The Safety Car Heating and Lighting Co., Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Sep 28, 1948

79 N.L.R.B. 1065 (N.L.R.B. 1948)

In the Matter of THE SAFETY CAR HEATING AND LIGHTING COMPANY,
INC., EMPLOYER and INTERNATIONAL UNION, UNITED AUTOMOBILE,
AIRCRAFT, AND AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA,
CIO, PETITIONER
Case No. 1-RC-357.Decided September 28,1948
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, an original hearing in this case was held
at New Haven, Connecticut, on May 21, 1948, before Torbert H. Mac-
Donald, hearing officer. At this hearing, the hearing officer denied
the intervention of United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of
America, Local 243, C. I. 0., herein called the Intervenor, because of
the fact that the Intervenor had not complied with Section 9 (f), (g),
and (h) of the Act.
On July 20, 1948, the Board, having reversed the hearing officer's
ruling, directed that the record be reopened and a further hearing be
held for the purpose of permitting the Intervenor to participate in the
proceeding. Thereafter a further hearing was held before Sidney A.
Coven, hearing officer. At the hearing, the Intervenor was afforded
an opportunity to introduce evidence as to all issues in the case. The
rulings made by the hearing officers at the hearings are free from
prejudicial error with the exception noted above, and are hereby
affirmed. All parties were afforded opportunity to file briefs in sup-
port of their respective positions.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor
Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with
this case to a three-man panel consisting of the undersigned Board
Members.*
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds the following
facts :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the
National Labor Relations Act.
*Chairman Herzog and Members Reynolds and Murdock
79 N. L. R. B., No. 140.
1065
1066 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
2. Both the Petitioner and the Intervenor are labor organizations
claiming to represent employees of the Employer.'
3. The question concerning representation :
On July 12, 1947, the Employer and the Intervenor entered into a
contract which, by its provisions : "shall remain in effect until June
14, 1948, and shall automatically renew itself from year to year there-
after, unless written notice is given by either party to the other sixty
(60) days prior to the expiration of any such annual period. If such
notice is given, negotiations for a new agreement shall begin at least
thirty (30) days before the expiration date and shall continue until
a new agreement is reached, and during such negotiations this agree-
ment shall remain in full force and effect ; if no agreement has been
reached within sixty (60) days from the giving of the said notice
either party may terminate this agreement on ten (10) days' notice
in writing to the other party." A notice of desire to modify the
agreement was sent by the Intervenor to the Employer by letter dated
March 24, 1948, preventing the automatic renewal of the contract.
The Employer made no reply to this notice ; no further negotiations
were conducted; and no further notice of termination was given by
either party to the other. We find that the contract does not con-
stitute a bar to this proceeding.2
Under all the circumstances of the case, we find that a question
affecting commerce exists concerning the representation of employees
of the Employer, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section
2 (6) and (7) of the Act. -
4. The following employees of the Employer constitute, a unit
appropriate for purposes of collective bargaining within the mean-
ing of Section 9 (b) of the Act:
All production and maintenance employees at the Employer's
Hamden, Connecticut, plant, including shipping and receiving em-
ployees, but excluding office and clerical employees, professional em-
ployees, nurses , matrons , engineering department employees, pattern
makers, guards, foundry workers, foremen, and all supervisors as
defined in the Act.
i At the hearing the Inteivenor contended that the Board should defer action on the
petition herein until efforts have been made to get its parent organization , the Congress
of Industrial Organizations , to settle the alleged jurisdictional dispute between it and the
Petitioner, both affiliated with the C . I. O. As the Intervenor does not suggest any likeli
hood that the dispute will be settled by the parent body or that the Intervenor and its af-
filiated International will comply with the registration and filing requirements of the Act,
thus making the processes of the Board available to it, we do not believe that at thi&
stage of the proceedings we may justifiably stay the operation of the election machinery
provided by the Act.
2 The Intervenor also contends that Section 103 of the Labor Management Relations Act,
1947, precludes the Board from proceeding with the petition . This contention .has no,
basis in fact or law, and we so find.
THE SAFETY CAR HEATING AND LIGHTING COMPANY, INC. 1067
- -DIRECTION OF ELECTION S
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for then
purposes of collective bargaining with the Employer, an election
by secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later
than 30 days from the date of this Direction, under the direction,
and supervision of the Regional Director for the Region in which
this case was heard, and subject to Sections 203.61 and 203.62 of Na-
tional Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 5, as,
amended, among the employees in the unit found appropriate in para-
graph numbered 4, above, who were employed during the pay-roll
period immediately preceding the date of this Direction of Election,
including employees who did not work during said pay-roll period
because they were ill or on vacation or temporarily laid off, but ex-
cluding 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, and also excluding employees on strike who are not en-
titled to reinstatement, to determine whether or not they desire to,
be represented, for purposes of collective bargaining, by Interna-
tional Union, United Automobile, Aircraft and Agricultural Imple-
ment Workers of America, CIO.
"As the Intervenor has not complied with the registration and filing requirements of
Section 9 ( f) and (h) of the Act, we shall not place its name on the ballot herein.