Eppinger & Russell Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 7, 1944

56 N.L.R.B. 1259 (N.L.R.B. 1944)

In the Matter of EPPINOER,& RUSSELL COMPANY and FLORIDA CITRUS
& ALLIED WORKERS UNION LOCAL. 4A, U. C. A. P. A. W. A., C. I. O.
Case -No. 10-C-1502.-Decided June 7, 1944
DECISION-
AND
ORDER
On March 3,11944, the Trial Examiner issued his Intermediate
Report in the above-entitled proceeding; finding that the respondent
had engaged in and was engaging in certain unfair labor practices
affecting commerce, and recommending that it cease and'desist there-
from and take certain affirmative action, as set forth, in the copy
of the Intermediate Report attached hereto. 'Thereafter, the re-
spondent duly filed exceptions to the Intermediate Report, and a,
motion to dismiss the complaint on the ground of alleged'mootness.
Pursuant to notice, oral argument was scheduled before the Board
in Washington, D. C., on April 27, 1944, but none of, the parties
appeared and no argument was held. '
The Board has considered the Intermediate Report, the- respond-,
east's exceptions and motion, and the entire record in the case, and
hereby adopts the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the
Trial Examiner, with the following additions :
The respondent does not contest the validity of the Board's certifi-
cation of the Union, or the fact that it refused to bargain with
Mathews, who,"it admitted, was a representative of the Union. How-
ever, the respondent excepts to the Trial Examiner's findings that
these facts. constitute a violation of Section 8 (1) and (5) of the Act.
The only evidence adduced by the respondent-in support of its posi-
tion was, as it admitted in its exceptions before the Board, the
existence of a State statute which required Mathews to obtain a
license before acting as the Union's representative, and the fact that
it refused to bargain collectively with Mathews on the ground that
she had no. such license. The respondent did not point out any
provision of the statute which prohibited it from dealing with an
unlicensed union representative. Moreover, even assuming the ex-
istence of a State statute in support of the respondent's position, it is
established beyond question that any such State law must yield before
56 N. L. R. B., No. 226 ,
'1259
1260 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
the paramount authority of, Congress expressed in a valid and ap-
plicable -Federal law.' There is no, question but'that the National'
Labor' Relations Act constitutionally applies to this respondent,,iid
,hence the sole inquiry must be whether Congress meant, that the duty
of employers to'bargain, as provided in Section 8 (5) of the,'Act^
Should- turn, on the requirements of such State legislation. No doubt
Congress could have so provided, even though this would have sub-
jected the enforcement of 'legislation national in scope to the varied
and perhaps conflicting provisions of,State enactments; but we find
nothing in the language of the Act or 'its legislative history which
warrants the belief that Congress in fact did so provide.2 We there-
fore conclude that the respondent's contention is without merit. , '
The respondent further contends that the Board should dismiss
the complaint as moot, on the, ground that, after its refusal to, bar-
gain, Mathews secured a State license and on, the further ground that
the respondent subsequently granted the 'Union's request to enter
into bargaining negotiations with another representative of . the
Union zvho had obtained -a 'State license. However, like the Trial
Examiner`; we find that the respondent engaged in an unfair labor
practice by. refusing to bargain' with Mathews, 'a representative of
the, Union.' 'In order',to prevent recurrences of a refusal to bargain
because 'of the alleged 'effect of State law, and pursuant to Section
10'(c), of the Act,3 we reject the respondent's contention as being
without merit, and shall issue an appropriate order 4
' See Hines v. Davidowitz, 312, U. S . 52, 66=8, where the Supreme Court of the United
States held that State law was "subordinate to supreme National law" and must yield
where "inconsistent" with the exercise of Congressional power; Cloverleaf Butter Co. v.
Patterson, 315 U. 'S. 148; Napxer'v. Atl. C. L. Railroad Co., 272 U S 605; Oregon-Wash-
ington Railroad it Navigation Co V. State of Washington, 270 U. S 87; C it W. C. Railway
Co.•v. Varnuille Furniture Co., 237 U S. 597 , Cf. Union Brokerage Company v. Norman G.
Jensen , et al 64 S. Ct . 967,- 12 L. W 4360 , ( May 8, 1944)
R See N L. R , B v. Hearst Publications Incorporated , etc., 322 U. S . 111, where
the Supreme Court refused to base it's determination of the meaning of the term "em-
ployees" on local State law for the reason that Congress "obviously did not intend" a
result which would be destructive of national uniformity in applying the Act. The Court
added that a contrary decision :
would introduce variations into , the statute 's [the Act's] operation as wide as the dif-
Iferences the forty-eight States and other local jurisdictions make ... Both the terms
;and the purposes of the statute, as well as the legislative history,'show that'Congress,
had in mind no such patchwork plan for securing freedom of employees' organization
and of collective bargaining ... It is not only proper, but necessary for us to assume,
"in the absence of a plain indication to the contrary, that Congress'.. is not making
the application of the federal Act dependent on State law." Jerome v. United States,
318 U. S. 101, 104. -
Cf Allen-Bradley Local No 111t, etc , v. Wisconsin ' Employment Relations Board, et al.
315 U S 740, 751
3 Section 10 (c) of the Act states in part that if "the Board shall be of the opinion that
any person named in the complaint has engaged in j.'. any . . . unfair labor practice, then
the Board shall state its findings of fact and shall issue and cause to be 'served on such
person an order requiring such person to cease and desist from such unfair labor practice,
and to take such affirmative action ... as will effectuate the policies of this Act."
4See Consolidated Edison,Company'v. N. L. R. B., 305 U. S 197, 230; N. L. R B. v.
Pennsylvania Greyhound Lines, Inc ., et t al, 303 -U. S. 261 , 271 ; N. L. R. B. v . Southern
i
EPPINGER & RUSSELL COMPANY- 1261
ORDER
Upon the entire record in the case, and pursuant to Section 10' (c)
of the National Labor Relations Act,'the National Labor Relations
Board hereby orders that the respondent, Eppinger & Russell Com-
pany, Jacksonville, Florida, and its officers, agents, successors, and
assigns, shall:
1. Cease and desist from :
(a) Refusing to bargain collectively with Florida Citrus & Allied
Workers Union, Local 4A, U. C. A. P.A. W. A.,.afliliated with the
Congress of Industrial Organizations, as the exclusive representative of
all its production and maintenance employees, at its Jacksonville,
Florida, plant, excluding foremen, clerical , workers, watchmen, and
all supervisory employees with authority to hire; promote, discharge,
discipline, or otherwise effect changes'in the status of employees, or
effectively. recommend such action, in respect to rates of pay, wages,
hou'rs' of employment, and other conditions of employment;,
"(b)' Engaging in any like or related acts or conduct interfering with,
restraining,- or coercing its employees in the exercise of the right to_
self-organization, to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to bargain
collectively, 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 Florida Citrus &'Allied
Workers Uhion, Local 4A, U. C. "A. P. A. W. A., affiliated with the
Congress of Industrial Organizations, as the exclusive representative
of all its production and maintenance employees at its Jacksonville,
Florida, plant, excluding foremen, clerical workers, watchmen, and
all supervisory employees with authority to hire, promote, discharge,
discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or
effectively recommend such action, in respect to rates of pay, wages
hours of employment, and other conditions of employment;
(b) ' Post immediately in conspicuous places throughout its Jack-
sonville, Florida, plant, and maintain, for a period of at least sixty
(60) consecutive days from the date -of posting, notices to its employees
stating : (1) that the respondent will not engage in the conduct from
which it is ordered to cease and desist in paragraphs 1 (a) and (b) of
this Order, and (2) that the respondent will take the affirmative action
set-forth in paragraph 2 (a) of this Order;
Wood Preservanq Companil , 135 F. (2d) 606 , 607-8 (C. C. A 5) ; N. L. R B V Ford"
Motor - Company, 119 F •(2d) 326, 330 (C. C. A. 5) ; N L. R. B. v."Pure 0i1'Company, 103
F (2d) 497, 497-8 (C C A 5). - -
587784-45-vol 56-81
1
1262 - DECISIONS OF NATIONAL 'LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
(c) Notify the Regional Director 'for the Tenth Region in writing,
within • ten (10) days from the date-of this Order, what -steps the
respondent has taken to comply herewith.
INTERMEDIATE ^REPO'RT
Mr. John H. Garver for the Board
Crawford and Ma,, of Jacksonville, Fla, for the respondent.
Miss Anne Mathews for the Union. -
• - STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon a charge duly filed on December 24, 1943, by Florida Citrus & Allied
Workers Union Local 4A, UCAPAWA, CIO, herein called the Union, the National
,Labor Relations Ward, herein called the Board, by the Regional Director for
the Tenth Region (Atlanta, Georgia), issued its complaint dated January 27, 1944,
against Eppinger & Russell Company,' Jacksonville; Florida, herein called the,
respondent, alleging that the respondent had engag8d in and was engaging "in
unfair labor practices affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 8 (1)
and 8 (5) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49,
Stat. 449, herein called the Act. Copies of the complaint, accompanied by notice
of hearing were duly served upon the respondent and the Union. -
Concerning the unfair labor practices, the complaint, alleged in substance :
(1) that' on November' 11, 1943, the Board in its Direction of Election in case
number 10-R-1028' found that all the production and maintenance employees.
at the Jacksonville, Florida plant of the respondent excluding foremen , clerical
workers, watchmen and all supervisory employees with authority to hire, promote,
discharge and discipline or otherwise affect changes in the status of its em-' -
ployees, or effectively recommend the changes, Constituted a unit appropriate
for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (c),of
the Act; (2) that on December 17, 1943, the Board certified the Union as the,
representative of respondent's employees in'said unit for the purposes of collec-
tive bargaining as the result, of an election won by the Union on December 7,
1943, and that the Union is still such representative; (3) that on or about
December 23, 1943, and at all times thereafter, the respondent did 'refuse and
continued to refuse to bargain collectively with the Union as the exclusive repre-
sentative of all employees of the unit described above; and (4) that by such
refusal the respondent interfered with, restrained, and coerced its employees in
the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act, and that such acts
constitute unfair labor practices affecting commerce within the meaning of
Section 8 (1) and (5) and 'Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
Thereafter, the respondent filed an answer dated February 3, 1944, admitting
those allegations of the complaint concerning the appropriateness of the unit-
found by the Board as alleged in the complaint, and admitting also the proceed-
ings of the Board leading to the certification of the Union, following its selection
by the employees within the unit: The respondent, however, denied the com-
mission of any alleged unfair'labor practices.
Under date of February 22, 1944, the respondent, the Union and counsel for
the Board entered into a signed stipulation of facts, hereinafter called the stipu-
lation, in which it was agreed that the stipulation might be accepted by, the.
' See In the Matter of Eppinger & Russell Company and Florida Citrus and Allied Workers
Union Local 4A, UCAI'A11'A, CIO,, Case Number 10-R-1028 decided November 11, 1943;
53 N. L R. B. 557.
EPPINGER & RUSSELL COMPANY 1263
Board in lieu of testimony taken at the hearing, all parties expressly waiving the
holding of a.hearing. It was-further specifically agreed that the "National Labor
Relations Board may decide the case on the basis of the record as defined herein."
In the stipulation all parties requested that a Trial Examiner issue an Inter
mediate Report to which all parties might have the right to file exceptions and
after which they might also have the right to file briefs and make oral arguments
before the Board in Washington. Various pleadings and exhibits were annexed
to and made a part of the stipulation.
The stipulation was filed with the Chief Trial Examiner of the Board in
Washington, D. C. on February 24, 1944. Thereafter, on February 28, 1944, he
designated himself to act as Trial Examiner herein. -
Upon the entire record in the case the undersigned makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. TILE BUSINESS OF THE RESPONDENT
The respondent is a New York corporation with its principal office in New
York City and is engaged in the business-of treating lumber and forest-products
with chemical preservations. The respondent has plants in Long Island City,
New York, Norfolk, Virginia, and Jacksonville, Florida. Respondent, at its plant
in Jacksonville, Florida, the only,one here involved, annually uses raw materials,
chemicals, and other supplies exceeding $1,100,000 in value, more than 50 percent
of which is obtained from points outside the State of Florida and shipped to
respondent's plant in Jacksonville; Florida. More than 50 percent of the finished
products at this plant is shipped to customers outside of the State of Florida'
II. THE LABOR ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
The Union , Florida Citrus & Allied Workers Union, Local 4A, UCAPAWA, CIO,
is a labor organization , admitting - to membership employees of the respondent at
its Jacksonville , Florida plant and organized for the purpose of dealing with
employers concerning grievances , labor disputes , wages, rates of , pay, hours of
employment and conditions of work.
III. THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
A. The refusal to bargain
1. The appropriate unit and representation by the Union of a majority therein
On November 11, 1943, the Board issued a decision and direction of election 8
finding that:. "All production and maintenance employees at the Jacksonville,
Florida, plant of the respondent, excluding foremen, chemical workers, watchmen,
and all supervisory employees with authority to hire, piomote, discharge, dis-
cipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees or' effectively
recommend such action, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of'collec-
tive bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act." The complaint'
herein alleges and the respondent admits the appropriateness 'of such unit. The
undersigned so finds. Following the direction of election, and pursuant thereto,'
an election was conducted by the Regional Director' for the Tenth Region on
December 7, 1943. It was won by the Union. On December 17, 1943 the Board
certified' the Union as the,exclusive representative of the employees in the ap-
2 These facts are taken from the Board 's decision ( see footnote #1) and from the stipu-
lation herein.
8In the Matter of Eppinger i. Russell Company and Florida Citrus i Allied Workers
Union, Local iA, UCAPAWA, CIO, 53 N L. R B. 557. '
1264 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD -
propriate unit' The respondent does not challenge the status of the Union ; to
the contrary it concedes that at all times since December 7, 1943; the Union has
,been the exclusive representative of the employees ' in the appropriate unit. On
the basis of the Board's certification of December 17, 1943, and the subsequent
admission of the respondent, the undersigned finds that at, all times since Decem-
ber 17, 1943, the Union has been, and is now, the exclusive representative of the
respondent's employees in the appropriate unit hereinabove found
2. The refusal to bargain
Shortly after December 7, 1943, the date of the election, Union Representative
Anne Mathews made an appointment with representatives of the respondent for
- the purposes-of collective'bargaining for December 17, 1943, at 11: 00 a. in. This
meeting was not held; Mathews was advised that the respondent would not
commence bargaining with the Union until the certification of the Union had been
received from the Board. The proposed conference was postponed until Decem-
ber 23, 1943. Prior to that time the Board, as previously found herein, had
'certified the Union on December 17.
On December 23, 1943, Anne Mathews, who had been theretofore designated
by the Union as its business agent and was receiving from the Union a financial
consideration for representing it as its business agent, engaged in soliciting rights
and privileges for employees,, came to the plant pursuant to appointment She
was directed to the office of John S. Calhoun, plant superintendent of the re=
spondent in Jacksonville, where Calhoun and Philip S. May, counsel for the
respondent, awaited her. Upon her arrival there, Mathews requested that the
respondent send for certain employees to assist her in representing the Union.
May stated, "Miss Mathews, before we, call these men in, we would like to see
your license as a business agent of the Union under the Florida law." Mathews
replied that she had no license. May, after further 'discussion, stated that the
respondent declined to deal' with her as the business agent of the Union until
she was able to produce a license, or,until some governmental authority required
the respondent to negotiate with her notwithstanding the fact that she had no
license.'
The record further discloses that the Florida Law referred to by May is
Chapter 21968, in Acts of 1943, Laws of Florida. The pertinent provisions of
this law are set forth below e -
The cei time ation of representatives issued by the Board finds, inter aria, that of 152
valid votes cast, 142 were in favor of the Union and 10 were against
5 The facts hereinabove found are substantially as set forth in the stipulation
4 AN ACT
TO REGULATE THE ACTIVITIES AND AFFAIRS OF LABOR UNIONS, THEIR OF.
FICERS, AGENTS, MEMBERS, ORGANIZERS, AND OTHER REPRESENTATIVES ;
MAKING PROVISION FOR SUITS AND PROCESS BY AND AGAINST THE SAME;
REQUIRING CERTAIN FEES ; DECLARING CERTAIN PUBLIC POLICY OF THE STATE,
,GIVING CERTAIN DEFINITIONS AND RECOGNIZING CERTAIN RIGHTS AS BELONG-
ING TO FMPLOYEES ; EXEMPTING CERTAIN LABOR ORGANIZATIONS- FROM ITS
PROVISIONS; PROVIDING CERTAIN PENALTIES AND PUNISHMENT FOR VIOLA-
TIONS, WITII A SAVING CLAUSE IN CASE OF UNCONSTITUTIONALITY; AND RE-
PEALING ALL LAWS AND PARTS OF LAWS IN CONFLICT HEREWITH.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
SECTION A (Policy) Because of the activities of labor unions affecting the economic
conditions of the country 'and the State, entering as they do into practically every business
and industi ial enterprise, it is the sense of the Legislatuie that such organizations affect
the public interest and are charged with a public use. The working man, unionist or non-
unionist,, mu"t be protected' The right to work is the right to live
It is' here now declared to be the policy of the State, in the exercise of its sovereign
constitutmi al police power, to regulate the activities and affairs of labor unions, their
EPPINGER & RUSSELL COMPANY 1265
The undisputed facts herein pose the question of whether respondent's refusal
to meet with the designated representative of the .Union under the circumstances
officers, agents , organizers , and other representatives , in the manner, and to the extent'
hereafter set forth.
SEC 2 ( Definitions ) The following terms , when used in this Act, shall have the meaning
ascribed to them in this section .
(1) The term "labor organization" shall mean any organization of employees , ' local
or subdivision thereof having within its membeiship residents of the State of Florida,
whether incorporated or not , organized for the purpose of dealing with employers con-
cerning hours of employment , rate of pay , working conditions or grievances of any kind
ielating to employment
(2) The term "business agent" as used herein shall mean any person , without regard
to title , who shall for a pecuniary or financial consideration , act or attempt to act for
any "labor organization " in (a) the issuance of membership , or authorization cards, work
permits , or any other evidence of rights granted or claimed in, or by , a labor oiganization,
or (b) in soliciting or receiving from any 'employer any right or privilege for employees. -
SEC. 3 (Employee Rights ) Employees shall have the right to self-organization , to form,,
join, or assist labor organizations, to bargain collectively through representatives of their
own choosing , and,to engage in concerted activities, for the purpose of collective bargaining
or other mutual aid or protection
SEC. 4. (Licensing of Business Agents ) No person shall be granted a license or a permit
to act as a business agent in the State of Florida , ( 1) who has not been a citizen of and
has not resided in the United States of America for a period of more than ten years next
prior to making application for such license or permit ( 2) Who has been convicted of a
felony ( 3) Who is not a person of good moral character , and every person desiring to
act as a business agent in the State of Florida shall before doing so obtain a license or
permit by filing an application under oath therefor with the Secietary of State, accom-
panied by a fee of One Dollar. There shall accompany the application a statement , signed
by,the president and secretary of the labor organization for which lie proposes to act as
agent, showing his authority so to do. The Secretary of State shall hold such application
on file for a period of thirty days during which time any person may file objections to the
issuing of such license or permit . After the expiration of the thirty day period , regardless
of whether or not any objections have been filed, the Secretary of State shall submit the
application , together with all information that he may have including any objections that
may have been filed to such application to ii' Board to be composed of the Governor as
Chairman, the Secretary of State, and the Superintendent of Education . If a majority of
the Board shall find that the applicant is qualified , pursuant to the terms of this Act and
are of the opinion that the public interest requires that a license or pei mit should be issued
to such applicant , then the Board shall by resolution authorize the Secretary of State to
issue such license or permit, same shall be for the calendar year and shall expire on De-
cember 31 of the year for which issued unless sooner surrendered , suspended , or revoked.
SEC 5 (Initiation Fees of Union) . . .
SEC 6. (Reports to Secretary of State) . . .
Sec. 7. (Accounting of Union Finances) . . .
SEC. 8 ( Reinstatement of Veterans into Union Membership)
SEC. 9.- ( Prohibited Acts ) It shall be unlawful for any person
-
(1) To inteifeie with or prevent the right of franchise of any member of a-labor oigan-
ization. The night to franchise shall include the iight of an employee to make complaint,
file charges , give information or testimony concerning the violations of this Act, or the
petitioning to his union regarding any grievance he may have concerning his membership
or employment , or the making known facts concerning such grievance or violations of law
to any public officials , and his right of flee petition , lawful assemblage and frec ' speech.
( 2) To prohibit or prevent any election of the officers of any labor organization.
(3) To participate in any strike , walk-out, or cessation of work or continuation thereof
without the same being authorized by a majority vote of the employees to be governed,
thereby; Provided , that this shall not prohibit any person from terminating his employment
of his own volition.
(4) To conduct any election referred to in subsection 3 of this section without a secret
ballot
(5) To charge , receive, or retain any dues, assessments or other charges in excess of,
or not authorized by, the constitution or bylaws of any labor organization.
(6) -To act as a business agent without having obtained and possessing a valid and sub-
sisting license or permit.
1266 DECISIONS OF' NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
N
above set forth, is a violation of Section 8 (1) and (5) of the Act'. In the opinion
of the undersigned the answer is clearly in the affirmative.
It is not a valid defense` to urge, as does the respondent, that,the business
agent of the Union certified by the Board had failed to obtain a license under the
Florida law. The Act clothes the Board with the exclusive power to determine -
representation for collective bargaining among employees in industries that fall
within the Board's, jurisdiction. The Board's decision and direction of elec-
tion of November 11, 1943 and subsequent certification of December 17, 1943, make
it clear that the Board has, exercised its power in' the present case.' If re-
spondent's contention were accepted, the result would be, in effect, a nullifica-
tion of the Board's certification by operation of the Florida statute. , Such an
interpretation would be contrary to the plain language, of the Act and the many,
'decisions of the Board and Courts construing it.
(7) To solicit membership for or to act as a representative of an existing labor organ-
ization without authority of such labor organization to,do so
( 8) To make any false statement in an application for a license.
(9) For- any person to seize 'or occupy property unlawfully during the existence of -a
labor dispute.
( 10) To cause any cessation of work or interference with the progress of work by reason
of any jurisdictional dispute, grievance or disagreement between or within labor organ-
izations
(11) To coerce or intimidate any employee in the enjoyment of his legal rights , including
those guaranteed in Section 3 of this Act, or to intimidate his family , picket his domicile
or injure the person or property of such employee or his family. -
(12) To picket beyond the area of the industry within which a labor dispute arises.
(13) To engage in picketing by force and violence, or to picket in such a manner as to
prevent ingress and egress to and from any premises ; or to picket other than in a reasonable
and peaceable manner.
SEC. 10 . (Enforcement ) An action may be commenced by the Attorney General of the
State on complaint of any interested party, for the suspension or revocation of the license
of any business agent for the violation of any of the provisions of this Act ' Said action
shall be commenced only in the circuit court of the county of residence of such business
agent or of the county in which such violations occuried. Such action shall be heard by
the court without a jury and the rules of equity procedure shall apply in such proceedings.
The court may suspend such license for such time as in its judgment is deemed best, or may
revoke such license.
SEC. 11. ( Suability of Unions ) Any labor organization may maintain any action or suit
in its commonly used name and shall be subject to any suit or action in its commonly used
name in the same manner and to the same extent as any corporation authorized to do
business in this ' State. All process, pleadings and other papers in such action may be
served on the president or other officer , business agent, manager or person in charge of the
-business of such labor organization . Judgment in such action may be enforced against the
common property only, of such labor organization.
SEC. 12. ' (-Dispcsition of Fees ) All fees collected by the Secretary of State hereunder
shall be paid to the State Treasurer and credited to the general fund
SEC. 13 (Preservation 'of Rights) Except as specifically provided in this Act, nothing
therein shall be construed so' as to interfere with or impede or diminish in any way the
'right of individuals to work; nor shall anything in this Act be so construed as to invade
unlawfully the right to freedom of speech.
SEC 14. (Penalties) Any person ' or labor organization who shall violate any of the
provisions of this Act, shall , upon conviction thereof,,be adjudged guilty of a misdemeanor
and be punished by a fine not exceeding Five Hundred Dollars ($500 00) or by imprison-
ment in the county jail for not to exceed six months, or by both such fine and imprisonment.
SEC. 15. (Exemptions ) All railway labor organizations and members thereof shall be ex- _
empt from all of the provisions of this Act as, long as they are regulated by, any Act of
the Congress of the United States.
'SEc 16 (Separability of Provisions) . . . ,
SEC. 17. (Effective Date) This Act shall take effect immediately upon its becoming a law:
Approved by the Governor June 10, 1943.
In its Decision and Direction of Election- (53 N. L. R. B. 557) the Board makes the
following finding : "The Company - (respondent ) admits that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act."
EPPINGER & RUSSELL COMPANY 1267
The undersigned finds that the respondent on December 23, 1943, and at all
times thereafter has refused to bargain collectively with the Union as the exclu-
sive representative, of its employees in the appropriate unit and has thereby
interfered "with, restrained and coerced its employees in the exercise of the
rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act.
IV. THE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES UPON COMMERCE
The activities of -the respondent set forth in Section III above, occurring in
connection-'with the operations of the respondent 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.
V. THE REMEDY
Since it has been found that the respondent has engaged in unfair labor prac-
tices, it will be recommended that it cease and desist therefrom and take certain
affirmative action designed to effectuate the policies of the Act. Since it has
been found that the respondent has refused to bargain collectively with the Union
as the exclusive representative of its employees in an appropriate unit, it will
be recommended that the respondent, upon request, bargain collectively with the
Union.
-Upon -,the basis of the above findings of fact and upon the entire record in the
case, the undersigned makes the following:
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. Florida Citrus & Allied Workers Union, Local 4A, UCAPAWA, affiliated with
the Congress of Industrial Organizations, is a labor organization, within the
meaning of Section 2 (5) of the Act.
2. All production and maintenance employees of the Company, employed at its
Jacksonville, Florida, plant, excluding foremen, clerical workers, watchmen, and
all supervisory employees with authority to hire, promote, 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 bargain-
ing within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
3. Florida-Citrus & 'Allied Workers Union, Local 4A, UCAPAWA, affiliated
with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, was on December 17, 1943, and at
all times thereafter has been, the exclusive representative of all. the employees in
the aforesaid unit for'the purposes of collective bargaining, within the meaning of
Section 9 (a) of the Act.
4. By refusing on December 23, 1943, and at all times thereafter,, to bargain
collectively with Florida Citrus & Allied Workers Union, Local 4A, 'UCAPAWA,
affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, as the exclusive repre-
sentative of all its employees in the aforesaid appropriate,unit, the respondent
has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices, within the meaning of
Section 8 (5),of the Act. -
5. By interfering with, restraining, and coercing its employees in the exercise
of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act, the 'respondent has engaged in
and is engaging iii unfair labor practices, within the meaning of Section 8 (1) of
the Act. I -
6. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair 'labor practices affecting
commerce , within the meaning of Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
I
1268 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
RECO11 MENDATIONS
Upon the basis of ihe , ahove findings of fact and conclusions of law , and upon
the entire record in . the case, the undersigned recommends that the respondent,
Eppinger & Russell Company, Jacksonville , Florida, and its officers , agents, suc-
cessors, and assigns ' shall
1. Cease and desist from :
(a) Refusing to bargain collectively with Florida Citrus & Allied Workers
Union, Local 4A, UCAPAWA, affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organiza-
tions, as the exclusive representative of all its production and maintenance em-
ployees at its Jacksonville , Florida, plant, excluding foremen, clerical workers,
watchmen, and all supervisory employees with authority to hire, promote, dis-
,charge, discipline , or otherwise effect changes in the status of'employees , or effec-
tively recommend such-action :
(b) Engaging in any like or related acts or conduct interfering with, restrain-
ing,-or coercing its employees in the exercise of the right to self-organization, to
form, join, or assist labor organizations , to bargain collectively through repre-
sentatives of their own choosing , and to engage in concerted activities for,the pur-
•poses of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection, as guaranteed in -
Section 7i of the Act.
2. Take the following affirmative action which, the undersigned - finds will
effectuate the policies of the Act :
(a) Upon request , bargain collectively with Florida Citrus & Allied Workers
Union, Local 4A, UCAPAWA, affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organiza-
tions, as the exclusive representative of all its , production and maintenance em-
ployees at its Jacksonville ,, Florida, plant, excluding foremen , clerical workers,
watchmen , and all supervisory employees with authority to hire; , promote, dis-
charge, discipline , or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or
effectively recommend such action ; _ - - -
-
r
(b) Postrimmediately in conspicuous places at its Jacksonville , Florida, plant,
and 'maintain for a period of attleast sixty ( 60) consecutive days from, the
date of posting, notices to its employees stating : (1) that the respondent will
.riot engage in the conduct from which,it is recommended that, it cease and desist
.in paragraphs 1 (a) and ( b) of these recommendations , and (2 ) that the
respondent will take the affirmative .action set forth in paragraph 2 (a) of these
recommendations ; . '
(c) Notify the Regional Director for the Tenth Region in writing, within
,ten (10 ) days from the date of the receipt of this Intermediate Report, what
steps , the respondent has taken to comply herewith. -
It is further recommended that unless on or before , ten (10 ) days , from the
receipt of this Intermediate Report, the respondent notifies said Regional
Director in writing that it will comply with the foregoing recommendations,
the National Labor Relations Board issue an order requiring the respondent
to take the action aforesaid.
As provided in Section 33 of Article II of the Rules and Regulations of the
National Labor Relations Board, Series 3, effective November 26, 1943, any
party or counsel for the Board may within fifteen ( 15) days from the date of the
entry of the order transferring ' the case to the Board , pursuant to Section 32, • -
'of Article II of said Rules and Regulations , file with the Board, Rochambeau
Building , Washington , D C., an original and four copies of a statement in writ-
ing setting forth such, exceptions to the Intermediate Report or to any other
part of the record or proceeding ( including rulings upon all motions or objec-
tions ) as he relies upon, together with the original and four copies of'a brief
r
-EPPINGER & RUSSELL COMPANY 1269
in support thereof. Immediately upon the filing of such statement of exceptions
and/or brief, the party or counsel for the Board filing the same shall serve- a
copy thereof upon each of the other parties ,and shall file a copy with the Re-
gional Director. As further provided in said Section 33, should any party de-
sire permission to argue orally before the Board request therefor must be made
in, writing to- the, Board within, ten (10) days from the date of the order trans-
ferring the case to the Board.
i ' FRANK BI.ooM
I
Dated March 3, 1944.
Trial Examiner
I