Standard Memorial Works

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 23, 1938

7 N.L.R.B. 1069 (N.L.R.B. 1938)

In the Matter of J. W. BEASLEY , INDIVIDUALLY AND TRADING AS
STANDARD MEMORIAL WORKS and GRANITE CUTTERS' INTERNATIONAL
ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA , CHARLOTTE BRANCH
Case No. C-368-Decided June 23, 1938
Monument Manufacturing Industry-Interference, Restraint, and Coercion-
Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining: granite cutters, carvers, surface
machine operators, carbo sawyers, lathe operators, sand blast operators, tool:
sharpeners, and rotary and gang sawyers ; no controversy as to-Representa-
tives: proof of choice : admission by employer that petitioning union represented
a majority of the employees in the appropriate unit-Collective Bargaining:
refusal to negotiate with representative of majority of employees ; special form=
of remedial order : recognition as exclusive representative ; negotiation-
Discrimination: complaint dismissed, as to.
Mr. Beeves Hilton, for the Board.
Mr. J. 6V. Beasley, of Charlotte, N. C., pro se.
Mr. Harry E. Selekman, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
ORDER
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon charges duly filed by Granite Cutters' International Associa-
tion of America, Charlotte Branch, herein called the Union, the-
National Labor Relations Board, herein called the Board, by Bennet
F. Schauflier, the Regional Director for the Fifth Region (Balti-
more, Maryland), issued its complaint, dated December 8, 1937,.
against J. W. Beasley, individually and trading as Standard
Memorial Works, Charlotte, North Carolina, herein called the
respondent, alleging that the respondent had engaged in unfair labor
practices affecting commerce, within the meaning of Section 8 (1),
(3), and (5) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the National Labor Rela-
tions Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act. The complaint and
notice of hearing were duly served upon the respondent and the
Union. The respondent filed no answer.
Pursuant to notice, a hearing was held in Charlotte, North Caro-
lina, on December 16, 1937, before Lawrence J. Kosters, the Trial!
1069
1070 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Examiner duly designated by the Board. The Board was repre-
sented by counsel ; the respondent appeared in his own behalf.
Both participated in the hearing. Full opportunity to be heard, to
examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to produce evidence bear-
ing on the issues was afforded all the parties.
At the close of the Board's case, counsel for the Board moved
to strike from the complaint the allegations that the respondent had
engaged in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8
(3) of the Act, and to conform the pleadings to the proof. Both
motions were granted by the Trial Examiner. There were no ob-
jections to the rulings of the Trial Examiner concerning the
admission of evidence made at the hearing. The Board has re-
viewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner and finds that no
prejudicial errors were committed.
On January 8, 1938, the Trial Examiner filed his Intermediate
Report, finding that the respondent had engaged in unfair labor
practices affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 8 (1)
and (5) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. The respondent filed
no exceptions to the Intermediate Report.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF TIIE RESPONDENT
The respondent is engaged in the production and distribution of
monumental stones in Charlotte, North Carolina. All of the granite
used in the manufacturing of the monuments is shipped from Wins-
boro, South Carolina. Some of the machinery at the respondent's
plant was made in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and practically all
of the replacement parts for the machinery come from the same city.
During the year 1937 the respondent produced several hundred
monuments with a total value of $39,000. Approximately 75 per
cent of the finished products are sold in North Carolina, 15 per cent
in Tennessee, 5 per cent in South Carolina, and 5 per cent in Virginia.
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
Granite Cutters' International Association of America, Charlotte
Branch, is a labor organization affiliated with the American Federa-
tion of Labor, admitting to its membership granite cutters, carvers,
surf ace machine operators, tool sharpeners, sand blast operators, lathe
operators, polishers, carbo sawyers, and rotary and gang sawyers.
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1071
III. THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
A. The refusal to bargain collectively
1. The appropriate unit
The complaint alleged that the granite cutters, carvers, surface
machine operators, carbo sawyers, lathe operators, sand blast opera-
tors, tool sharpeners, polishers, rotary and gang sawyers, constitute
a unit , appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining. The
respondent raised no objections to the unit proposed by the Union.
We find that the granite cutters, carvers, surface machine, opera-
tors, carbo sawyers, lathe operators, sand blast operators, tool sharp-
eners, polishers, and rotary and gang sawyers of the respondent,
excluding supervisors and clerical employees, constitute a unit appro-
priate for the purposes of collective bargaining and that said unit
will insure to employees of the respondent the full benefit of their
right to self-organization and collective bargaining and otherwise
effectuate the policies of the Act.
2. Representation by the Union of a majority in the appropriate unit
The Union organized the respondent's plant in August 1937, and
during that month all the employees, eligible for membership in the
-Union signed membership cards. At no time during the series of
conferences between the respondent and the Union did the respondent
question the majority of the Union. On November 2^, 1937, he wrote
the following letter to a field representative of the Board :
I acknowledge that the Granite Cutters' International Asso-
ciation of America represents a majority of the granite cutters,
carvers, surface machine operators, carbo sawyers, lathe opera-
tors, sand blast operators, tool sharpeners, polishers, rotary and
gang sawyers, in my employ, and I am, therefore, willing to
bargain collectively with that Union as the exclusive representa-
tive of all such employees in respect to rates of pay, wages, hours
of employment, or other conditions of employment.
Very truly yours,
STANDARD MEMORIAL WORKS.
(s) J. W. BEASLEY.
We find that on August 31, 1937, and at all times thereafter, the
Union was the duly designated representative of a majority of the
employees in an appropriate unit, and pursuant to Section 9 (a) of
the Act, was the exclusive representative of all the employees in such
1072 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
unit for the purposes of collective bargaining in respect to rates of
pay, wages, hours of employment , and' other conditions of
-employment.
3. Refusal to bargain collectively with the Union
The record is clear that although the respondent stated on several
•occasions his willingness to bargain collectively with the Union, at
each conference with representatives of the Union Beasley refused
to recognize the Union or to bargain with it. Vance Vaughn, chair-
man of the committee of the Union, testified that at the first con-
ference on August 31, 1937, he informed Beasley that the committee
represented the employees of the plant and requested that he bargain
•collectively with them. When asked whether he was familiar with
the Act, Beasley said he was not, but refused to examine a copy of
it which was offered to him. The next ,meeting with Beasley and the
committee occurred on September 1, 1937. Beasley was told by the
Union representatives that he was being given another opportunity
to recognize the Union as the bargaining agent before charges were
filed with the Board., Beasley said he did not care to discuss the
matter at all with them. On September 17 the International presi-
dent attended a conference with Beasley and attempted to induce him
to discuss an agreement with the committee. The respondent finally
-consented to accept a contract given to him by the International
president for inspection and study. However, he put it in his pocket
and refused to read it at that time. A further meeting took place
-on November 12 when Beasley told the committee that he had read
the agreement, that he had no counterproposals to make, and that he
still refused to discuss its terms or to sign it.
The respondent offered as an excuse for his failure to bargain
with the Union the fact that he was not engaged in continuous pro-
duction and that on September 17 and December 16 he was not op-
erating his plant. He stated at the hearing that he would be willing
to recognize the Union as soon as he began to produce. However,
it is apparent from the record that the respondent always has on
hand stock with which to begin immediate production upon the re-
-ceipt of orders and that he was manufacturing monuments subse-
quent to the holding of the first few conferences. Moreover, Vaughn
testified that Beasley's reluctance to recognize the Union was moti-
vated by the respondent's desire to have his competitors organized
'first. We conclude, therefore, that the fact that the respondent pro-
duces monuments only upon receipt of orders, which are intermit-
tent in nature, does not absolve him from the duty of recogniz-
ing and bargaining with the employees' duly designated bargaining
agency.
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1073
We find that on August 31, 1937, ' and thereafter , the respondent
refused to bargain collectively with the Union as the representative
of his employees in respect to rates of pay, wages , hours of employ-
ment, and other conditions of employment and thereby interfered
with, restrained , and coerced his employees in the exercise of the
rights guaranteed under Section 7 of the Act.
IV. EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES UPON C011D1ERCE
The activities of the respondent set forth in Section III above,
occurring in connection with his operations described in Section I
above, have a close, intimate , and substantial relation 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.
Upon the basis . of the foregoing findings of fact and upon the en-
tire record in the proceeding , the Board makes the following :
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. Granite Cutters' International Association of America, Char-
lotte'Branch , is a labor organization within the meaning of Section
2 (5) of the Act.
2. The granite cutters, carvers , surface machine operators, carbo
sawyers, lathe operators , sand blast operators , tool sharpeners , polish-
ers, and rotary and gang sawyers of the respondent , excluding super-
visory and clerical employees , constitute a unit appropriate for the
purposes of collective bargaining, within the meaning of Section 9
(b) of the Act.
3. Granite Cutters' International Association of America, Char-
lotte Branch, was on August 31, 1937 , and at all times thereafter has
been the exclusive representative of all employees in such unit for
the purposes of collective bargaining , within the meaning of Section
9 (a) of the Act.
4. By refusing and continuing to refuse to bargain collectively
with Granite Cutters' International Association of America, Char-
lotte Branch , as the exclusive representative of the employees in
the above-stated unit, the respondent has engaged in and is engaging
in unfair labor practices , within the meaning of Section' 8 (5) of
the Act.
5. The respondent , by interfering with, restraining , and coercing
its employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of
the Act, has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices,
within the meaning of Section 8 (1) of the Act.
6. The aforesaid labor practices are unfair labor practices affecting
commerce, within the meaning of Section 2 (6) and ( 7) of the Act.
1074 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ORDER
Upon the basis of the findings of fact and conclusions of law and
pursuant to Section 10 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, the
National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that the respondent,
J. W. Beasley, individually and doing business as Standard Memorial
Works, Charlotte, North Carolina, and his agents, successors, and as-
signs, shall:
1. Cease and desist :
(a) From refusing to bargain collectively with Granite Cutters'
International Association of America, Charlotte Branch, as the ex-
clusive representative of the granite cutters, carvers, surface ma-
chine operators, carbo sawyers, lathe operators, sand blast operators,
tool sharpeners, polishers, and rotary and gang sawyers of the re-
spondent, excluding supervisory and clerical employees;
(b) From in any other manner interfering with, restraining, or
coercing his employees in the exercise of the right to self-organiza-
tion, to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to bargain collec-
tively through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage
in concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or
other mutual aid or protection, as guaranteed 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 collectively with Granite Cutters' In-
ternational Association of America, Charlotte Branch, as the exclu-
sive representative of the granite cutters, carvers, surface machine
operators,,carbo sawyers, lathe operators, sand blast operators, tool
sharpeners, polishers, and rotary and gang sawyers of the respond-
ent, excluding supervisory and clerical employees, in respect to rates
of pay, wages, hours of employment, and other conditions of em-
ployment ;
(b) Post immediately notices to his employees in conspicuous,
places within the plant, and maintain said notices for a period of at
least thirty (30) consecutive days from the date of the posting, stat-
ing that respondent will cease and desist as aforesaid ;
(c) Notify the Regional Director for the Fifth Region in writing
within ten (10) days from the date of this order what steps the
respondent has taken to comply herewith.
And it is further ordered that the allegations of the complaint that
the respondent discharged and refused to reinstate Clyde Shelton
pursuant to an unfair labor practice within the meaning of Section
8 (3) of the National Labor Relations Act be, and they hereby are,
dismissed.