Weber Showcase & Fixture Co., Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 17, 1946

67 N.L.R.B. 456 (N.L.R.B. 1946)

In the Matter of WEBER SHOWCASE & FIxTmIE Co., INc. and INTER-
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS, FOR ITSELF AND ON BEHALF OF
LODGE 311
Case No. 21-R-2575.-Decided April 17, 1946
Messrs. V. S. Pallette and C. S. Meyers, both of Los Angeles, Calif.,
for the Company.
Messrs. E. R. White, Russell G. Benedict, Dale O. Reed, and Robert
D. Peery, all of Los Angeles, Calif., for the Machinists.
Messrs. Arthurr Garrett, C. F. Mall, C. H. Burge, Earl E. Thomas,
C. F. Naeearato, W. T. Blaney, Lenard Graham, C. C. Collins, E. D.
Boyd, and F. V. McKenney, all of Los Angeles, Calif., for the Building
Trades.'
Mr. David V. Easton, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon a petition duly filed by International Association of Machin-
ists, for itself and on behalf of Lodge 311, herein called the Machin-
ists, alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concern-
ing the representation of employees of Weber Showcase & Fixture Co.,
Inc., Los Angeles, California, herein called the Company, the Na-
tional Labor Relations Board provided for an appropriate hearing
upon due notice before William T. Whitsett, Trial Examiner. The
hearing was held at Los Angeles, California, on various dates between
August 2 and 17, 1945, inclusive. The Company; the Machinists; and
Los Angeles Building and Construction Trades Council, herein called
the Council, Los Angeles County District Council of Carpenters and
I The following organizations affiliated either directly or indirectly with the Building
Trades were represented by counsel at the hearing . Los Angeles County District Council
of Carpenters ; Millmen and Cabinet Makers Local Union No. 721, United Brotherhood of
Carpenters and Joiners of America, Sheet Metal Workers International Association, Local
Unions Nos 108 and 371 ; Brotherhood of Painters , Decorators & Paperhangers of America,
Local Union 792; International Union of Teamsters , Chauffeurs , Warehousemen and
Helpers, Local Union 389; United Association of Plumbers , Steamfitters and Refrigeration
Fitters of the United States and Canada. Local Union No. 508.
67 N L R. B., No 60
456
WEBER SHOWCASE & FIXTURE CO., INC. 457
Millmen and Cabinet Makers Local Union No. 721 of United Brother-
hood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, herein collectively called
the Carpenters; United Association of Plumbers, Steamfitters and
Refrigeration Fitters of the United States and Canada, Local Union
No. 508, herein called the Plumbers ; Brotherhood of Painters, Deco-
rators & Paperhangers of America, Local Union 792, herein called the
Painters; Sheet Metal Workers International Association, Local
Unions Nos. 108 and 371, herein called Metal Workers 108 and 371, re-
spectively; and International Union of Teamsters. Chauffeurs, Ware-
housemen and Helpers, Local Union 389, herein called the Teamsters,
all referred to collectively herein as the Building Trades, 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. The Building Trades moved at the
hearing for a dismissal of the petition herein. The Trial Examiner
referred this motion to the Board for determination. For reasons
stated in Section III, infra, the motion is hereby denied.
On February 7, 1946, the Board issued an Order Reopening Record
and Remanding Proceeding to Regional Director for Further Hear-
ing. Pursuant thereto, a further hearing was held upon due notice
at Los Angeles, California, on February 20 and 22, 1946, before Wil-
liam T. Whitsett, Trial Examiner. The Company, the Machinists
and the Building Trades appeared, participated, and were afforded
full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses,
and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues.
The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the original and at the re-
opened hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby af-
firmed. All parties have been afforded opportunity to file briefs with
the Board.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following:
FINDINGS of FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Weber Showcase & Fixture Co., Inc., a Delaware corporation, is
engaged in the manufacture, sale and distribution of store and office
fixtures. and equipment; in addition, it has been and still is, to some
extent, engaged in the manufacture, sale and distribution of mis-
cellaneous items under contract with the United States Army, Navy,
and Maritime Commission. For these purposes it operates a plant at
Los Angeles, California, with which we are concerned herein. Dur-
ing the fiscal year eiding December 31, 1944, the Company purchased
raw materials consisting principally of lumber, plywood, steel, paint,
and fibre grass valued at approximately $10,300,000. During the
458 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
same period, the Company manufactured finished products valued at
approximately $15,000,000, substantially all of which was sold and
shipped by it or by others to purchasers outside the State of
California.
The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
International Association of Machinists and its Lodge 311 are labor
organizations admitting to membership employees of the Company.
Los Angeles Building and Construction Trades Council; Los An-
geles County District Council of Carpenters ; Millmen and Cabinet
Makers Local Union 721 of United Brotherhood of Carpenters and
Joiners of America ; United Association of Plumbers, Steam Fitters
and Refrigeration Fitters of the United States and Canada, Local
Union No. 508; Brotherhood of Painters, Decorators & Paperhangers
of America, Local Union 792; Sheet Metal Workers International
Association, Local Unions Nos. 108 and 371; and International Union
of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers, Local Union
389, are labor organizations affiliated with the American Federation
of Labor, admitting to membership employees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On April 26, 1945, the Machinists requested recognition from the
Company as the representative of certain of its employees. The Com-
pany refused to grant this request in the absence of certification by
the Board. The Company and the Building Trades raise contracts
to which they are parties as bars to this proceeding.
On July 25, 1938, pursuant to a consent election agreement, the
Carpenters was designated as the representative of all production and
installation employees of the Company, including working foremen 2
and was thereafter recognized by the Company as the representative
of these employees. However, no collective bargaining agreement
was executed by these parties until 1940, when, in addition to the Car-
penters, the Company executed collective bargaining agreements with
Metal Workers 108, the Plumbers and the Painters, covering em-
ployees claimed by each of these organizations.
On August 6, 1941, the Company executed a closed-shop master
agreement with the Council, covering journeymen, registered appren-
tices, lumber handlers, and mill laborers. This agreement was for a
term ending June 30, 1942, and provided for automatic renewal for
yearly terms thereafter, "unless either party shall within sixty (60)
2 Case No 21-R-588
WEBER SHOWCASE & FIXTURE CO., INC. 459
days prior to any expiration date give to the other written notice of
their intention to modify, amend or terminate the agreement." At
the same time the Company executed separate subsidiary closed-shop
agreements with the Carpenters, the Painters, Metal Workers 108
and 371, and the Plumbers, and, in addition, it reached an under-
standing with the Teamsters which was not reduced to writing. The
original master agreement between the Company and the Council
was succeeded by another closed-shop agreement executed on January
26, 1944, retroactive to June 30, 1943, and to continue in operation
until June 30, 1944. This agreement contained the identical renewal
provision set forth in the 1941 agreement. It was renewed automati-
cally in 1944. Later in 1944, the Company executed supplementary
closed-shop agreements with Metal Workers 371 and the Painters
(August 18), Metal Workers 108 (September 18), the Carpenters
(September 22), and the Teamsters (November 30). No separate
agreement was executed by the Company and the Plumbers, these
parties being content to conduct their relations pursuant to the 1941
master agreement which they considered as having been automatically
renewed with respect to them.
An examination of these contracts discloses that the Company had
bound itself contractually to the Council, the Carpenters, the Paint-
ers, Metal Workers 108 and 371, and the Plumbers for a period
ending June 30, 1945, and with the Teamsters for a period ending
July 1, 1945. It further reveals that the contracts between the Com-
pany and the Carpenters, the Painters, Metal Workers 108, and the
Teamsters were automatically renewable for yearly periods after
their stated terms unless any of the parties thereto gave notice "not
less than" or "at least" 60 days prior to any expiration period of a
desire to modify, terminate or amend. The contract between the
Company and Metal Workers 371 had a similar provision, except that
it provided for "at least" 90 days' notice.
In 1945, prior to the 60-day period, the Council, the Painters and
Metal Workers 108 and 371 gave notice to the Company of a desire
to modify their agreements.3 On June 15, 1945, the Company exe-
cuted new closed-shop agreements with the Painters and with Metal
Workers 108 and 371 for the period June 30, 1945, to June 30, 1946,
and, on November 9, 1945, it executed a new closed-shop master
agreement with the Council, retroactive to June 30, 1945, covering
the same period.
In view of the foregoing, we find that no contractual bar exists to
a current determination of representatives. It is apparent that the
' we also infer that the Carpenters, Teamsters, and the Plumbers gave similar notice
inasmuch as, at the time of the original hearing in this proceeding, negotiations were being
conducted with respect to the terms of new agreements between the Company and these
organizations,
460 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Machinists' rival claim to representation on April 26, 1945, was timely
insofar as the, 1944 agreements between the Company and the Car-
penters, the Painters, Metal Workers 108, and the Teamsters are con-
cerned, having been given prior to the 1945 effective date of the
automatic renewal clauses in these documents. It is also evident that
the 1944 agreements between the Company and the Council, the
Plumbers and Metal Workers 371 had been opened up by these parties
and that no new agreements had been reached by them at the time
the Machinists gave notice in 1945 of its claim to representation. For
these reasons we have denied the motion of the Building Trades to
dismiss the petition.
A statement of the Trial Examiner, made upon the record at the
reopened hearing, indicates that the Machinists represents a substan-
tial number of employes in the unit hereinafter found to be appro-
priate.4
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning
the representation of employees of the Company, within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Machinists seeks a unit comprised of all employees of the Com-
pany engaged as tool and die makers, precision jig builders, machin-
ists, maintenance mechanics, apprentices and helpers, and welders that
work with these classifications, including specifically all welder jour-
neymen, maintenance repair classes A and B, bench machinists classes
A and B, jig and tool builders classes A, B and C, general machinists,
metal workers C, and foremen C engaged in the maintenance depart-
ment, machine shop and glass grinding machine manufacturing de-
partment, but excluding supervisory employees and all other employees
of the Company. The Company and the Building Trades assert, in
effect, that in view of the Company's bargaining history in which it
has been allegedly dealing with the Building Trades as a represent-
ative of its employees upon a plant-wide basis, the unit sought by the
Machinists is inappropriate.
In 1938, when the Company was engaged primarily in woodwork-
ing operations, the Carpenters, as above noted, was designated as the
representative of its "production and installation employees, includ-
4 The Trial Examiner reported that the Machinists submitted 19 designations bear-
ing the names of persons employed by the Company on February 22, 1946, and that as of
that date , there were 74 employees in the unit sought by the Machinists . In view of the
closed -shop provisions in the various agreements between the Company and the Building
Trades , we find that this showing of interest , amounting to approximately 25.6 percent, is
substantial.
At the original hearing a Field Examiner reported that the Machinists submitted 39
designations and that there were , as of May 15 , 1945, 95 eplployees in the unit sought by
the Machinists.
WEBER SHOWCASE & FIXTURE CO., INC. 461
ing working foremen," and was thereafter recognized by the Company
as such. This situation lasted until some time in 1940 when the Car-
penters ceded jurisdiction over certain employees to other labor organ-
izations, and the Company thereafter executed collective bargaining
agreements with the Carpenters, the Painters, the Plumbers and Metal
Workers 108, recognizing these organizations as the representatives
of its employees engaged in occupations claimed by each. In 1941 a
master agreement was made between the Company on the one hand,
and the Carpenters, the Painters, Metal Workers 108 and 371, the
Teamsters and the Plumbers, acting together as the Council on the
other, and supplementary agreements were also executed between the
Company and the Carpenters, the Painters, Metal Workers 108 and
371, and the Plumbers .5 The 1941 series of agreements continued
until replaced by a new master agreement, dated January 26, 1944,
between the same parties," and supplementary agreements made in
1944 between the Company and the Carpenters, Metal Workers 108
and 371, the Painters and the Teamsters.? These agreements were
thereafter succeeded by a new master agreement dated November 9,
1945, between the Company and the Building Trades, and by supple-
mentary agreements in 1945 between the Company and the Painters
and Metal Workers 108 and X71. The record indicates that the Com-
pany is presently engaged in negotiations with the other labor organ-
izations affiliated with the Council for the purpose of reaching new
supplementary agreements with each of them.
In its collective bargaining relations pursuant to all these agree-
ments, it is clear from the record that, except as to matters of common
interest, the Company has in practice dealt with individual labor
organizations rather than with the Council. Grievances, for example,
have been handled by the individual unions rather than by the Coun-
cil, and new employees have been assigned to the particular organiza-
tion claiming jurisdiction over their work classifications and have
looked to that organization rather than to the Council as their rep-
resentative.
Due to the national emergency, the character of the Company's
operations changes, and metals took the place of wood as the principal
medium with which the Company's employees worked. Because of
this, new classifications of employees were engaged which were as-
signed to particular labor organizations affiliated with the Council.
In March of 1944, the Machinists began organizing certain of the
employees then represented by the Carpenters and Metal Workers
6 As noted previously , the Teamsters executed no written supplementary agreement
with the Company at this time.
" This agreement differed from the 1941 agreement in that it recited that the labor
organizations involved were being represented by the Council . The Council was merely
a signatory to the 1941 agreement.
7 As indicated before , the Plumbers did not execute a separate supplemental agree.
ment in 1944.
462 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
371,5 and was successful in obtaining some concessions from the latter
organization. Thus, grievances were initiated by the Machinists on
behalf of employees in the unit which it seeks, and were carried
through the grievance machinery established under the contracts be-
tween the Company and the Metal Workers by a steward of the latter
organization; dues of employees claimed by the Machinists which
were collected by the Company pursuant to "check-off" provisions
contained in the Metal Workers' contracts were turned over by the
Metal Workers to the Machinists; the closed-shop provisions of these
contracts were not enforced against employees who were members of
the Machinists prior to their employment with the Company, and, in
some instances, were not enforced against employees who joined the
Machinists after they had entered the Company's employ; and the
Machinists, as well as the labor organizations enjoying contractual
relations with the Company, was asked by the Company to help sup-
ply it with personnel.
In 1944, some time after its organizational drive had begun, the
Machinists requested the Building Trades to cede jurisdiction to it
over the employees it now seeks. This request was denied, in effect,
when, on July 25, the Council informed the Machinists that no action
had been taken upon its request. In December 1944, the instant peti-
tion was filed.
Thereafter, in late January and early February, the Council
awarded jurisdiction over all employees sought by the Machinists to
the Carpenters, with the exception of welders and certain jig and tool
builders who were assigned to Metal Workers 108.9 Thereafter, the
Council notified the Company of these actions, and called upon it to
enforce the closed-shop provisions contained in the contracts between
it and the Building Trades. Subsequently, the Company posted no-
tices in the plant to the effect that its employees were required to be-
come members of one of the organizations affiliated with the Council
as a condition of continued employment. However, there is no evi-
dence that any employees have been discharged for failure to comply
with this posting.
We are of the opinion that the classifications of employees sought
herein by the Machinists comprise a distinct, functionally coherent
group. We are further of the opinion that, in view of the events set
forth above, the Company's history of collective bargaining with the
Building Trades is not so clear as to warrant a finding that it was
premised solely upon a plant-wide unit. Finally, through the Machin-
ists, and by their own actions, the employees sought by the Machinists
have, to a considerable extent, resisted assimilation into any of the
8 At this time the majority of the employees sought herein by the Machinists were rep-
resented by Metal Workers 371
1 Previously, the majority of these employees had been represented by Metal Workers 371.
WEBER SHOWCASE & FIXTURE CO., INC. 463
groups over which the Council's affiliates have claimed jurisdiction io
We conclude, therefore, that under the circumstances present herein
the unit sought by the Machinists is appropriate.
We find that all tool and die makers, precision jig builders, machin-
ists, maintenance mechanics, apprentices and helpers, and all welders
who work with these classifications, employed at the Company's Los
Angeles, California, plant, including specifically all welder journey-
men, maintenance repair classes A and B, bench machinists classes A
and B, jig and tool builders classes A, B, and C, general machinists,
metal workers C, and foremen C 11 engaged in the maintenance de-
partment, machine shop, and glass grinding machine manufacturing
department, but excluding all supervisory employees with authority
to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in
the status of employees or effectively recommend such action, and all
other employees of the Company, 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 employees
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 Rela-
tions Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3, as amended, it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Weber Showcase
& Fixture Co., Inc., 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 Twenty-first Region, acting in this matter as agent
for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Article III,
Sections 10 and 11, of said Rules and Regulations, among employees
in the unit found appropriate in Section IV, above, who were em-
16A representative of the Carpenters admitted at the hearing that several of the
employees sought by the Machinists resisted representation by the labor organizations
having contracts with the Company
"It does not appear that these employees are supervisory within the meaning of our
customary definition.
464 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ploved 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 those em-
ployees who have since quit or been discharged for cause and have not
been rehired or reinstated prior to the date of the election, to deter-
mine whether they desire to be represented by International Associa-
tion of Machinists, for itself and on behalf of Lodge 311, or by Los
Angeles Building and Construction Trades Council, affiliated with
the American Federation of Labor, for the purposes of collective
bargaining, or by neither.
CHAIRMAN HERZOG took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Direction of Election.