The Life Insurance Co. of Virginia

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 14, 1944

57 N.L.R.B. 279 (N.L.R.B. 1944)

In the Matter of THE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF VIRGINIA and IN-
DUSTRIAL AND ORDINARY INSURANCE AGENTS UNION #22947, A. F. L.,
LYNCHBURG, VA.
In the Matter of THE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF VIRGINIA and IN-
DUSTRIAL AND ORDINARY INSURANCE AGENTS UNION #21354, A. F. L.
Cases Nos. 5-R-1499 and 5-R-1535 respectively-Decided July
14, 194./
Mr. Sidney J. Barban, for the Board.
Mr. S. J. Hilton, of Baltimore , Md., for the Company.
Mr. George L. Russ, of Washington , D. C., for the Unions.
Mr. Robert Silagi, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
AND
ORDER
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon separate petitions duly filed by Industrial and Ordinary In-
surance Agents Union #22947, A. F. L., Lynchburg, Va., herein called
Local 22947, and Industrial and Ordinary Insurance Agents Union
#21354, A. F. L., herein called Local 21354, and herein collectively
called the Unions, each alleging that a question affecting commerce
had arisen concerning the representation of employees of The Life In-
surance Company of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, herein called the
Company, the National Labor Relations Board consolidated the cases
and provided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice before Robert
N. Denham, Trial Examiner. Said hearing was held at Washington,
D. C., on April 4, 1944. The Company and the Unions appeared and
participated. All parties were afforded full opportunity to be heard,
to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence
bearing on the issues.
At the hearing the Company moved to dismiss the petition in Case
No. 5-8-1499 on jurisdictional grounds. The Trial Examiner re-
ferred the motion to the Board for appropriate action. The motion
57 N. L . R. B., No. 52.
• 279
280 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
is hereby denied; however , the petition is hereinafter dismissed on
other grounds . The Trial Examiner 's rulings made at the hearing
are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. All parties
were afforded opportunity to file briefs with the Board.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
The Life Insurance Company of Virginia is a Virginia corporation
having its principal office in Richmond, Virginia . It is engaged in
the writing of ordinary and weekly premium insurance . It is duly
licensed to conduct such business in 16 States and the District of
Columbia. The business of the Company is managed and directed
by its directors and officers located at its home office in Richmond.
The terms and conditions of the various policies of insurance offered
by the Company are determined, and all investments of the Company's
funds are made by such officials at the home office. All applications
for insurance , policies of insurance , claims , applications for loans,
checks covering disbursements , and other matters pertaining to insur-
ance in force are either acted upon or executed by the Company at its
home office.
In the conduct of its business the Company has accumulated assets
which on December 31 , 1943, amounted to $140,828 ,279.99, and consisted
of cash bonds , stocks , mortgage loans , real estate , and other assets. As
of that date cash belonging to the Company was deposited in 121 banks
and trust companies located in 18 States and the District of Columbia.
During 1943 the Company purchased securities from companies located
in 10 States , the District of Columbia , and Canada . All securities pur-
chased by the Company are delivered to it at its home office and are
kept in Richmond , Virginia . The Company holds some common
stock; stock holdings of the Company , however, consist mainly of
preferred stocks of railroads , public utilities , industrial and miscel-
laneous corporations . Loans are made on notes secured by mortgages
on residences , apartment buildings , business property and farms.
The Company now has outstanding loans secured by real estate located
in 19 States and the District of Columbia . Some of these loans are
insured by the Federal Housing Authority . The Company has loan
correspondents in 18 States and the District of Columbia , through
whom loans are purchased or mortgage investments are made.
In 1943 the Company purchased furniture , fixtures, and mechanical
equipment having a value of $3,013.22 , 29 percent of such purchases
being made outside the State of Virginia . During the same year the
THE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF VIRGINIA 281
Company spent $43,750.44 for postage, telephone, telegram and ex-
press service. A total of $21,881.96 was spent for traveling expenses
of the Company's Agency Supervisors during that year.
At the end of 1943, the Company had in force and effect policies
amounting to $689,753,899. In that year policies in the Company's
Lynchburg, Virginia, district office numbered 15,451 for the face
amount of $6,363,078. In its Washington, D. C., district office the
Company had 27,985 policies in effect, for the face amount of $14,-
907,965.
We find, contrary to the contention of the Company, that it is
engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor
Relations Act.'
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
Industrial and Ordinary Insurance Agents Union #22947, Lynch-
burg, Va., and Industrial and Ordinary Insurance Agents Union
#21354, are labor organizations affiliated with the American Federa-
tion of Labor admitting to membership employees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION IN CASE NO. 5-R-1535
THE ALLEGED QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION IN CASE NO.
5-R-1499
On March 3, 1944, the organizer for the Unions addressed a letter
to the Company advising it that Local 21354 represented a majority
of the industrial agents employed in the Company's Washington, D. C.,
office, and requesting a conference for the purpose of negotiating a
collective bargaining contract on their behalf. Several days later
the Company replied by suggesting that the Local proceed in accord-
ance with the applicable provisions of the Act.
A statement of a Board agent, introduced into evidence at the hear-
ing, indicates that Local 21354 represents a substantial number of
employees in the unit hereinafter found appropriate.2
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the
representation of the employees of the Company employed at its Wash-
ington, D. C., office, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section
2 (6) and (7) of the Act. Since, however, we hereinafter find that the
unit petitioned for in Case No. 5-R-1499 is inappropriate, we find that
no question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the representa-
1 Matter of The Life Insurance Company of Virginia, 24 N. L. It. B. 411, 29 N. L. R. B.
246, 31 N. L. R. B. 674, and 38 N. L. It. B. 20.
2 The Field Examiner reported that there are 23 persons employed in the Washington,
D. C., office of the Company, who, Local 21354 contends, are within the appropriate unit,
and for whom 22 authorization cards were submitted . The cards were dated between
February 25 and March 2, 1944,
282 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
tion of employees in the unit alleged to be appropriate by Local 22947,
within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the
Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Company functions through district offices which, in the main,
are established and conducted along identical lines. They are headed
by a district manager who is responsible for the conduct of the office
and upon whose recommendation as to the hiring and discharging of
his subordinate employees, the Company places implicit confidence.
Next in" order of supervisory rank are the assistant managers. These
men supervise the activities of the industrial agents who solicit and
sell" insurance. Although to a lesser degree than the district managers,
the assistant managers also have authority effectively to recommend
the discharge or change in status of the industrial agents. Each office
has cashiers and clerical employees attached to it. These groups,
however, are not within the jurisdiction of the Unions nor are they
sought to be included within appropriate units in the present cases.
The same applies to some writers of ordinary insurance over whom the
unions make no claim to jurisdiction.
Local 22947 and Local 21354 seek separate units of the industrial
agents employed in the Lynchburg and Washington, D. C. areas, re-
spectively, excluding, however, the managers, assistant managers,
cashiers, clerical employees and special agents who write ordinary
insurance. The Company expresses no opposition to the composition
of the units.
The Company has been the object of union organization many times
within the past few years. The parent organization to which the unions
are affiliated has frequently, and usually successfully, petitioned the
Board for certification as collective bargaining representative of the
Company's insurance agents in many of its district offices in the State
of Virginia and elsewhere.3 Both Local 22947 and Local 21354 have
previously participated in Board elections held in the same units they
now seek.4 As we recently stated in Matter of Metropolitan Life In-
surance Company; wherein careful reconsideration was accorded the
type of unit mostapproprigte generally throughout the insurance busi-
ness, organization among insurance agents is steadily progressing, and
tending toward State-wide units which we believe are, in most in-
stances, the most practicable for collective bargaining purposes. Con-
sequently, as stated in that case, it is the Board's policy to avoid setting
up units for insurance agents smaller than State-wide in scope in the
3 See footnote 1, supra.
4 See Matter of Life Insurance Company of Virginia, 24 N. L. R. B. 411, also 38 N. L. R. B.
20.
6 56 N. L. It. B. 1635 and 1642; see also Matter of Washington National Insurance
Co., 57 N. L. R. B. 224.
THE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF VIRGINIA 283
absence of unusual circumstances. Since the establishment of a State-
wide bargaining unit for the Company's agents throughout the State
of Virginia does not appear improbable in the near future, and since
no other circumstances are presented which would warrant a de-
parture from the policy thus adopted by the Board, we are of the
opinion that the limited unit sought by Local 22947, covering the
Lynchburg office, is inappropriate. We shall, therefore, dismiss
Local 22947's petition without prejudice.
The situation with respect to the unit of employees in the Wash-
ington, D. C., office, sought by Local 21354, however, is readily dis-
tinguishable from that discussed above. As indicated in Matter of
Metropolitan Insurance Co., supra, we are of the opinion that the
organization of insurance agents throughout the District of Columbia
is comparable to organization on a State-wide basis. Accordingly, we
find that the unit sought by Local 21354 is appropriate.
We find that all industrial insurance agents employed by the Com-
pany in its Washington, D. C., office but excluding the cashiers, clerks,
special agents, manager, assistant managers, and all other supervisory
employees with authority to hire, promote, 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 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 em-
ployees 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
Direction.
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,
and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor Relations
Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3, it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with The Life Insurance
Company of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, 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 supervi-
sion of the Regional Director for the Fifth Region, acting in this mat-
ter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to
284 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Article III, Sections 10 and 11, of said Rules and Regulations, 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
the said pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation or tem-
porarily laid off, and including employees in the armed forces of the
United States who present themselves in person at the polls, but ex-
eluding 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 desire to be represented by
Industrial and Ordinary Insurance Agents Union #21354, A. F. L.,
for the purposes of collective bargaining. .
ORDER
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact, and the entire
record in this proceeding, the National Labor Relations Board hereby
orders that the petition in Case No. 5-R-1499 for the investigation
and certification of representatives of employees of The Life Insurance
Company of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, filed by Industrial and
Ordinary Insurance Agents Union #22947, A. F. L., Lynchburg, Va.,
be, and it hereby is, dismissed without prejudice.