Uarco Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 18, 1976

224 N.L.R.B. 1236 (N.L.R.B. 1976)

1236 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Uarco Incorporated and International Printing and
Graphic Communications Union (AFL-CIO) Case
38-CA-2677
June 18, 1976
DECISION AND ORDER
By MEMBERS FANNING, JENKINS, AND PENELLO
Upon a charge filed on March 1, 1976, by Interna-
tional Printing and Graphic Communications Union
(AFL-CIO), herein called the Union, and duly
served on Uarco Incorporated, herein called the Re-
spondent, the General Counsel of the National La-
bor Relations Board, by the Officer-in-Charge for
Subregion 38, issued a complaint on March 11, 1976,
against Respondent, alleging that Respondent had
engaged in and was engaging in unfair labor practic-
es affecting commerce within the meaning of Section
8(a)(5) and (1) and Section 2(6) and (7) of the Na-
tional Labor Relations Act, as amended Copies of
the charge and complaint were duly served on the
parties to this proceeding
With respect to the unfair labor practices, the com-
plaint alleges in substance that on October 31, 1975,
following a Board election in Case 38-RC-1621, the
Union was duly certified as the exclusive collective-
bargaining representative of Respondent's employees
in the unit found appropriate,' and that, commenc-
ing on or about February 20, 1976, and at all times
thereafter, Respondent has refused, and continues to
date to refuse, to bargain collectively with the Union
as the exclusive bargaining representative, although
the Union has requested and is requesting it to do so
Thereafter, Respondent filed its answer to the com-
plaint admitting in part, and denying in part, the alle-
gations in the complaint The Respondent admits all
of the factual allegations of the complaint, except
those paragraphs which relate to the underlying rep-
resentation proceeding, Case 38-RC-1621 The Re-
spondent alleges that the certification issued to the
Union is invalid by reason of the Board's errors in
overruling its objections to the (lection conducted on
October 17, 1974, urges that th,, election be set aside,
and requests that the complaint be dismissed
On April 2, 1976, counsel for the General Counsel
filed directly with the Board a Motion for Summary
Official notice is taken of the record in the representation proceeding
Case 38-RC-1621 as the term record is defined in Sees 102 68 and
102 69(g) of the Board s Rules and Regulations Series 8 as amended See
LTV Electrosystems Inc 166 NLRB 938 (1967) enfd 388 F 2d 683 (C A 4
1968) Golden Age Beverage Co 167 NLRB 151 (1967) enfd 415 F 2d 26
(C A 5 1969) Intertype Co v Penello 269 F Supp 573 (D C Va 1967)
Follett Corp 164 NLRB 378 (1967) enfd 397 F 2d 91 (C A 7 1968) Sec
9(d) of the NLRA as amended
Judgment, with appendixes, alleging that the
Respondent's answer raises no factual issues war-
ranting a hearing in this proceeding and, therefore,
requesting the Board to grant the Motion for Sum-
mary Judgment
On April 9, 1976, Respondent filed a reply to the
Motion for Summary Judgment Subsequently, on
April 14, 1976, the Board issued an order transferring
the proceeding to the Board and a Notice To Show
Cause why the General Counsel's Motion for Sum-
mary Judgment should not be granted Respondent
thereafter filed a response to Notice To Show Cause
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the Na-
tional Labor Relations Board has delegated its au-
thority in this proceeding to a three-member panel
Upon the entire record in this proceeding, the
Board makes the following
Ruling on the Motion for Summary Judgment
As reflected above, the Respondent's answer ad-
mits all of the factual allegations of the complaint,
including its refusal to recognize and bargain with
the Union which had been certified as the collective-
bargaining representative of the employees described
in the complaint In its reply to the Motion for Sum-
mary Judgment, as well as in its response to the No-
tice To Show Cause, Respondent raises substantially
the same matters that it raised in the underlying rep-
resentation case, and the affirmative defenses in its
answer to the complaint 2 The Respondent's answer
attacks the validity of the election and the resulting
certification, and it denies that the Union is the col-
lective-bargaining representation of the employees in
the bargaining unit 3 By this assertion, and more spe-
cifically by its denials, in whole or in part, of the
allegations of the complaint, the affirmative defenses
alleged in its answer, and the arguments propounded
in its reply to the Motion for Summary Judgment
and in its response to the Notice To Show Cause, the
Respondent is attempting to relitigate the same issues
which it raised and litigated in the representation
proceeding, Case 38-RC-1621, in which, after a
hearing before a Hearing Officer, the Board adopted
the Hearing Officer's findings and recommendations
and issued a Decision and Certification of Represen-
tative of October 31, 1975, and reaffirmed by its Or-
2 In its response to Notice To Show Cause Respondent states that it
readopts and reaffirms all the matters and things heretofore set forth in its
Answer and in its Reply to Motion for Summary Judgment filed herein
' These issues were raised and litigated by the Respondent in the prior
representation case the record of which is before us and for the reasons
recited herein may not be relitigated in this unfair labor practice case
224 NLRB No 168
UARCO INCORPORATED
der denying Respondent's motion for reconsidera-
tion issued on December 11, 1975 4
It is well settled that in the absence of newly dis-
covered or previously unavailable evidence or special
circumstances a respondent in a proceeding alleging
a violation of Section 8(a)(5) is not entitled to relrti-
gate issues which were or could have been litigated in
a prior representation proceeding 5
All issues raised by the Respondent in this pro-
ceeding were or could have been litigated in the prior
representation proceeding, and the Respondent does
not offer to adduce at a hearing any newly discov-
ered or previously unavailable evidence, nor does it
allege that any special circumstances exist herein
which would require the Board to reexamine the de-
cision made in the representation proceeding We
therefore find that the Respondent has not raised
any issue which is properly litigable in this unfair
labor practice proceeding We shall, accordingly,
grant the Motion for Summary Judgment
On the basis of the entire record, the Board makes
the following
FINDINGS OF FACT
I THE BUSINESS OF THE RESPONDENT
Respondent is, and has been at all times material
herein, a Delaware corporation with an office and
place of business located at West Fleming Street,
Watseka, Illinois It is engaged in the business of
manufacturing business forms Respondent, during
the past 12 months, which period is representative of
all times material herein, sold and shipped from its
Watseka plant finished products valued in excess of
$50,000 to points outside the State of Illinois
We find, on the basis of the foregoing, that Re-
spondent is, and has been at all times material here-
in, 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 juris-
diction herein
II THE LABOR ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
International Printing and Graphic Communica-
tions Union (AFL-CIO) is a labor organization with-
in the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act
4 The Board noted that the Respondent in its motion for reconsideration
apparently wished the Board s Decision and Certification which adopted
the Hearing Officers report interpreted with respect to the Union s misrep
resentation of the Respondents profit The Board concluded that the mis
representation was material but made in a cartoon thus frivolously and the
Respondent though it knew of it and had an opportunity to rebut did not
do so In ruling on this motion the Board has as indicated reviewed the
record in that case On the basis of such review we find no ground for
disturbing our prior findings and conclusions
III THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
A The Representation Proceeding
1 The unit
1237
The following employees of the Respondent con-
stitute a unit appropriate for collective -bargaining
purposes within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the
Act
All unrepresented employees including plant
clericals employed by the Employer in its prepa-
ratory department, press department, finishing
department, carbon plant, and material control
plant at its Watseka, Illinois, facility, excluding
all press and maintenance employees presently
represented by labor organizations, guards, and
supervisors as defined in the Act
2 The certification
On October 17, 1974, a majority of the employees
of Respondent in said unit, in a secret ballot election
conducted under the supervision of the Regional Di-
rector for Region 13, designated the Union as their
representative for the purpose of collective bargain-
ing with the Respondent The Union was certified as
the collective-bargaining representative of 'he em-
ployees in said unit on October 31, 1975, and the
Union continues to be such exclusive representative
within the meaning of Section 9(a) of the Act
B The Request To Bargain and Respondent's Refusal
Commencing on or about February 10, 1976, and
at all times thereafter, the Union has requested the
Respondent to bargain collectively with it as the ex-
clusive collective-bargaining representative of all the
employees in the above-described unit Commencing
on or about February 20, 1976, and continuing at all
times thereafter to date, the Respondent has refused,
and continues to refuse, to recognize and bargain
with the Union as the exclusive representative for
collective bargaining of all employees in said unit
Accordingly, we find that the Respondent has,
since February 20, 1976, and at all times thereafter,
refused to bargain collectively with the Union as the
exclusive representative of the employees in the ap-
propriate unit, and that, by such refusal, Respondent
has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor prac-
tices within the meaning of Section 8(a)(5) and (1) of
the Act
5 See Pittsburgh Plate Glass Co v NLRB 313 U S 146 162 (1941)
Rules and Regulations of the Board Sees 102 67(f) and 102 69(c)
1238 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
IV THE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES UPON
COMMERCE
The activities of Respondent, set forth in section
III, above, occurring in connection with its opera-
tions described in section I, above, have a close, inti-
mate, and substantial relationship 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
V THE REMEDY
Having found that Respondent has engaged in and
is engaging in unfair labor practices within the mean-
ing 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 Union as the
exclusive representative of all employees in the ap-
propriate unit, and, if an understanding is reached,
embody such understanding in a signed agreement
In order to insure that the employees in the appro-
priate unit will be accorded the services of their se-
lected bargaining agent for the period provided by
law, we shall construe the initial period of certifica-
tion as beginning on the date Respondent commenc-
es to bargain in good faith with the Union as the
recognized bargaining representative in the appropri-
ate unit See Mar Jac Poultry Company, Inc, 136
NLRB 785 (1962), Commerce Company d/b/a Lamar
Hotel, 140 NLRB 226, 229 (1962), enfd 328 F 2d 600
(C A 5, 1964), cert denied 379 U S 817 (1964), Bur-
nett Construction Company, 149 NLRB 1419, 1421
(1964), enfd 350 F 2d 57 (CA 10, 1965)
The Board, upon the basis of the foregoing facts
and the entire record, makes the following
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1 Uarco Incorporated is an employer engaged in
commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7)
of the Act
2 International Printing and Graphic Communi-
cations Union (AFL-CIO) is a labor organization
within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act
3 All unrepresented employees including plant
clericals employed by the Employer in its preparato-
ry department, press department, finishing depart-
ment, carbon plant, and material control plant at its
Watseka, Illinois, facility, excluding all press and
maintenance employees presently represented by la-
bor organizations, guards, and supervisors as defined
in the Act, constitute a unit appropriate for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining within the meaning of
Section 9(b) of the Act
4 Since October 31, 1975, the above-named labor
organization has been and now is the certified and
exclusive representative of all employees in the afore-
said appropriate unit for the purpose of collective
bargaining within the meaning of Section 9(a) of the
Act
5 By refusing on or about February 20, 1976, and
at all times thereafter, to bargain collectively with the
above-named labor organization as the exclusive bar-
gaining representative of all the employees of Re-
spondent in the appropriate unit, Respondent has en-
gaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices
within the meaning of Section 8(a)(5) of the Act
6 By the aforesaid refusal to bargain, Respondent
has interfered with, restrained, and coerced, and is
interfering with, restraining, and coercing, employees
in the exercise of the rights guaranteed to them in
Section 7 of the Act, and thereby has engaged in and
is engaging in unfair labor practices within the mean-
ing of Section 8(a)(1) of the Act
7 The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair
labor practices affecting commerce within the mean-
ing 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 Re-
lations Board hereby orders that the Respondent,
Uarco Incorporated, Watseka, Illinois, 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 con-
ditions of employment with International Printing
and Graphic Communications Union (AFL-CIO) as
the exclusive bargaining representative of its employ-
ees in the following appropriate unit
All unrepresented employees including plant
clericals employed by the Employer in its prepa-
ratory department, press department, finishing
department, carbon plant, and material control
plant at its Watseka, Illinois, facility, excluding
all press and maintenance employees presently
represented by labor organizations, guards, and
supervisors as defined in the Act
(b) In any like or related manner interfering with,
restraining, or coercing employees in the exercise of
the rights guaranteed them in 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
UARCOINCORPORATED
respect to rates of pay, wages, hours, and other terms
and conditions of employment, and, if an under-
standing is reached, embody such understanding in a
signed agreement
(b) Post at its Watseka, Illinois, plant copies of the
attached notice marked "Appendix " 6 Copies of said
notice, on forms provided by the Officer-in-Charge
for Subregion 38, after being duly signed by
Respondent's representative, shall be posted by Re-
spondent immediately upon receipt thereof, and be
maintained by it for 60 consecutive days thereafter,
in conspicuous places, including all places where no-
tices to employees are customarily posted Reason-
able steps shall be taken by Respondent to insure
that said notices are not altered, defaced, or covered
by any other material
(c) Notify the Officer-in-Charge for Subregion 38,
in writing, within 20 days from the date of this Order,
what steps have been taken to comply herewith
6 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
1239
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
concerning rates of pay, wages, hours, and other
terms and conditions of employment with Inter-
national Printing and Graphic Communications
Union (AFL-CIO) as the exclusive representa-
tive of the employees in the bargaining unit de-
scribed 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 represen-
tative of all employees in the bargaining unit de-
scribed below, with respect to rates of pay, wag-
es, 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 unrepresented employees including plant
clericals employed by the Employer in its pre-
paratory department, press department, fin-
ishing department, carbon plant, and material
control plant at its Watseka, Illinois, facility,
excluding all press and maintenance employ-
ees presently represented by labor organiza-
tions, guards, and supervisors as defined in
the Act
UARCO INCORPORATED