The A. Moresi Co., Ltd.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Feb 6, 1970

181 N.L.R.B. 13 (N.L.R.B. 1970)

THE A. MORESI CO., LTD. 13
The A. Moresi Co., Ltd. and Machinists and
Foundry Workers Club. Case 15-CA-3590
February 6, 1970
DECISION AND ORDER
BY CHAIRMAN MCCULLOCH AND MEMBERS
FANNING AND BROWN
answer to the complaint and asked that the
complaint be dismissed.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the
National Labor Relations Board has delegated its
powers in connection with this case to a
three-member panel.
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board
makes the following:
Upon a charge filed by Machinists and Foundry
Workers Club, hereinafter called Club, the General
Counsel for the National Labor Relations Board, by
the Regional Director for Region 15, issued a
complaint and notice of hearing dated August 6,
1969,' alleging that The A. Moresi Co., Ltd.,
Respondent herein, had engaged in and was
engaging in unfair labor practices within the
meaning of Sections 8(a)(5) and (1) and 2(6) and (7)
of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended.
Copies of the charge, complaint and notice of
hearing before a Trial Examiner were duly served
upon the Respondent.
With respect to the unfair labor practices, the
complaint alleges, that on or about June 19, the
Club was duly certified by the Acting Regional
Director for Region 15, as the exclusive bargaining
representative of the Respondent's employees in the
unit found appropriate= and that since on or about
June 30, the Respondent has refused and continues
to refuse, to recognize or bargain with the Union as
such exclusive bargaining representative, although
the Union had requested and is requesting it to do
so.
On August 15, the Respondent filed its answer
admitting certain allegations of the complaint in
whole or in part, but denying the commission of the
unfair labor practices alleged. It alleged in its
answer that the unit was inappropriate, in particular
because it was based on the extent of organization,
and further that the Club was not a labor
organization within the meaning of Section 2(5) of
the National Labor Relations Act, as amended.
On August 25, the General Counsel filed with the
National Labor Relations Board a motion to
transfer and continue case before the Board and
Motion for Summary Judgment, asserting that there
were no issues of fact or law which had not already
been litigated before and determined by the Board.
Thereafter on August 26, the Board having duly
considered the matter, issued an order transferring
proceeding to the Board and notice to show cause,
why the General Counsel's motion for summary
judgment should not be granted. On September 11,
the Respondent filed an opposition to motion for
summary judgment and return to rule to show cause
maintaining that the motion was "without basis in
law." It reiterated the contentions raised in its
'All dates herein are 1969
'Decision and Direction of Election , Case 15-RC-4080 (not printed in
NLRB Volumes).
Ruling on Motion for Summary Judgment
The record establishes that on February 6, the
Club filed a petition in Case 15-RC-4080, seeking a
plantwide unit of machine shop and foundry shop
employees. At the hearing the Club amended its
petition to exclude the machine shop employees.
After a hearing on the petition, the Acting Regional
Director for Region 15 found on the basis of Board
precedent and the evidence in the record that a unit
of foundry employees was appropriate. In particular
he relied in so finding principally on facts showing
that the foundry employees had separate
supervision, that there was physical and
departmental separation of the employees, separate
identity, different hours and wages and a lack of
significant interchange of employees. He thus
concluded that the Respondent's foundry was a
functionally distinct and separate department whose
employees are identified with a traditional trade and
occupation. The Acting Regional Director rejected
the Respondent's contention that the foundry unit
was inappropriate on the ground that it was based
on extent of organization pointing out that the Act
precluded the Board only from giving controlling
weight to extent of organization, but that his
determination was based on factors wholly unrelated
to the extent to which the employees had been
organized. Furthermore, in view of the evidence
adduced at the hearing, the Acting Regional
Director also denied Respondent's motion to dismiss
the petition on the ground that the Club was not a
labor organization within the meaning of Section
2(5) of the Act.
On March 28, the Respondent filed a request for
review of the Acting Regional Director's Decision
and Direction of Election. The request was denied
by the Board on May 12.
On May 14, an election was held in which a
majority of the employees of the Respondent in the
appropriate unit selected the Club as their
representative for the purposes of collective
bargaining. The Club was certified on June 19 by
the Acting Regional Director as the
collective-bargaining representative of the employees
in the appropriate unit. On or about June 25, the
Club requested that Respondent bargain collectively
with it. This request was refused and on August 6,
1969, the Acting Regional Director issued the
complaint and notice of hearing upon which these
proceedings are predicated.
181 NLRB No. 7
14 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
In its opposition to the motion for summary
judgment and notice to show cause, the Respondent
maintains that the Acting Regional Director and
Board erred in designating the foundry employees as
an appropriate unit because the unit was based on
extent of organization prohibited by Section 9(c)(5)
of the Act. It also argues that the Club is not a
labor organization within the meaning of Section
2(5) of the Act and that on the peculiar facts in the
case , the Board erred in refusing to grant review of
the Acting Regional Director's Decision and
Direction of Election. It contends therefore that the
motion for summary judgment is without basis in
law and asks that the complaint be dismissed. The
Respondent does not contend that it has any newly
discovered or previously unavailable evidence
bearing on the issues in the case or that any special
circumstances exist requiring a new consideration of
the case.
The contentions it is raising in this proceeding
were argued at the hearing in the representation
case, and before the Board in its request for review
of the Acting Regional Director's Decision. We have
since considered the entire record; we affirm the
correctness of that Decision.
It may be observed that in contesting the finding
that the Club is a labor organization, the
Respondent argues that the Acting Regional
Director confused the "function" of the Club as a
labor organization with the "purpose" for which it
was organized, and that the Act defines a labor
organization in terms of purpose rather than
function. It maintains that the Club's function is
irrelevant and that since the Club was organized for
an unlawful purpose it therefore did not come within
the purview of the Act's definition of a labor
organization. In substance, it relies on evidence
showing that Alfred Moresi, a former officer,
director and stockholder in Corporate Respondent
had, because of personal differences with
Respondent's management, threatened that he would
make its operations unprofitable by organizing a
union of its employees, or damage it in other ways.
It is true that Reverend Wilmer Castle3 who testified
in support of the organization's petition, admitted
that Alfred Moresi was present at all of the
organization 's meetings and that the organization
followed his advice. However, Castle went on to
testify that, although he knew of Moresi's former
connections with the Respondent, he had no
knowledge of the circumstances of his leaving and
that Moresi had never spoken to him about them.
The Board notes that whatever the view the Acting
Regional Director had of the Club's function as a
labor organization he did correctly find that its
purpose, at least in part, was to deal with the
employer in regard to wages, hours, and working
conditions of employees. Such declared purpose, in
the Board's opinion, is sufficient to satisfy the
requirements of the Act.' It well may be, as
Respondent maintains, that Alfred Moresi, who
counseled and assisted the employees in the
formation of the organization, had, in so doing, as
his purpose injuring or damaging the Respondent.
But, evidence of Moresi's purpose is not, without
more, evidence that it is the organization's purpose.
The Board will not assume such improper purpose,
particularly in the face of a denial that the Club's
Chairman, or any of the employees, had knowledge
of Moresi's personal difficulties with the
Respondent.
Since the record shows that the Machinists and
Foundry Workers Club was formed for one evident
purpose - to deal with the Respondent concerning
wages, hours and conditions of employment - it is
evident that the Acting Regional Director's
determination was not in error as a matter of fact
or law, and we so find.
As all material allegations of the complaint have
either been found by the Board to be supported or
have been admitted by the Respondent in this
proceeding, and as there is no matter requiring a
hearing before a Trial Examiner, the Board denies
Respondent's motion to dismiss the complaint and
grants the General Counsel's motion for. summary
judgment.
On the basis of the record before it the Board
makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE RESPONDENT
The Respondent is, and at all times material
herein has been, a Louisiana corporation, with a
plant and principal office located in Jeanerette,
Louisiana, the facility involved herein, where it is
engaged in the foundry business producing sugar
mill rollers. In the course and conduct of its
business operations, the Respondent annually sells
goods valued in excess of $50,000 to sugar mills in
the State of Louisiana, each of which, in turn,
during the same period sells and ships goods valued
in excess of $50,000 directly to points outside the
State of Louisiana.
The Respondent admits, and we find, that it is,
and has been at all times material herein, an
employer engaged in commerce within the meaning
of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act and that it will
effectuate the policies of the Act to assert
jurisdiction herein.
II. THE LABOR ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
Machinists and Foundry Workers Club is a labor
organization within the meaning of Section 2(5) of
the Act.
'Reverend Wilmer Castle , a former employee of the Respondent, was
the person most active in organizing the foundry employees and heads the
organization as its "Chairman "
IN L R B v Cabot Carbon Co. 360 U S 203
THE A. MORESI CO., LTD. 15
III. THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
A. The Representation Proceeding
1. The unit
At all times material herein, the following
employees have constituted and now constitute a
unit appropriate for purposes of collective
bargaining within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the
Act:
All full-time and regular part-time foundry
department employees at the Respondent's
Jeanerette , Louisiana , plant , including molders,
core makers , cupola tenders , crane operators, fire
bricklayers, apprentices, helpers and laborers,
excluding office clerical employees , machine shop
employees , farm employees, pattern maker,
professional employees , guards and supervisors as
defined in the Act.
2. The certification
On about May 14, a majority of the employees of
the Respondent in said unit , voting in a secret
election conducted under the supervision of the
Acting Regional Director for Region 15, designated
the Club as their representative for the purpose of
collective bargaining with the Respondent, and on
June 19, the Acting Regional Director certified the
Club as the exclusive collective- bargaining
representative of the employees in said unit , and the
Club continues to be such representative.
B. The Request To Bargain and the
Respondent's Refusal
Following the Certification of Representative
described above, the Club on June 25, requested the
Respondent to recognize and bargain with the Club
as the representative of the employees in the
aforesaid unit . On June 30 , the Respondent refused
and is continuing to refuse to bargain collectively
with the Club as the exclusive bargaining
representative of all employees in said unit.
C. Conclusions
Accordingly, we find that the Club was duly
certified as the collective - bargaining representative
of the employees of the Respondent in the
appropriate unit described above; that the Club at
all times since June 19 , has been and now is the
exclusive bargaining representative of all the
employees in the aforesaid unit within the meaning
of Section 9(a) of the Act; that the Respondent has
since June 30, refused to bargain collectively with
the Club as the exclusive bargaining -representative
of its employees in the appropriate unit , and that by
such refusal , the Respondent has engaged in and is
engaging in unfair labor practices within the
meaning of Section 8 (a)(5) and (1) of the Act.
IV. THE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR
PRACTICES UPON COMMERCE
The Acts of the Respondent set forth in section
III, above , occurring in connection with its
operations as described in section 1, 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.
THE REMEDY
Having found that the Respondent has engaged in
and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the
meaning of Section 8 (a)(5) and (1) of the Act, we
shall order that it cease and desist therefrom and,
upon request , bargain collectively with the Club as
the exclusive representative of all employees in the
appropriate unit and , if an understanding is reached,
embody such understanding in a signed agreement.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. The A. Moresi Co., Ltd., is an employer
engaged in commerce within the meaning of Section
2(6) and (7) of the Act.
2. Machinists and Foundry Workers Club is a
labor organization within the meaning of Section
2(5) of the Act.
3. All full-time and regular part-time foundry
department employees at The A. Moresi Co ., Ltd.,
Jeanerette , Louisiana, plant, including molders, core
makers, cupola tenders , crane operators, fire
bricklayers, apprentices, helpers, and laborers,
excluding office clerical employees, machine shop
employees , farm employees, pattern makers,
professional employees, guards, and supervisors as
defined in the Act, constitute a unit appropriate for
the purposes of collective bargaining within the
meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
4. Since June 19, 1969, the above-named labor
organization has been the certified and exclusive
representative of all employees in the aforesaid
appropriate unit for the purposes of collective
bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 ( a) of the
Act.
5. By refusing on or about June 30 , 1969, and at
all times thereafter, to bargain collectively with the
above-named labor organization as the exclusive
bargaining representative of all its employees in the
appropriate unit, the Respondent has engaged in and
is engaging in unfair labor practices within the
meaning of Section 8 (a)(5) and (1) of the Act.
6. By the aforesaid refusal to bargain, the
Respondent has interfered with , restrained, and
coerced, and is interfering with, restraining, and
coercing , employees in the exercise of the rights
16 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
guaranteed to them in Section 7 of the Act, and has
thereby engaged in, and is engaging in, unfair labor
practices within the meaning of Section 8(a)(1) of
the Act.
7. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair
labor practices affecting commerce within the
meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
ORDER
Pursuant to Section 10(c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor
Relations Board hereby orders that:
A. For the purpose of determining the duration of
the certification, the initial year of the certification
shall be deemed to begin on the day that
Respondent commences to bargain in good faith
with the Club as the recognized exclusive bargaining
representative of the employees in the appropriate
unit.'
B. The Respondent, The A. Moresi Co., Ltd., its
officers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall:
1. Cease and desist from:
(a) Refusing to bargain collectively concerning
rates of pay, wages, hours, and other terms and
conditions of employment with Machinists and
Foundry Workers Club, as the exclusive and duly
certified bargaining representative of its employees
in the following appropriate unit:
All full-time and regular part-time foundry
department employees at The A. Moresi Co.,
Ltd., Jeanerette, Louisiana, plant including
molders, core makers, cupola tenders, crane
operators, fire bricklayers, apprentices, helpers
and laborers, excluding office clerical employees,
machine shop employees, farm employees, pattern
maker, professional employees, guards and
supervisors as defined in the Act.
(b) In any like or related manner interfering with,
restraining, or ceorcing employees in the exercise of
the rights guaranteed to them by Section 7 of the
Act.
2. Take the following affirmative action which the
Board finds will effectuate the policies of the Act:
(a) Upon request, bargain with the above-named
labor organization as the exclusive representative of
all employees in the aforesaid appropriate unit with
respect to rates of pay, wages, hours, and other
terms and conditions of employment and, if an
understanding is reached, embody such
understanding in a signed agreement.
(b) Post at its Jeanerette, Louisiana, plant, copies
of the attached notice marked "Appendix."6 Copies
of said notice, on forms provided by the Regional
'The purpose of this provision is to insure that the employees in the
appropriate unit will be accorded the services of their selected bargaining
agent for the period provided by law . See Mar-Jac Poultry Company, Inc.
136 NLRB 785; Commerce Company, d/b/a Lamar Hotel. 140 NLRB
226, 229, enfd 328 F.2d 600 (C A 5), cert denied 379 U S. 817; Burnette
Construction Company, 149 NLRB 1419, 1421, enfd . 350 F 2d 57 (C A
10)
Director for Region 15, after being duly signed by
the Respondent's representative, shall be posted by
the Respondent immediately upon receipt thereof,
and be maintained by it for 60 consecutive days
thereafter, in conspicuous places, including all places
where notices to employees are customarily posted.
Reasonable steps shall be taken to ensure that said
notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by any
other material.
(c) Notify said Regional Director for Region 15,
in writing, within 10 days from the date of this
Decision and Order, what steps Respondent has
taken to comply herewith.
'In the event that this Order is enforced by a judgment of a United
States Court of Appeals , the words in the notice reading, "Posted by
Order of the National Labor Relations Board ," shall read "Posted
Pursuant to a Judgment of the United States Court of Appeals Enforcing
an Order of the National Labor Relations Board "
APPENDIX
NOTICE TO EMPLOYEES
Posted by Order of the National Labor Relations
Board an Agency of the United States Government
WE WILL NOT refuse to bargain collectively with
Machinists and Foundry Workers Club, as the exclusive
representative of the employees in the bargaining unit
described below.
WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner interfere
with, restrain , or coerce our employees in the exercise
of the rights guaranteed them by Section 7 of the Act.
WE WILL, upon request, bargain with the
above-named Union, as the exclusive representative of
all employees in the bargaining unit described below
with respect to wages, hours, and other terms and
conditions of employment and, if an understanding is
reached, embody such understanding in a signed
agreement.
The bargaining unit is:
All full-time and regular part-time foundry
department employees at The A. Moresi Co., Ltd.,
Jeanerette, Louisiana, plant including molders, core
makers, cupola tenders, crane operators, fire
bricklayers, apprentices, helpers, and laborers,
excluding office clerical employees, machine shop
employees, farm employees, pattern maker,
professional employees, guards and supervisors as
defined in the Act.
THE A. MORESI CO,
LTD.
(Employer)
Dated By
(Representative ) (Title)
This is an official notice and must not be defaced by
anyone.
This notice must remain posted for 60 consecutive days
from the date of posting and must not be altered, defaced,
or covered by any other material.
Any questions concerning this notice or compliance
with its provisions may be directed to the Board 's Office,
T6024 Federal Building (Loyola), 701 Loyola Avenue,
New Orleans, Louisiana 70103, Telephone 504-527-6361.