The Belden Brick Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 18, 1946

69 N.L.R.B. 645 (N.L.R.B. 1946)

In the Matter of THE BELDEN BRICK CO., EMPLOYER and UNITED
BRICK AND CLAY WORKERS OF AMERICA ( AFL), PETITIONER
Case No. 8-R-2087.-Decided July 18,1946
Messrs. Dan M. Belden, B. B. Wentz, J. H. Walker, Paul Belden,
Jr., and William H. Belden, all of Canton, Ohio, for the Employer.
Messrs. Howard R. Hill, of Philadelphia, Ohio, and Joe Bat-
,tista, of Waynesburg, Ohio, for the Petitioner.
M. Arthur Christopher, Jr., of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at Canton,
Ohio, on May 21,1946 ' before George F. Hayes, Trial Examiner. The
Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial
Error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations
Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
The Belden Brick Co. is an Ohio corporation with general offices
in Canton, Ohio, and plants located at Canton, Uhrichsville, Port
Washington, and Somerset, Ohio. This proceeding is concerned only
with the plant located at Canton, Ohio, which is engaged in the manu-
facture of face brick, common brick, acid-proof brick, floor brick,
and silo brick. During the past fiscal year, 25 percent of the operating
materials used by the Company at its Canton plant was purchased
from sources outside the State of Ohio. During the same period, the.
Company's total sales receipts at the Canton plant were approxi-
mately $21,000 of which amount 70 percent represented sales to cus-
tomers outside the State.
The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
69 N. L. R. B., No. 80.
645
646 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
The petitioner is a labor oragnization affiliated with the American
Federation of Labor claiming to represent employees of the Employer.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Employer refuses to recognize the Petitioner as the exclusive
bargaining representatives of employees of the Employer until the
Petitioner has been certified by the Board in an appropriate unit.
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning
the representation of employees of the Employer, within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
IV. TIIE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Petitioner seeks a unit composed of all production and main-
tenance employees of the Company at its Canton, Ohio, plant, ex-
cluding clerical and supervisory employees, and requests further that,.
if an election is directed and results in its certification by the Board as
bargaining representative for these employees, the Board then con-
solidate into one single unit the production and maintenace employees
at the Canton plant and at each of the other three plants, viz, Uhrichs-
ville, Port Washington, and Somerset, where its affiliates are separ-
ately recognized as collective bargaining representatives. The
Company, while agreeing that the unit of production and maintenance
employees sought at the Canton plant is appropriate, opposes the con-
solidation into one unit of all the production and maintenance em-
ployees at its plants.
Inasmuch as no representative has yet been certified by the Board
as the result of this proceeding and no request has been made upon
the Company to bargain on behalf of the employees in the Canton
plant along with the employees in the other three plants, we will deny
the Petitioner's request, at this time as premature; without passing
upon the merits of it. We shall, however, in accordance with the
agreement of the parties, establish a unit of production and mainte-
nance employees at the Canton plant.'
Accordingly, we find that all production and maintenance em-
ployees of the Employer at its Canton, Ohio, plant, excluding clerical
1 See Matter of Chrysler Corporation, 28 N. L. R. B. 1038, and 37 N. L. R. B. 877.
2 Subsequent to the hearing, the Employer filed with the Board a motion to dismiss the
petition on the ground that it "presents a moot problem." The Employer bases its motion
on the fact that since the hearing another labor organization has filed with the Board a
petition for investigation and certification of representatives at its Port Washington and
Uhrichsville plants. Inasmuch as the latter petition in no way affects the employees at
the Canton plant, it is obvious that the question concerning the representation of these
employees is not moot. Accordingly, we find no merit in the Employer's position and shall
deny the motion to dismiss.
THE BELDEN BRICK CO. 647
employees, and all 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
appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the mean-
ing of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the
purposes of collective bargaining with The Belden Brick Co., Canton,
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
Eighth Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National Labor
Relations Board, and subject to Article III, Sections 10 and 11, of
National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3,
as amended , among the employees 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 per-
son at the polls, but excluding those employees 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 or not they de-
sire to be represented by United Brick and Clay Workers of America
( AFL), for the purposes of collective bargaining.
CHAIRMAN HERZOG took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Direction of Election.