Chicago Curled Hair Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 26, 1944

56 N.L.R.B. 1674 (N.L.R.B. 1944)

L
t
In the Matter Of CHICAGO CURLED HAIR Co., HORwICH VITKIN Co., AND
GENERAL FELT PRODUCTS Co. and TEXTILE WORKERS UNION OF AMER-
ICA, C. I. O.
Case No. 13-R-2389. Decided June 26, 1941
Jacobson, Nierman cC Silbert, by Mr. David Silbert, of Chicago, Ill.,
for the Company.
Messrs. Leon M. Despres, William J. Tullar, and Earl F. McGrew,
of Chicago, Ill.,'for the C. I. O.
Mr. Joseph M. Jacobs, of Chicago, Ill., for the A. F. of L., and Mr. -
Alfred'Rota, of Chicago, Ill., for Local No. 702.
Mrs. Augusta Spaulding, of counsel to,the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon a petition duly filed by Textile Workers Union of America,
affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, herein called
'the C. I. 0., alleging that a' question affecting commerce had arisen
concerning the representation of employees of Chicago Curled Hair
,Co., Horwich Vitkin Co., and General Felt, Products Co., 'Chicago, ,
Illinois, herein collectively called the Companies, the National Labor
Relations-Board provided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice
before Russell Packard, Trial Examiner. Said hearing vas held at
Chicago,'Illinois, on May 9 and 110944. The Companies,,the C. I. 0.,
and .Hair, Felt, and Jute Workers' Union Local No. 702, 'chartered
by Upholsterers International Union•of North America, affiliated with
the American Federation of Labor, appeared and participated? Dur-
ing the course ' of the hearing,, 'and subsequent to' the hearing, the
Companies and the A. F. of L. moved that the Board dismiss this pro-
ceeding. The Trial Examiner did not rule on the-motions. Foi''rea-
sons which appear in 'Section III, below,' the 'motions are 'denied.
All parties were afforded full opportunity to' 'be' 'heard, to examine
and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing oh
1Hair,' Felt and Jute Workers ' Union, Local No. 702, herein called Local No 702, and
its parent body, herein called the A. F of L , each entered an appearance in this proceeding.
56 N. L R. B., No. 299.
1674
CHICAGO CURLED HAIR CO. 1675
the issues. The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are
free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. All parties were
afforded an 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 COMPANIES
Chicago Curled Hair Co.; Horwich Vitkin Co., and General Felt
Products Co. are three separate Illinois corporations under common
ownership and with common officers. All operations of the three'
Companies are directed from the executive office of Chicago Curled
Hair Co. Although the Companies maintain their separate, legal en-
tities for tax and other purposes, they conduct their manufacturing
operations under one employment policy and as one business.
The three Companies are engaged in the manufacture of curled' hair,
the processing of animal hair of all types, and the manufacture of hair
and felt products. -Chicago' Curled Hai' Co. has a current volume of
business in excess of $7+50,000, of which 75 percent is sold and shipped
in interstate commerce. Horwich Vitkin Co. has' a current volume of
business in excess of $250,000, of which 65 percent is sold and shipped
in interstate commerce. General Felt Products Co. has a current vol-
ume of business of approximately $1,000,000, of which 80 percent is sold
and shipped in interstate commerce.
We find that the Companies are engaged in commerce, and that they
constitute a single employer, within the meaning of the National Labor
Relations At.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
Textile Workers Union of America is a labor organization affiliated
with the Congress,pf Industrial Organizations, admitting to member-
ship employees of the Company.
Upholsterers, International Union 'of North America is a labor' or-
ganization affiliated with the American Federation of Labor. Hair,
Felt and Jute Workers' Union, Local- No. 702, is a local of Upholsterers
International Union of North America and admits to membership em-
ployees of the Company. - - ' ,
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
-On April 15, 1940, the C. 10. filed a petition for investigation and
certification of the Companies' employees. On May 6, 1940, the C. I.
0., the A. F. of L., and the Companies entered into'a consent 'election
agreement. ' Pursuant to the agreement, an election was held; and the
1676 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
,A. F. of L. won the election. On June 22, 1940, the Companies and the
A. F. of L. entered;.into an exclusive, bargaining contract with a
closed-shop provision. The contract provided that it should be,
effective ^as of June 1, 1940; that it should continue in full force
and effect until May 30, 1943; and, further, that unless on or before'
April 1, 1943, either party gave notice in writing to the other of an
intention to change any or all terms of the agreement, all such terms
should continue in full force and effect for an additional period of 3'
years.
On May 20, 1943, the A. F. of L. and the Companies entered into a
formal "extension" of their 1940 agreement wherein they affirmed that
the contract had been renewed by operation of the automatic renewal
clause for an additional 3-year term, until May 30,1946. On June 1,
1943, the C. I. O. filed a petition for investigation and certification of
the Companies' employees in Case No. 13-R-1853. A representative of
the Board's Regional Office informed the C. I. O. that the contract be-
tween the Companies and the A. F. of L. constituted a bar to an election:
at that time. On July .17, 1943, the C: I. O. withdrew its petition in,
Case No. 13-R-1853. On March 27, 1944, the C. I. O. filed the petition
in the instant proceeding.
. The Companies and the- A. F. of L. contend thattheir 3-year exten-
sion agreement is operative until May 30, 1946, and that consequently
it constitutes a bar to this proceeding. The C. I. O. opposes this con-
tention. In support of their position, the contracting parties rely on
the Board's decision in Matter of - Owens-Illinois Pacific Coast Com-
pany,2 wherein the Board held that a 2-year contract was of reasonable
duration and refused to direct an election at the beginning of the
second year of the contract term, although there was a considerable
shift of union membership' among the employees concerned. 'The
Board based its, refusal to direct an election in the cited case on the
custom of the employer to make 2=year contracts with affiliates of the
contracting union and of the competing union and on the custom of
the contracting union to make 2-year contracts with other firms in the
same industry. The Companies herein are presently performing their
second 3-year contract with the A. F. of L. The Companies are the
only employers manufacturing curled hair as a product in the Chicago
are.t. The Companies also make pads of curled hair and felt. The
record does not disclose the comparative quantity or value of such
products made by them. Other pad and'stuffing manufacturers in the
Chicago area, who use other filling material, contract for theirem-
ployees on terms of 1 year. Affiliates of the A. F. of L. bargain for
employees in the upholstery and frame industries in the Chicago area
on 3- and 5-year terms. , The curled hair industry is admittedly limited
"36 N. L. R B. 990.
CHICAGO CURLED HAIR CO. 1677
in scope. Crown Products Company at Philadelphia, allied with the
Companies in ,this proceeding by common ownership and control,
manufactures products similar to those of the Companies and bargains
with the C. I. O. for its employees on a 3-year basis. Only'two other
concerns making similar products in other locations are named in the
record. These firms presently bargain with the representatives of their
respective employees on a yearly basis, although one of them in the
past made a contract for 3 years' duration.
In many cases the Board has enunciated the rule,• now well recog-
nized ip the law of collective bargaining, that a contract for a term'of
several years or of indefinite duration is not a bar to representation
proceedings filed at the end of the first contract year.' In the Owens=
Illinois- case, cited above, we• were persuaded that the existence of a
custom in the glass industry, apparently national in scope, justified an
exception to that rule in the case of a 2-year contract. In the instant
case, however, the evidence set forth above is, in our opinion, iilsuffi-
cient to establish that there exists any such, industrial custom 4 as
would warrant us in withholding a determination of representatives
for the full term of a 3-year contract. Since the renewal contract in
question has no`v,been in effect for more than a year, we find that it is
not a bar to an election at this time.
A statement prepared by a Board agent and other evidence intro-
duced at the hearing indicate that the C. I. O. represents a substantial
number of employees in the bargaining unit herein found appropriate.5,
We find that a question has arisen concerning the representation of
the Companies', employees, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and
Section 2 (6) and'(7) of the Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
We find, in accordance with the substantial agreement among the
parties, that all production and maintenance employees of the Com-
panies, includilig shipping and receiving employees, but excluding
office and clerical employees, hair spinners, -timekeepers, boiler room
employees,'and all supervisory employees with authority to hire, pro-
T See Matter of The Trailer Company of America, 51 N L R B 177 , Matter of Rosedale
Knitting Company, 23 N L R. B. 527; and cases cited theieiu
A Aside from the fact that the 5-year term does not appear to be a universal custom
among firms producing curled hair, we note that the record is inconclusive as to whether
the Companies should properly be classed as members of the pad and stuffing industry, the
cur led hair industry, of the upholstery industry
5 The C I O. presented to a Field Examiner 111 cards, of which 110 were dated in 1944
and 1 was undated. During the course of the heaiing, the C. I. 0 submitted to the Trial
Examiner for checking 76 additional cards, of which 1 was dated in March 19i], 4 were-
undated, and the remaining were dated in 1944. None of these cards was checked against a
pay roll of the Companies - '
In support of its claim to represent the Companies' employees, the A F of L did not
submit any cards. It relies upon its contract to disclose its interest among them.
587784-45-vol. 56-----107
1678 • DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
mote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status
of ^ employees or effectively ' recommend such action, 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 the em-
ployees in the appropriate unit who were employed during the pay-
roll period immediately preceding the date of the Direction of Elec-
tion 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 Relations
Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3, it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for ' the purposes of collective bargaining with Chicago Curled
Hair Co., Horwich Vitkin Co., and General Felt Products Co., Chi-
cago, 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 Direc-,
for for the Thirteenth 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 the employees of the
Companies 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
the said pay-roll period because they were ill or oil vacation or tem-
porarily laid off, and including. employees in the armed forces of the
United' States who present themselves in person at the polls, but ex-
cluding those employees who have "since quit or been discharged for
cause and have not been rehired or reinstated prior to the date of the
election, to-determine whether they desire to be represented by Tex-
tile Workers Union of America, affiliated with the Congress'of Indus-
trial Organizations, or by Hair, Felt, and Jute Workers' Union, Local
No. 702, affiliated with the American Federation , of Labor, for the
purposes of collective bargaining, or by neither.'
s Employees within the appropriate unit have been covered under the contracts be
the Companies and the A. F of L Boiler room employees and hair spinners bargain with
their employer through affiliates of the A. F of L. in separate bargaining groups. '