Inco Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 9, 1951

93 N.L.R.B. 745 (N.L.R.B. 1951)

INCO COMPANY 745
INco COMPANY and FURNITURE WORKERS, UPHOLSTERERS AND WOOD-
WORKERS UNION, LOCAL 576, INDEPENDENT, PETITIONER. Case No.
21-RC-1563. March 9,1951
Decision and Direction of Election
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a hearing was held before Jack R. Berger, hearing
officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free
from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.'
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, the Board
has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member
panel [Chairman Herzog and Members Murdock and Styles].
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the
Act.
2. The parties stipulated and the Board finds that the Petitioner
and United Furniture Workers of America, CIO, Local 1010, which
was allowed to intervene on the basis of a showing of interest, are
labor organizations within the meaning of the Act. The Petitioner
asserts, however, that United Furniture Workers of America, CIO,
Local 576, which was allowed to intervene upon the basis of a contract
interest, was not functioning as a labor organization at the time of
the hearing and contends that Intervenor CIO Local 1010 has been
chartered to represent former members of CIO Local 576.
Intervenor CIO Local 576 is an amalgamated local which has repre-
sented employees in a number of plants in the Los Angeles area, in-
cluding the plant of the Employer. A defection in the ranks of CIO
Local 576 having occurred, its affairs have been administered since
September 7, 1950, by a trustee, appointed by the International Union,
United Furniture Workers of America, CIO. The record shows that
the trustee has carried on contract negotiations with the Employer,
has met with small groups of members and discussed with them prob-
lems dealt with in such negotiations, and has handled shop problems
with the Employer.
Intervenor CIO Local 1010 was chartered about August 1, 1950, by
the International Union, United Furniture Workers of America, CIO.
' At the hearing the Employer moved to dismiss the petition on the ground that the
Petitioner had not fulfilled the filing requirements of Section 9 (f), (g), and ( h) of the
Act because its business agent had not filed an affidavit under Section 9 (h). The motion
is hereby denied Compliance with the filing requirements of the Act is a matter for
administrative determination , and the Board is satisfied that the Petitioner has met the
requirements Moreover , the Petitioner' s business agent has filed an affidavit under
Section 9 ( h). The Employer 's motion to dismiss on the ground of contract bar is also
denied for reasons stated in paragraph numbered 3, below.
93 NLRB No. 111.
`746 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
By letter of August 14, 1950, to the Employer, attorneys for Inter-
venor CIO Local 1010 made a claim of representation for that local,
stated that it had been chartered upon request of dissatisfied mem-
bers of CIO Local 576, and requested the Employer to grant no recog-
nition and send no funds or dues to CIO Local 576.
Upon this record the Board is not satisfied that Intervenor CIO
Local 576, which has represented the employees involved for a number
of years, has ceased to exist for the purpose of admitting employees to
membership and of dealing with the Employer on matters relating
to wages and other working conditions. Accordingly, we find that
Intervenor CIO Local 576 is a labor organization within the meaning
.of the Act.
3. The Employer and both intervening labor organizations urge
as a bar to this proceeding a contract dated September 2, 1949, be-
tween the Employer and Intervenor CIO Local 576. The contract
provides that it is renewable from year to year unless notice of change
•or termination is given 60 days before the expiration date of any
yearly term. The contract states that in the event of notice of changes,
all other provisions of the contract are to remain in full force and
effect and newly negotiated provisions are to become part of the
contract. On or about June 29, 1950, both parties to the contract
gave timely written notice of a desire to negotiate amendments: The
labor organization specified two and the Employer numerous
changes.2 Negotiations followed, and the Petitioner filed its petition
herein on September 21, 1950. At the time of the hearing no agree-
ment had been reached. As the notices given indicated a desire to
make substantial amendments and revisions in the contract, the
Board construes them as intended to prevent the contract from auto-
matically becoming effective for another year.8 The contract pro-
vision that terms of the contract which the parties did not wish to
change -should remain in effect during negotiations, rendered the
contract, at best, one of indefinite duration which, in the circum-
stances, cannot preclude a determination of representatives. We find
that the contract is no bar to this proceeding.
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 the purposes of collective bargaining within the mean-
ing of Section 9 (b) of the Act: All production and maintenance em-
s The labor organization specified an insurance provision and a successor clause;
the Employer : Omission of preferential hiring provisions , change in military reemployment
rights, changes with respect to holidays and overtime pay, omission of certain grievance
provisions , omission of a restriction on hiring learners , and other changes.
3 See Mount Shasta Pine Mfg. Co., 92 NLRB 1138. -
CALIFORNIA-PACIFIC UTILITIES COMPANY 747
ployees of the Employer at its Los Angeles, California, plant, ex-
cluding professional, administrative, and office employees, truck
drivers, guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this
volume.]
CALIFORNIA-PACIFIC UTILITIES COMPANY and LOCAL 125, INTERNA-
TIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, AFL, PETITIONER.
Case No. 36-RC-560. March 9,1951
° Decision and Direction of Election
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a hearing was held before Robert J. Weiner, hearing
officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from
prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, the Board
has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member
panel [Members Houston, Reynolds, and Styles].
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the Act.
2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain em-
ployees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9 "
(c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The appropriate unit :
The Petitioner seeks a unit of all employees in the Employer's
Eastern Oregon Division, excluding clerical and professional em-
ployees, building service employees, and supervisors. The Petitioner
would include, and the Employer would exclude, the agents, tank
truck drivers, gas serviceman, line foremen, and the chief operator
at the Rock Creek hydro plant. In addition, the Employer contends
that a division-wide unit is inappropriate, and that, if an election is
directed, it should be limited to the employees in the John Day dis-
trict of its Eastern Oregon Division, or, in the alternative, to the
employees in the John Day and Burns districts of that division.
Geographical Scope of Unit
The Employer operates gas, electrical, and water utility systems in
the States of California, Nevada, Idaho, Wyoming, and Oregon. Its
93 NLRB No. 109.