Owens-Illinois Glass Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Sep 5, 1952

100 N.L.R.B. 1024 (N.L.R.B. 1952)

1024 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
complete collective bargaining agreements containing detailed provi-
sions as to wages, hours, holidays, vacations, and grievance procedure,
and that such bargainable issues as seniority, layoffs, promotions, inter-
departmental transfers, severance pay, leaves of absence, piecework
allowances, and safety have been given detailed treatment in the con-
tracts as bargaining progressed and time went on. Many of the "side
agreements," to which the Petitioner refers, arose out of grievances.
More recently the parties seem to have adapted the basic contract to
peculiarly local needs by means of a "letter" addressed to each of the
two locals requesting their approval of provisions contained in the
letter in connection with execution of the basic contract.
We conclude from this record that the Thompsonville and Amster-
dam employees do not lack that community of interest ordinarily
considered essential to effective multiplant bargaining.' We find that
the unit of Thompsonville and Amsterdam employees, stabilized as
it has been by 14 years of collective bargaining between the Employer
and the Intervenor, is appropriate.8 Accordingly, we grant the Inter-
venor's motion to dismiss the petition on the ground of inappropriate
-unit.
Order
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition filed herein be, and it hereby,
is, dismissed.
'Compare Aluminum Company ' of America, 85 NLRB 915 , 917; Hygrade Food Products
Corporation, 85 NLRB 841 , where the master contract covered 13 widely separated plants
of the Employer 's total of 60.
6 The Reliance Electric d Engineering Company, 98 NLRB 488 ; Oregon Portland Cement
Co., 83 NLRB 675 ; see also Lever Brothers Company, 96 NLRB 448 , 97 NLRB 1240 ; com-
pare Gulf Ott Corporation, 90 NLRB 1607 , where the bargaining history was of 6 years' dura-
tion, the plants in question had been individually certified before merged in the contract
unit, and the unit constituted only part of one of the company's seven divisions; and
Fruehauf Trailer Co., 87 NLRB 589, where only two unrelated parts of a chain were sought
as a unit on the basis of bargaining history.
OWENS-ILLINOIS GLASS COMPANY and GLASS BOTTLE BLOWERS AssocI-
ATION OF U. S. & CANADA, A . F. L., PETITIONER . Case No. 13-RC-
2510. September 5,1952
Decision and Certification of Representatives
Pursuant to a stipulation for certification upon consent election, an
election by secret ballot was conducted May 15 and 16, 1952, under
100 NLRB No. 144.
OWENS-ILLINOIS GLASS COMPANY 1025
the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Thir-
teenth Region , among the employees in the stipulated unit. There-
after, a tally of ballots was furnished to the parties which showed the
results to be inconclusive.' Accordingly, a run-off election was con-
ducted on June 10 and 11, 1952. Upon the completion of the run-off
election , a tally of ballots was furnished the parties. The tally shows
that of approximately 1,420 eligible voters, 1,298 cast valid ballots, of
which 668 were for Glass Bottle Blowers Association of U. S. & Can-
ada, A. F. L., herein called the Petitioner, 570 were for Federation
of Glass, Ceramic & Silica Sand Workers of America, C. I. 0., herein
called the Intervenor, and 60 ballots were challenged.
On June 13, 1952, a letter front the Intervenor enclosing a copy of
a letter directed to the Employer 2 was received'in the Regional Office.
The letter to the Regional Office conveyed in general terms the In-
tervenor's protest and objections to the results of the run-off election
due to conduct of the Employer.3 Pursuant to a request from the
Regional Office for specific reasons for objections to the conduct of
the election the Intervenor, on June 19, 1952, filed a statement of sup-
porting reasons for the objections. A copy of this statement was not
served upon either of the other parties. On June 20, 1952, pursuant
to a notice from the Regional Office as to the requirement of the Rules
and Regulations for service upon the other parties,' the Intervenor
3 The tally of ballots showed that of approximately 1,420 eligible voters, 1,279 cast valid
ballots, of which 448 were for the Petitioner , 481 were for the Intervenor , and 350 were
against the participating labor organizations . There were 43 challenged ballots. No
objections to this election were filed.
' The copy of the letter addressed to the Employer reads in part as follows : "This is to
advise your company that our organization herewith protests and objects to the results
of the runoff election held on June 10th and 11th , 1952. Our objections are based upon
your company's numerous violations of the Labor -Management Relations Act of 1947.
Pending the final disposition of this matter , our organization requests equal rights and
recognition given any other organization in matters relating to wages, hours and working
conditions affecting the employees in the bargaining unit."
3 The Intervenpr 's.letter to the Regional Office reads in part as follows : "Enclosed please
had copy of letter addressed to the Owens -Illinois Glass Company , covering our protests
and objections to the results of the runoff election . This is also, to advise the Board
that we herewith protest and object to the results of the runoff election due to the Com-
pany's many violations of the Labor-Management Relations Act. Under separate cover
we are sending y ou charges against the company as a result of such violations of the Act."
On June 15 , 1952, the Intervenor filed with the Regional Office, unfair labor practice
charges alleging violation of Section 8 (a) (1) and ( 3) of the Act, docketed as Case No.
13-CA-1149.
4 The pertinent part of the rule reads : "Within 5 days after the tally of ballots has been
furnished , any party may file with the regional director four copies of objections to the
conduct of the election or conduct affecting the results of the election , which shall contain
a short statement of the reasons therefor . . . Copies of such objections shall immedi-
ately be served upon each of the other parties by the party filing them , and proof of service
shall be made "
1026 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
mailed to the Petitioner a copy of the letter directed to the Employer
on June 12, 1952. This copy was received by the Petitioner on
June 23, 1952.
The' Regional Director, on June 27, 1952, issued and duly served
upon'the parties a report on objections in which he recommended that
the ,Board overrule the objections on the ground that they were, not
timely'filed in accordance with the rules because a copy thereof was
riot "immediately served upon the Petitioner. Accordingly, the Re-
gional'Directbr made no report on the merits of the objections. The
Intervenor filed timely exceptions to this report in which it urges, in
substance, that by serving,a copy of its letter of June 12, 1952, upon
the Petitioner "immediately" after the expiration of the time allowed
by the Rules for filing objections,5 it had substantially complied with
the Rules 6"
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 organizations involved herein claim to represent eni-
ployees of the Employer.
, 3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of the employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section
9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. We find no merit in the Intervenor's exceptions to the Regional
Director's report on objections. The Board has previously indicated
that it will require the parties to adhere to the clear language of the
published Rules.7 As used in Section 102.61 of -the Rules, the word
"immediately" clearly refers to the time when the objections are ac-
tually filed with the Regional Director and not to the time permitted
5 In this case , June 18'was the last day on which objections could have been timely filed.
9 In, its exceptions the Intervenor urges that failure to comply with _ the service require-
ments more promptly was due to a misunderstanding of a discussion with a Board repre-
sentative by its International representative , a layman acting without the guidance of-
counsel ; that on the day of receipt from the NLRB of a card dated June 19, 1952 , acknowl-
edging receipt of the objections and advising of the necessity of serving copies upon the
other parties under the Rules, the Intervenor mailed a copy of the objections to the Peti-
tioner ; that this is not a situation where there was unreasonable or deliberate delay, and
that the rules are not so rigid and inflexible as to require their technical interpretation
and application to the detriment of meritorious objections . It is argued that various
courts of law, when called upon to interpret the work "immediate ," have not so narrowly
construed its meaning . Accordingly , the Intervenor requested an opportunity to present
oral argument before the Board on the issues raised in its exceptions . The request for
oral argument is hereby denied.
7 See National Carbon Company, 99 NLRB 774.
OWENS-ILLINOIS GLASS COMPANY 1027_
tinder the Rules for the-filing of objections. , The Intervenor having-.
choseri'to -file -its objections on June 13, 1952, rather than wait until
the 18th the'last day when it might have- filed objections, the Rules.
required that immediately after the 13th of June the Intervenor serve-
copies of those objections upon the other parties. We hold that the
:,e5'vice.bf objections on June 2,3, 1952, was not timely, within the mean-
ing of the immediacy requirement of the Rules, and, that- therefore the-
objections may not be considered. Accordingly, we hereby adopt the-
Regipnal Director's recommendations and overrule the Intervenor's.
objections to the election.8
5.' All hourly- paid employees (production and maintenance em-
ployees) in all departments at the Employer's Streator, Illinois, plant,
except for foremen, assistant foremen, and those employees now repre-
sented by the Glass Bottle Blowers Association of U. S. & Canada,_
A. F.: L., and by American Flint- Glass Workers Union of North
America, A. F. L., and all supervisors as defined in the Act, constitute
a, unit, appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within.
the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act .9
Because, as the tally shows, a majority of the ballots were` cast' for-
the Petitioner, we shall certify it as the exclusive bargaining repre--
sentative of all the employees in the appropriate unit.
Certification of Representatives
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED that Glass Bottle Blowers Association of
U. S. & Canada, A. F. L., has been designated and selected by a ma-
jority of the employees of Owens-Illinois Glass Company, Streator,-
Illinois, in the unit hereinabove found appropriate, as their repre--
sentative for the purposes of collective bargaining and that, pursuant
to. Section 9 (a) ' of the Act, the said organization is the exclusive
representative of all the employees in such unit for the purposes of-
collective bargaining, with respect to rates of pay, wages, hours o£
employment, and other conditions of employment.
MEMBERS HOUSTON and STYLES took no part in the consideration.
of the above Decision and Certification of Representatives.
1 In view of the basis up-n which the Regional Director overruled the Intervenor's-
objections , it is unnecessary for us to consider whether the Intervenor 's letter of June 13,
195,2, objecting to the election was itself inadequate to meet the requirements of the Rules-
that such objections "shall contain a short statement of the reasons therefor."
The unit is thus described in the stipulation for certification upon consent election.
227260-53-vol . 100---66