Sydney-Thomas Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Sep 5, 1944

58 N.L.R.B. 51 (N.L.R.B. 1944)

in ache Matter of SYDNEY-THOMAS CORPORATION and PAPER WORKERS
ORGANIZING COMMITTEE, C. I. O.
Case No. 9-R-1450.-Decided September 5, 1944
Messrs. Harry KKasfir and Jonah Mehl , of Cincinnati , Ohio, for the
Company.
.Messrs. Julius Holzberg and Howard Forkner, of Cincinnati, Ohio,
for the C. I. O.
.Messrs. Earl Taylor , S. A. Stephens , and E. C. Bundy , of Cincinnati,
(Ohio, for ,the A. F. L.
Mr. William C. Baisinger , Jr., of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
i
' STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon petition duly filed by Paper Workers Organizing Committee,.
C. I. 0., herein called the C. I. 0., alleging that a question affecting
commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of
Sydney-Thomas Corporation, Cincinnati, Ohio, herein called the
Company, the National Labor Relations Board provided for an ap-
propriate hearing upon due notice before Benjamin E. Cook, Trial
Examiner. Said hearing was held at Cincinnati, Ohio, on June 29,
1944. On July-18, 1944, pursuant to an order of the Board reopening
the record, a further hearing upon due notice was held at Cincinnati,.
Ohio, before the same Trial Examiner. At both hearings the Com-
pany, the C. I. 0., and Local 490, International Brotherhood of Pulp,.
Sulphite and Paper Mill Workers, A. F. L., herein called the A. F. L.,
appeared and participated.-' All parties were afforded full opportu-
nity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, to introduce
evidence bearing on the issues, and to file briefs with the Board. The
Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are free from preju-
dicial error and are hereby affirmed.
i A written waiver signed by the C I O , introduced into evidence at the first hearing,
states that the C. I 0 waives any right, power, or privilege to protest any election held
in this proceeding on any ground set forth in Case No 9-C-2034.
58 N. L. R. B, No. 11.
51
52 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Upon the-entire record in the case, the Board makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Sydney-Thomas Corporation, an Ohio corporation with its prin-
cipal offices and places of business in Cincinnati, Ohio, operates four
plants in Cincinnati, Ohio, at which it is engaged in the manufacture
of paper, window shades, cellophane bags, paper bags, and confec-
tionery cake decorations. During the year 1943 the raw materials used
by the Company in the manufacture of cellophane bags and paper
bags consisted of approximately $1,000,000 worth of paper, cello-
phane, and glue, of which over 98 percent was shipped to the Com-
pany's plants from points outside the State of Ohio. During the same
period the Company purchased approximately $10,000 worth of sugar
and egg white for use in the manufacture of confectionery cake deco-
rations, all of which was purchased within the State of Ohio. During
1943 the value of the confectionery cak,; decorations manufactured by
the Company was in excess of $40,000, of which over 20 percent was
shipped to points outside the State of Ohio.
The Company admits, and we find, that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
Paper Workers Organizing Committee is a labor organization
affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations , admitting
to membership employees of the Company.
Local 490 , International Brotherhood of Pulp, Sulphite and Paper
Mill Workers is a labor organization affiliated with the American
Federation of Labor, admitting to membership employees of the
Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Company's operations are conducted at four locations in the
city of Cincinnati, Ohio, known as the Reading Road plant, the West
Eighth Street plant, the Central Avenue plant, and the Warehouse,
respectively. All of these buildings are situated within a radius of
21/2 miles.
At the hearing the parties stipulated that on or about April 1, 1944,
the C. I. O. advised the Company by letter that it represented a ma-
jority of the employees in the Central Avenue plant who, it contended,
constituted an appropriate bargaining unit, requesting recognition
as their exclusive bargaining representative, and that the Company
SYDNEY-THOMAS CORPORATION 53
refused to accord the C. I. O. such recognition unless and until it was
certified by the Board.
On June 17, 1942, pursuant to the results of a consent election held
on February 20, 1942, under the Board's supervision,2 the Company and
the A. F. L. entered into a collective bargaining contract covering all
employees of the West Eighth Street plant with certain exceptions.
On January 29, 1943, the same parties executed a second agreement
covering the same employees. On or about January 1, 1944, the Com-
pany, by means of a business merger, acquired the businesses of the
Mehl Manufacturing Company and the Imperial Paper Company,
both of Cincinnati, Ohio. Prior to the merger the Mehl Manufactur-
ing Company had operated plants at 1644 West Central Avenue, now
known as the Company's Central Avenue plant, where it was engaged
in the manufacture of paper bags and cake decorations, and at 2057
Reading Road, now known as the Company's Reading Road plant,
where it was engaged in the manufacture of paper bags. Before the
merger, Imperial Paper Company operated a plant at 320 West Cen-
tral Avenue, now known as the Company's Warehouse, where it was
engaged in the business of wholesale paper jobbing. On February 29,
1944, subsequent to,the merger, the Company and the A. F. L. ex-
ecuted a third contract which provided for a closed shop and dues
check-off and, by its terms vas to remain in effect "for 1 year from -
February 1st, 1944, and thereafter for succeeding periods," in the
absence of notice by either party to the contrary served upon the other
party 60 days prior to any anniversary date of the contract. The
contract's recognition clause provides, in part, "The Company hereby
recognizes the Union as the sole and exclusive representative for the
purposes of collective bargaining with respect to rates of pay, wages,
hours of work and other conditions of employment, for all plant pro-
duction workers, but exclusive of .. ."
The C. I. O. contends that the contract of February 29, 1944, covers
only employees of the West Eighth Street plant. The A. F. L. claims
that it covers employees of the West Eighth Street and Reading Road
plants. The Company takes the position that it covers the employees
of all its operations. In the light of the collective bargaining history
prior to the execution of the 1944 contract, the language contained in
that contract appears to support the C. I. O.'s position. Wage scales
are set out only for employees of the "Shade Department" and the
"Harness Department," both of which are located in the West Eighth
Street plant. Under Article VII of the contract appears the following
clause :
2 At the time of the consent election the Company operated only the west Eighth Street
plant, at which it was engaged in manufacturing window shades, paper bags, and also
certain war materials . Only five persons participated in the consent election.
54 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
For the purposes of interpreting this agreement, insofar as dis-
tribution or sharing work, seniority, wages and overtime payment
etc., eachdepartment shall be considered as a separate and distinct
department of the Sydney-Thomas Corporation, it being under-
stood that the employees of the Shade Department will hold their
seniority rights with the Sydney-Thomas Corporation if and
when the Harness Department is discontinued.
From the record it appears that in March 1944, the A. F. L. approached
the Company with respect to extending the contract's coverage to the
Reading Road and Central Avenue plants. Although the Company
did not oppose such extension, the contract was not amended nor did
the A. F. L. attempt to organize the employees at either the Reading
Road or Central Avenue plant until the first week in April 1944.
The record contains no evidence to indicate that the closed-shop or
dues check-off provisions of the contract were ever put into effect at
any but the West Eighth Street plant. Moreover, the A. F. L. admits
that it has no members among the employees of the Central Avenue
plant.
In view of the foregoing facts, it seems apparent that, at the time
the February 29, 1944, contract was executed, the contracting parties
intended that it should lover only those employees for whom the
A. F. L. had theretofore bargained, namely, the employees of the
West Eighth Street plant. Accordingly, since we hereinafter find
that a company-wide unit is appropriate, we conclude that the contract
does not constitute a bar to a determination of representatives for the
employees comprising the appropriate unit.3
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning
the representation of employees of the Company, within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
At the original hearing the C. I. 0. requested a bargaining unit
comprised of all production and maintenance employees at the Central
Avenue plant, excluding office and clerical employees, plant-protection
employees, foremen, assistant foremen, foreladies, assistant foreladies,
and all other supervisory employees with authority to hire, promote,
discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of em-
ployees, or effectively recommend such action. However, in view of
the additional evidence adduced at the second hearing on July 18,
1944, concerning the proposed centralization of all the Company's
operations, the C. I. 0. takes the alternative position that a company-
3 See Matter of Mills Industries , Incorporated, et al., 57 N. L. R. B . 467, and Matter
of Dolese & ,Shepard Company, 56 N. L. R. B. 532.
SYDNEY-THOMAS CORPORATION 55
wide unit with the same inclusions and exclusions is appropriate.
The A. F. L. disclaims any interest in the Central Avenue plant, but
is opposed to a determination of representatives affecting the em-
ployees at the other plants of the Company who, it claims, are covered
by its contract. The Company takes the position that only a company-
wide unit is appropriate. There appears to be no dispute with respect
to inclusions and exclusions.
At its 4 plants the Company employs approximately 250 production
and maintenance employees. As previously mentioned, all 4 plants
are situated within a 21/2 mile radius. All production work is done at
the West Eighth Street Central Avenue, and Reading Road plants.
The Warehouse is used as a storage building for the Company's sup-
plies and is operated by 1 man whose duties are comparable to those of
a shipping and receiving clerk: The same type of work is performed at
each of the 3 production plants; wage scales are uniform at all plants;
there is some interchange of personnel among the 3 production plants;
and the Company's executive and administrative offices are located at
the Reading Road plant. Moreover, the evidence indicates that the
Company contemplates moving all of its operations into a single build-
ing which it has contracted to purchase. It was estimated that this
move would take place in October 1944.
Upon the basis of the above facts and the entire record in the case,
we find that all production and maintenance employees at all of the
Company's plants, excluding office and clerical employees, plant-protec-
tion employees, foremen, assistant foremen, foreladies, assistant fore-
ladies, and all other supervisory employees with authority to hire, pro-
mote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of
employees, or effectively recommend such action, constitute a unit ap-
propriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning
of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
We shall direct that the question concerning representation which
has arisen be resolved by an election by secret ballot among the employ-
ees in the appropriate unit who were employed during the pay-roll
period immediately preceding the date of the Direction of Election
herein, subject to the limitations and additions set forth in the Direc-
tion.4
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
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,
* The C I 0 and the A F L requested that their names appear on the ballot as set
forth hereinafter in the Direction of Election
56 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor Relations
Board Rules and Regul ations-Series 3, as amended, ,it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of coll ective bargaining with Sydney-Thomas
Corporation, Cincinnati, Ohio, an election by secret ballot shall be
conducted 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 Ninth 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 employ-
ees in the unit 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 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 election, to determine whether
they desire to be represented by United Paper Workers Organizing
Committee, C. 1. 0., or by International Brotherhood of Pulp, Sulphite
and Paper Mill Workers, Local 490, A. F. of L., for the purposes of -
collective bargaining, or by neither.
CHAIRMAN MILLIS took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Direction of Election.