the things we said we would. Should this happen, it is quite possible that the U. E. C. I. O. will call your attention to these things through their handbills. In any event, we will continue our policy of answering all of the U. E. C. I. O. handbills so that you will always know the facts. * * * In our next general assembly we will discuss in detail the four points brought out in the last Union handbill which were: 1. Equal pay for equal work; 2. the revision of the little Steel formula now under consideration; 3. The Republic Incentive Plan ; 4. the matter of wage cuts. As we have said at previous meetings, the labor unions of this country have done a tremendous amount of good for the workers of America. The U. E. C. I. O. is a very powerful union because its leaders are very able men who have done an outstanding job for the workers. Many of you have brothers and sisters or fathers who are members of a U. E. C. I. O. union and you know they have received many benefits through the U E C I. O. That means when the U. E. C. I. O. says something to our . employees you take it seriously. If they tell you, as they did in the last handbill, that it would be cheaper for Republic Drill to invest thousands of dollars to keep the union out of the plant rather than install a fair incentive system which will guarantee the employees 1% return in wages for lrjo increase in production, you have a right to take such a statement seriously unless we can show you that the U. E. C. I. O. made a mistake when they made this statement. I am sure that the U. E. C. I. O. would not deliberately try to mislead you, * * * CONCLUSIONS The Board contends that the General Assembly, the House Committees, and the Trustees, taken together, constitute an organization known as the Republic Plan, and that Republic Plan is a company-dominated labor organization exist- ing in violation of Section 8 (2) of the Act. The undersigned finds this con- tention unsupported by the record. The General Assembly is simply a gathering together of the respondent's employees, in meetings called by the respondent. Assuming it to be an organi- zation in any sense of the word, it still falls short of being a labor organization, 970 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD as defined by the Act," because of the absence of employee participation, and because dealing with the respondent is no part of its purpose . The employees, in these assemblies , merely constitute an audience to which the respondent makes announcements which it deems to be of interest or importance to its employees. The fact that many of these announcements have to do with deci- sions as to wages and working conditions-decisions arrived at by the respond- ent acting unilaterally-does not serve to constitute the assembly a labor organization , any more than other announcements pertaining to problems of production serve to convert it into a labor-management committee. It is equally clear from the record that the term "Trustees," as applied to Reinhart , Brogan , and Avildsen , was a mere euphemism , the use of which the respondent encouraged so as to soften and obscure the reality of the relation- ship of employer and employee. The euphemism, when used in conjunction with other euphemisms such as "Republic Plan" and with such paraphernalia of an aggressive personnel department as opinion polls and The Republic Forum, had the effect, if not the purpose, of creating In the minds of the employees the illusion that they shared to some extent In the operation of the plant , that the respondent was not a mere employer and the employees mere employees, and that the Republic Drill & Tool Company was not a mere business enterprise. Far from being an over-all organization which Included the General Assembly , House Committees , and Trustees among its integral parts, "Republic Plan," actually, was only a term descriptive of the respondent's personnel policy . Whatever else might be said of It, the use of such verbiage as "Republic Plan" and "Trustees," does and cannot constitute "Republic Plan" a labor organization. Nor does the fact that the respondent , through Brogan and Reinhart, addressed employees repeatedly and at length on the subject of the Union and union organization , constitute, In the circumstances of this case, inter- ference , restraint, and coercion . These addresses refrained from attacking or disparaging the Union . On the contrary , the Union is repeatedly praised for its accomplishments on behalf of its members in other plants , and Its adherents are assured that allegiance to it will not result in discrimination against them. In these addresses the speakers , admittedly , attempted to meet the arguments set forth in the Union's handbills. In doing so, however, they refrained from inferring that the organizers for the Union were motivated by selfish or ulterior motives. In this respect Brogan's and Reinhart's remarks were in marked contrast to those made by the employer 's representatives In the American Tube Bending case," held by the Court not to be violative of the Act when unaccom- panied by acts of coercion. The undersigned finds, however, that the polls taken in June 1943, and June 1944, constituted interference and restraint . It is evident from the record, and admitted by Brogan, that these polls were conducted in response to requests that the employees be given a chance to vote on the question of a union. The phrasing of the ballot used in the 1943 poll clearly, and the ballot used in the 1944 poll somewhat less clearly, cast the Union in the role of a competitor with the respondent's officers for the loyalty of the employees . The question is made one of "either, or." Either the respondent 's officers, on the one hand, 25 The Act , Section 2 (5), defines a labor organization as "any organization of any kind , or any agency * * * or plan , in which employees participate and which exists for the purpose, in whole or In part , of dealing with employers concerning grievances, labor disputes , wages, rates of pay, hours of employment, or conditions of work." le N. L. R. B. v. American Tube Bending Co., 134 F . ( 2d) 993 ( C. C. A. 2), 12 L. it. It 285, J-707, setting aside 44 N , L, R. R. 121 ( C-2259 ), 320 U , S, 768 , cert . denied, REPUBLIC DRILL & TOOL COMPANY 971 or the Union on the other, may look after the Interests of the employees, but not both . The issue thus created is a false one which makes no allowance for the co-existence of the respondent's officers and the Union, each within their own proper sphere with relation to the welfare of the employees. Moreover, It is open to the construction that if the employees choose the Union the respondent will go out of business, thus depriving the employees of their livelihood. The undersigned finds that the respondent, by conducting polls in June 1943 and July 1944, as above described, interfered with, restrained, and coerced its employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act. The House Committees, which the respondent set up in the plant and which admittedly handled complaints and grievances of employees pertaining to their working conditions, are similar to other plant committees which the Board, in other cases," has held to be labor organizations existing in violation of Section 8 (2) of the Act. For reasons which are hereinafter set forth in the section entitled "The remedy," the undersigned makes no finding In this case that the respondent, by forming and supporting the House Committees, com- imtted or did not commit an unfair labor practice IV. THE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES UPON COMMERCE The activities of the respondent set forth in Section III, above, occurring in connection 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 commerce and the free flow of commerce. V. THE REMEDY Having found that the respondent has engaged in certain unfair labor prac- tices, the undersigned will recommend that it cease and desist therefrom and take certain affirmative action which the undersigned finds will effectuate the policies of the Act. The undersigned has found that "Republic Plan" was not a general scheme or plan in which employees participate and which, in the language of the complaint, "exists for the purpose, in whole or in part, of dealing with the respondent concerning grievances, labor disputes, wages, rates of pay, hours of employment, or conditions of employment variously known and referred to as the Trustees, House Committee, Counsellors, General Assembly and Republic Plan." Although the evidence tends to show that the House Committees are labor organizations existing in violation of Section 8 (2), of the Act, the undersigned is unable to make findings of fact and conclusions of law to that effect because of the lack of service upon those organizations. Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact, and upon the entire record in the case, the undersigned makes the following: CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. United Electrical , Radio & Machine Workers of America , Local 1114, 17 See Matter of J. W. Greer Company, 52 N. L. R. B. 1341 ; Julius Kayser ct Co, 29 N. L. R. B. 1025. 972 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD C. I. 0., is a labor organization within the meaning of Section 2 (5) of the Act. 2. By interfering with, restraining, and coercing its employees in the exercise of their rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act, the respondent has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8 (1) of the Act. 3. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair labor practices affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. 4. The respondent has not engaged in any unfair labor practices by having in effect a general scheme or plan known as "Republic Plan." RECOMMENDATIONS Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, the undersigned recommends that Republic Drill and Tool Company, Chicago, Illinois, its officers, agents, successors, and assigns , shall: 1. Cease and desist from : (a) Interfering with, restiainuig, and coercing its employees in the exercise of the right to self-organization, to form labor organizations, to join or assist United Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers of America, Local 1114, C. I. 0., 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, as guaranteed In Section 7 of the Act. 2. Take the following affirmative action which the undersigned finds will effectuate the policies of the Act: (a) Post immediately in its plant in Chicago, Illinois, copies of the notice attached hereto and marked "Appendix A." Copies of said notice, to be furnished by the Regional Director for the Thirteenth Region, shall, after being duly signed by the respondent's representatives, be posted by the respondent immediately upon receipt thereof, and maintained by it for sixty ( 60) consecu- tive days thereafter, in conspicuous places, including all places where notices to employees are customarily posted Reasonable steps shall be taken by the respondent to insure that said notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by any other material; (b) File with the Regional Director for the Thirteenth Region on or before ten (10) days from the receipt of this Intermediate Report, a report in writing setting forth in detail the manner and form in which the respondent has com- plied with the foregoing recommendations. It is further recounnended that unless on or before ten (10) days from the receipt of this Intermediate Report, the respondent notifies the Regional Direc- tor in writing that it will comply with the foregoing recommendations, the National Labor Relations Board issue an order requiring the respondent to take the action aforesaid It is further recommended that the complaint be dismissed insofar as it alleges that the respondent formed and dominated a labor organization which "exists for the purpose, in whole or in part, of dealing with the respondent concerning grievances, labor disputes, wages, rates of pay, hours of employ- ment, or conditions of employment variously known and referred to as the Trustees, House Committee, Counsellors, General Assembly and Republic Plan, herein referred to in the aggregate as the Republic Plan." As provided in Section 33 of Article II, of the Rules and Regulations of the National Labor Relations Board, Series 3, as amended , effective July 12, 1944, REPUBLIC DRILL & TOOL COMPANY 973 any party or counsel for the Board may, within fifteen (15) days from the date of the entry of the order transferring the case to the Board , pursuant to Section 32 of Article II of said Rules and Regulations, file with the Board, Rochambeau Building, Washington 25, D. C, an original and four copies of a statement in writing setting forth such exceptions to the Intermediate Report or to any other part of the record or proceeding (including rulings upon all motions or objections) as he relies upon, together with the original and four copies of a brief in support thereof. Immediately upon the filing of such statement of exceptions and/or brief, the party or counsel for the Board filing the same shall serve a copy thereof upon each of the other parties and shall tile a copy with the Regional Director. As provided in said Section 33, should any party desire permission to argue orally before the Board request therefor must be made in writing to the Board within ten (10) days from the date of the order transferring the case to the Board. HORACE A. RucI EL, Trial Examiner. Dated August 9, 1945. "APPENDIX" NorICE To ALL EMPLOYEES PURSUANT TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF A TRIAL EXAMINER of the National Labor Relations Board, and in order to effectuate the policies of the National Labor Relations Act, we hereby notify our employees that : We will not in any manner interfere with, restrain, or coerce our employees in the exercise of their right to self-organization, to form labor organiza- tions, to join or assist United Electrical Radio & Machine Workers of America, Local 1114, C. I. 0., 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. All our employees are free to become or remain members of this union, or any other labor organization. REPUBLIC DRILL & TOOL 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. Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation