Visitainer Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 3, 1978

237 N.L.R.B. 257 (N.L.R.B. 1978)

VISIIAINER CORP.
Visitainer Corp. and Amalgamated Industrial Union.
Local 76B-92-76, United Furniture Workers of
America, AFL-CIO, Petitioner. Case 29 RC 4120
August 3. 1978
DECISION ON REVIEW AND ORDER
BY MILMBE RS J NKsINS. Mt RP'i' . .\NI) TRtI SL)t i
On May 2. 1978. the Regional Director for Region
29 issued his Decision and Direction of Election in
the above-entitled proceeding. finding that the con-
tract between the Employer and the Intervenior l \as
not a bar to the petition herein. Thereafter. in accor-
dance with Section 102.67 of the National I ahor Re-
lations Board Rules and Regulations. Series 8. as
amended, the Employer and the Intervenor filed re-
quests for review asserting that their contract has
been substantially enforced and therefore is a bar to
the election. The Board granted the requests for re-
view by telegraphic order dated June 1. 1978.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3tb) 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.
The Board has considered the entire record in this
case with respect to the issue under review and
makes the following findings:
The Employer has had contractual relations with
the Intervenor since 1971. The current contract he-
tween the Employer and the Intervenor has a 3-year
term extending from July 1, 1977. to June 30. 1980. It
contains provisions convering wages. hours of work.
vacations, holidays, seniority and layoff. griex ance
and arbitration procedures. probation period. and
union security, among others.
The Regional Director found that the contract had
I.ocal 294, Factor, Productlon Speialilst, & As.cmbl, %.kolkerh I ru,l11.
International Journesmen's and Production Allied Sernlcs ,iof \menir.l and
Canada.
been complied with regarding paid holidays and xa-
cations. and that there had been successful resolution
of employee grievances concerning inadequacies in
the physical environment at the plant without resort
to the arbitration procedure established bx the con-
tract.
However. the Regional I)irector also fLulid t hat
because of the failure of enforcemlenlt of ccrt Itaiii ther
provisions. itas set forth belowv. the contract "does not.
as administered. chart uith adequate priCcision the
terms and conditions of emplox ment" of the unit elci-
ployees and therefore is not a bar to the petition. We
disagree.
About half of the unit employees were paid 5 cents
less than the contractual minimum hourlN rate. al-
though some were paid more. Also. night-shift em-
pl)secs xe rec not paid a 15-percent contractual bo-
nus. Iinploees who worked on Thanksgivling DaNs
xwere not paid time-alnd-a-half wages as the contract
required but \were instead gixen the follo\wing dav off
x ith pa". Ihe Regional Director attached undue sig-
nificance to the fact that during the life of an antece-
dent contract five employees negotiated a pas raise
directli x ith the Employer. lie also regarded as sig-
nificant the fact that the Intervenor had been lax in
enforcinL the contract's union-securits provision.
O()n the basis of the record as a xwhole. we are un1-
able to find that the contract has been abandoned or
that the actuIal a it es. hours. and x orking conditions
at the plant are so at variance wxith the contract terms
as to remove the bar qualit? from the contract. On
the contrars. it is clear that there has been compli-
ance x ith mans of the contract terms and substantial
compliance with others, and that ans breaches may
he subjects of the grievance procedures which the
Intervenor has successfull, used before.
ORDER
It is herehb ordered that the petition filed herein
be. and it herebh is. dismissed.
237 NLRB No. 43
257