Pullman Standard Car Manufacturing Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 23, 1943

51 N.L.R.B. 661 (N.L.R.B. 1943)

In the Matter Of PULLMAN STANDARD CAR MANUFACTURING COMPANY
and UNITED STEELWORKERS OF AIIIERICA, C. I. O.
Case No. R-56-14.-Decided July W, 1943
Messrs. Russell Packard and George E. Frendenthal , Jr., for the
Board. ,
Winston, Strawn & Shawn , by Mr. George B. Christensen , of Chicago,
Ill., for the Company.
Messrs. John J. Brownlee and Philip M. Curran , of Pittsburgh, Pa.,
for the C. I. O.
Mr. A. Robert Pakulaz, of Chicago , Ill., for the Independent.
Mr. A. Sumner Lawrence , of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
ORDER
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon petition- duly filed by United Steelworkers of America,
C. I. 0., herein called the C. I. 0., alleging that a question affecting
commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of
Pullman Standard Car Manufacturing Company, Chicago, Illinois,
the National Labor Relations Board provided for an appropriate
hearing upon due notice before Josef L. Hektoen, Trial Examiner.
Said hearing was held at Chicago, Illinois, on June 28-29, 1943. The
Company, the C. I. 0., and Pullman Standard Employees Union, un-
affiliated, herein called the Independent, appeared, participated, and
were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-ex-
amine witnesses and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues. The
Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial
error and are hereby affirmed. The Company's motion to dismiss is
granted for reasons hereinafter set forth. All parties were afforded
the opportunity of filing briefs with the Board.
51 N. L. R. B., No. 111.
661
662 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Pullman Standard Car Manufacturing Company, a Delaware cor-
poration, has its principal office and place of business at Chicago,
Illinois, and operates numerous plants throughout the United States.
The only plant involved in this proceeding is the Chicago plant, known
as the carshops, at which the Company is principally engaged in the
manufacture of parts for ships under contract with the United States
Navy. The Company uses annually at its Chicago plant raw materials
of a value exceeding $1,000,000, of which more than 50 percent is re-
ceived from points outside the State of Illinois. The Company manu-
factures annually at its Chicago plant finished products of 'a value in
excess of $1,000,000, all of which are eventually shipped to points out-
side the State of Illinois. 'The Company admits that it is engaged in
commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
United Steelworkers of America is a labor organization, affiliated
with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, admitting to mem-
bership employees of the Company.
Pullman Standard Employees Union is an unaffiliated labor organi-
zation, admitting to membership employees of the Company.
III. THE ALLEGED QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On March 15, 1943, the C. I. O. filed a petition for investigation
and certification of representatives for the employees of the Company
at its Chicago plant, hereinabove referred to as the carshops. - Prior
thereto, on February 20, 1943, the Company and the Independent
had entered into an exclusive collective bargaining agreement cover-
ing the employees in question and effective until February 8, 1944,
with the-further provision that the contract should continue in effect
from year to year thereafter subject to termination on 30 days' notice
before the anniversary date. Both the Company and the Independent
contend that the contract is a bar to the present proceeding.
While the contract relied upon by the Company and the Independent
did not, at the time of its execution, resolve all issues then outstanding
between the parties, such contract was, however, a binding agreement
which settled a substantial number of questions relative to collective
bargaining, without prejudice to the right of the Independent to sub-
mit thereafter to the War Labor Board the issues unresolved by the
agreement. Such agreement was, moreover, executed at a time when
0
PULLMAN STANDARD CAR MANUFACTURING COMPANY 663
it appears that the Company had no notice of any claim on the part
of the C. I. O. to represent the employees of the Company.'
Since it does not appear that the C. I. O. made any claim of repre-
sentation to the Company prior to the execution of the contract with
the Independent, we find that the contract constitutes a bar to a
present determination of representatives.2 We shall, accordingly,
dismiss the petition filed by the C. I. O. This dismissal, however,
shall not prejudice the right of the C. I. O. to file a new petition at a
reasonable time before the expiration of the existing contract.
ORDER
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and upon the
entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations Board hereby
orders that the petition for investigation and certification of repre-
sentatives of employees of Pullman Standard Car Manufacturing
Company, Chicago, Illinois, filed by United Steelworkers of America,
C. 1. 0.1 be, and it hereby is, dismissed.
CHAIRMAN MILLIS took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Order.
1 The C. I. 0. claims that on or about December 11, 1942, at a conference in connection
with a collective bargaining agreement at another plant of the Company, the latter was
notified informally by the C. 1 0. of its claim to majority representation of the employees
at the carshops of the Company. It appears, however, that the general practice of the
C. I. 0. with respect to other plants of the Company was to give formal written notice of its
claim to majority representation At the hearing, the Company denied having ever received
any notice either formal or informal of the C. I. 0 's claim to representation prior to the
filing of the present petition. While there is some evidence that, subsequent to December 11,
1942, and prior to February 20, 1943, when the contract was executed, the Company had
notice of C. I. 0 membership among the carshop employees, there is no evidence that during
such period any claim was made by the C. I. o, to representation. We find, accordingly,
the the Company was without knowledge of any rival claim to representation upon the date
of the execution of the contract herein involved.
See Matter of Detroit Michigan Stove Company, 51 N. L. R. B. 34T.
S