Vulcan Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 1, 1943

51 N.L.R.B. 4 (N.L.R.B. 1943)

In the Matter Of VULCAN CORPORATION (WOOD PRODUCTS DIVISION) and
SHOEWORKERS OF DISTRICT 50, UNITED MINE WORKERS OF AMERICA
Case No. R-5397.-Decided July 1, 1943
Mr. Clark M. Clifford, of St. Louis, Mo., and Mr. R. A. Westerfield,
of Effingham, Ill., for the Company.
Mr. Joseph Ecoppi and Mr. Ralph McCaslin, of Mattoon, Ill., for
District 50.
Mr. William R. Cameron, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon petition duly filed by Shoeworkers of District 50, United
Mine Workers of America," herein called District 50, alleging that
a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representa-
tion of employees of Vulcan Corporation (Wood Products Division),
Effingham, Illinois, herein called the Company, the National Labor
Relations Board provided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice
before Eugene M. Purver, Trial Examiner. Said hearing was held
at Effingham, Illinois, on May 20, 1943. The Company and District'
50 appeared, participated, and were afforded full opportunity to be
heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evi-
dence bearing on the issues. 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
Vulcan Corporation (Wood Products Division) is an Ohio corpo-
ration engaged in the manufacture of wood products at its plant in
I Upon motion made at the hearing, the name of the petitioner , as it appears in this
proceeding, was corrected, and it *,Nil1 accordingly appear herein as Shoeworkers of District
50, United Mine Workers of America.
51 N L. R. B., No. 2.
4
VULCAN CORPORATION c5
Effingham, Illinois. , During the year 1942 the Company used raw
materials amounting in value to more than $100,000, consisting of
lumber, glue, lacquer, and hardware, approximately 88 percent of
which was obtained from points outside the State of Illinois. During
the year 1942 the Company sold finished products amounting in value
to more than $100,000, consisting of dimension stock, including fur-
niture parts, turnings, handles, bench tops, gunstocks, and shell sup-
ports, of which approximately 86 percent was shipped to points out-
side the State of Illinois. The Company concedes that it is engaged
in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
Shoeworkers of District 50, United Mine Workers of America, is a
labor organization affiliated with the United Mine Workers of
America, admitting to membership employees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On December 8, 1942, a consent election, under Board auspices, was
held among the Company's employees, as the result of which the
United Shoe Workers of America, C. I. 0., herein referred to as the
C. I. 0., was certified as the exclusive bargaining representative.
District 50 was not a party to the consent election agreement, nor
did it at that time claim any interest therein. On February 9, 1943,
District 50 by letter notified the Company that the employees and
members of the local union had withdrawn their affiliation from the
C. I. O. and had requested District 50 for affiliation and a charter.
Claiming to be the present representative of the employees, District
50 requested a bargaining conference. The Company replied by letter
of February 17, 1943, that the C. I. O. was the duly selected bargaining
representative of the employees and that the Company and the C. I. O.
were in process of negotiating an agreement.
At the hearing the Company moved to dismiss the petition on the
ground that the C. I. O. had previously been certified as exclusive
bargaining representative of the Company's employees.2 It is the
Board's accustomed policy not to order an election within a period of
a year after a labor organization has been certified as bargaining
representative of the employees involved.3 This policy was adopted
for the purpose of contributing to the stability of labor relations, and
has been consistently followed in cases wherein the duly certified
The C I. O , although duly notified , did not appear at the hearing , and requested that
its name should not appear on the ballot in event of an election among the Company's
employees
3 See Matter of Monarch Aluminum Manufacturing Company, 41 N L. R. B. 1, and
cases theiem cited.
G DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
bargaining agent has continued in existence and has been capable
of functioning as such . In the case of the employees here involved,
however, the record discloses that on February 4, 1943, at a regular
meeting of the local union , the members voted to change affiliation
from the C. I. O. to District 50, and that therel.-Ster, as the result of
action taken at the union meeting, the C. I. O. charter was returned
and no more dues were paid to that organization. On or about
March 5, 1943, the local union received a charter from District 50,
United Mine Workers of America, and became affiliated with that
organization. According to uncontroverted testimony, all members
of the local union joined in the transfer of affiliation to District 50.
Although negotiations between the Company and the C. I. O. con-
tinued until March 26, 1943, the record discloses that such negotiations
consisted of conferences between the' Company and regional officers
of the C. I. 0., in which no member or direct representative of the
local union participated, and that most of such conferences were held
after the repudiation of the C. I. O. by the local union. No agreement
resulted from these conferences. The record does not indicate any
communication by C. I. O. representatives with the members of the
local union subsequent to the time at which the local union changed
its affiliation. In view of all the evidence adduced at the hearing,
we do not believe that the Company's employees should be denied
opportunity to designate an exclusive bargaining representative at
this time.4 We find that a question concerning representation has
arisen and, accordingly, the Company's motion is denied.
A, statement of the Regional Director, introduced in evidence at
the hearing, indicates that District 50 represents a substantial number
of employees in the unit hereinafter found to be appropriate.5
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning
the representation of the employees of the Company, within the mean-
ing of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
Iv. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
We find, in substantial accordance with the agreement and stipula-
tion of the parties, that all production and maintenance employees of
the Company in the Wood Products Division, Effingham, Illinois,
excluding clerical employees and all supervisory employees with
authority to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or oil erwise effect
` The Boai d has pi eviously not withheld an election where it appeared that the labor
organization theietofoie found to be the duly designated repiesentative had ceased to
exist or its continued existence nnas in doubt See Matter of Helena Rubinstein, Inc,
47 N L It R 435 • Matter of Federal Chemical Conipanvt, 44 N L. It B 707
5 The Regional Directoi reported that Dnstiiet 50 submitted 67 membership and author-
ization cards, of which 20 appeal to beat the genuine original signatures of persons whose
names are on the Company's pay roll of April 6, 1943, containing the names of 32 persons,
within the appropriate unit
VULCAN CORPORATION 7
changes in the status of employees , or effectively recommend such
action , constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bar-
gaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
V. THE DETERMINATION Or REPRESENTATIVES
At the hearing question arose concerning eligibility to vote in the
election of employees who have been laid off by the Company since
October 19, 1,942. District 50 contends that all such employees were
laid off only temporarily and are therefore eligible to participate in an
election . The Company contends that these employees , excluding
some who have since been rehired, were "permanently" laid off and
are not eligible to vote. The record discloses that prior to October of
1942, the Company was engaged in fulfilling certain contracts for gun-
stocks, and other products , by reason of which the Company gave em-
ployment to approximately three times the number of employees
presently employed. These contracts were completed at some time
during- October or November 1942, and, due to inability to obtain
equivalent contracts , or orders , the Company , for lack of work, laid off,
prior to December 8, 1942, a considerable number of its employees.
In the consent election which was held on December 8, 1942, it was
agreed by the Company and the C. I. O. to include as eligible all those
who had been laid off subsequent to October 19, 1942. An additional
number of employees were laid off after the above election and before
the end of December 1942. The record indicates , however, that since
the beginning of the year 1943 there has been a small increase in the
Company's employment. The Company's manager of the Wood Prod-
ucts Division testified that the number of employees employed by the
Company is entirely dependent upon the amount of orders the Com-
pany is able to obtain , and, while it is continually bidding for new busi-
ness, the Company does not at the present time contemplate any sub-
stantial increase in employment within the next several months. In
view of these facts it does not appear that those employees who were
laid off by the Company during the latter part of the year 1.942, and
who have not since been reemployed , have any reasonably substan-
tial prospect of reemployment by the Company , and we therefore find
that they are not employees temporarily laid off , and are not eligible
to vote at this time in an election. We find, however, that employees
laid off àt any time during the year 1943 , during which time the Com-
pany's business appears to have been approximately stable, except such
as have quit or been discharged for cause , or who have been offered
and refused to accept reemployment , are employees temporarily laid
off, and we shall direct that they be permitted to vote in the election.
We shall direct that the question concerning representation which
has arisen be resolved by an elect ion by secret ballot among the em-
8 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
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 Rela-
tions Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor
.Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Sei;ies 2, as amended, it is
hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Vulcan Corpora-
tion (Wood Products Division), Effingham, Illinois, 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 Fourteenth Region,
acting in this matter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board,
and subject to Article III, Section 10, 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 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 person at the polls,
but excluding any who have since quit or been discharged for cause,
to determine whether or not they desire to be represented by Shoe-
workers of District 50, United Mine Workers of America, for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining.
0