Thompson Products, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 21, 1945

60 N.L.R.B. 1381 (N.L.R.B. 1945)

In the Matter of Tiro ursoN PRODUCTS, INC., TIIoirsoN AIRCRAFT
PRODUCTS COMPANY and INTERNATIONAL UNION, UNITED AUTOMO-
BILE, AIRCRAFT & AGRICULTURAI, IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA
(U. A. W.-C. 1. 0.), LOCAL No. 300
Case No. R-8653 (8-R-6'72)
SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION
AND
ORDER
March 21, 1945
Pursuant to the Board's Decision, Order, and Second Direction of
Elections and Supplemental Decision and Amendment to Second
Direction of Elections,2 elections by secret ballot were conducted on
August 30 and 31, 1944, under the direction and supervision of the
Regional Director for the Eighth Region (Cleveland, Ohio), among
certain employees (1) at the Cleveland, Ohio, plants of Thompson
Products, Inc., herein called T. P., and (2) at the,Euclid and Cleve-
land, Ohio, plants of Thompson Aircraft Products Company, herein
called TAPCO.3 Objections to the elections were thereafter duly
filed by the U. A. W.-C. I. O. and the I. A. M., parties to the elections.
On September 20, 1944, after having investigated the Objections,
the Regional Director issued and served on the parties a Report on
Objections, in which he set forth certain documentary and other evi-
dence (which he reported was undisputed by T. P. and TAPCO),
made certain findings of fact based on such evidence, and recommended
that the elections be set aside forthwith. Thereafter, T. P. and
TAPCO duly filed joint Exceptions to the Report on Objections, not
contesting the evidentiary facts nor requesting a hearing, but alleg-
' 57 N. I,. R. B. 925
2 57 N. L. R B. 1422 '
At the T P election, 1,291 votes were cast for International Union, United Automobile,
Aircraft & Agricultural Implement Workers of America (U. A W -C. I 0 ), Local No 300,
herein called the U A W -C I 0 , 256 for International Association of Machinists, Dis-
trict 54 (A F. L ), herein called the I A. M, and 2,033 for neither, with an inconse-
quential number of challenged and void ballots . At the TAPCO election , 1,276 votes were
cast for the U. A. W -C. I. O. and 4, 582 against the U. A. W -C. I 0., likewise with an
inconsequential number of challenged and void ballots.
60 N. L B. B, No. 241. _
1381
1382 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ing that the elections should not be set aside.4 It appears to the
Board that T. P.'s and TAPCO's Exceptions do not raise substantial
and material issues necessitating a hearing, within the meaning of
Article III, Section 10, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and
Regulations-Series 3, as amended. Accordingly we shall not hold a
hearing on said Exceptions.
Upon the entire record in the case, including the Objections, the
Report'on Objections, and the Exceptions thereto, the Board makes
the following :
SUPPLEMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
After the issuance of the Second Direction of Elections, but before
the elections were held pursuant thereto, T. P. and TAPCO began
publication of a plant newspaper entitled "Let's Have the Truth."
The first T. P. issue, dated August 21, 1944, and the first TAPCO
issue, dated the following day, were both marked "Volume 1, No. 1,"
and set the tone for the six or seven subsequent pre-election issues.
Featured was a large cartoon ridiculing the "C. I. 0." and "A. F. L."
for looking through the wrong end of a telescope and foreseeing
much post-war unemployment, while management advised them to
look through the right end and see "T. P. employment twice as great
as before the war." The leading article expanded on this alleged
disparity between the employees' gloomy outlook under the unions
and their bright prospects if reliance were placed on management.
There was also an article deriding the C. I. O. for its general opposi-
tion to bonus systems such as the one used by management, and point-
ing out that if the system were eliminated management, "under Wage
Stabilization, would not be permitted to increase hourly rates to make
up the difference." Another article ridiculed a letter from a Thomp-
son worker, praising the U. A. W.-C. I. O. and published in the
U. A. W.-C. I. O.'s paper. A subsequent issue reproduced a page of
clippings about strikes called by outside unions at other plants, and
a cartoon showing Thompson, employees going to work over the
trampled body of a man with a "strike" placard. Still another issue
contained one cartoon lampooning the C. I. O. and the A. F. of L.
organizers as "Merchants of Discord," and another cartoon portraying
these unions as "mudslingers" who had, however, not succeeded in
hurting the business "yet." •
In addition to discrediting the unions on the ballots, T. P. and
TAPCO, after repeatedly pointing out that they had given and would
4 The U A . W -C I 0 also filed Exceptions , raising issues which could not have been
determined without the holding of a hearing. Subsequently, the U A W -C I 0 re-
quested that the elections be set aside without holding a bearing In view of our disposition
of the elections , as hereinafter set forth , we consider it unnecessary to pass on the U. A. W.-
C. I. O.'s Exceptions.
THOMPSON PRODUCTS, INC. 1383
continue to give wages and working conditions as good as prevailed
in the area and better in many cases than prevailed in union shops,
appealed outright to their employees to vote for management by
voting against the unions. Thus, one issue consisted of a full-page
notice signed by the Old Guard Association, management's club for
both supervisory and non-supervisory employees,5 urging an anti-
union vote and reproducing a sample ballot with an arrow pointing
to the "neither" or "no" squares which management wanted the
employees to mark in the elections. Another issue printed a 2-page
spread of pictures of 14 top management executives, and added : "Put
your chips on this team when you cast your vote." Other issues dis-
played a "pledge," signed by top management officials, that they
would continue their 44-year history of working for ever better wages
and working conditions if the employees would reject the unions on
the ballot and leave the "affairs of this Company ... in our [manage-
ment's] hands."
Shortly before the elections T. P. and TAPCO assembled their
employees at the plants during working time on six different occasions,
once for each of the three shifts in each of the two units. Seated on
a platform were the officers of T. P. or TAPCO, depending on where
the meeting was held, who were introduced to the employees as the
men on whose policy the employees were to vote "yes" or "no" in the
Board elections. The employees were then addressed by Crawford,
president of T. P. and TAPCO, and, in some of the meetings, also by
Livingstone, vice president of T. P. and TAPCO. The tenor of the
speeches was openly anti-union. The U. A. W:-C. I. O. leaders were
derided as communists, drunkards, criminals, enemy aliens, and pro-
vocateurs of groundless strikes. Throughout the speeches was the im-
plication that the progress which T. P. and TAPCO had made was due
to the fact that they had not been fettered with union dealings. In
one speech Crawford told the employees that the stockholders of T. P.
had promised to furnish the money for T., P. to purchase from the
United States Government the plant which TAPCO was operating,
in view of the record of dependability in management-labor relations.
The implication was that if a union were to come in, management-
labor relations would no longer be dependable and the money for the
purchase of the plant would not be furnished. The employees were
also told that General Motors had assured T. P. and TAPCO of all its
post-war business because of the present dependable management-labor
relationship. Here again the implication was that such post-war
orders would be jeopardized by the advent of a union in the plant.
Impressed upon the employees was the fact that the elections pre-
sented the issue of endorsing management's leadership or repudiating
5 See 57 N. L. R. B. 925.
1384 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
it in favor of the leadership of the above-described, discredited outside
representatives .13 Each of the speeches, together with the time re-
quired for the employees to assemble and return to work, consumed
almost an hour of working time; the emplo3 ees were instructed to
attend by their supervisors; and they were paid their regular wages
for doing so.
Also during this period, T. P. and TAPCO sent to the houses of
each of their employees letters of similar anti-union tenor, urging
them to continue to rely on management and to vote against the unions
on the ballots. The tone of these letters is fairly reflected in one four-
page T. P. and TAPCO letter, which stated that management's pur-
pose was to discuss both the "attacks now being waged against the
Company by ... the international unions" and the pending election,
in which "you will have the opportunity to cast a vote either in favor
of, or against, the [management's] . . . policies ..." -After consid-
erable arguments designed to show that management had taken care of
the employees' welfare to the fullest extent possible, the employees were
told that "if the Thompson `drive' were to succeed, many thousands of
dollars in dues and assessments from Thompson employees would roll
into the C. I. O. treasury every month"; they were asked whether their
"status under Company leadership is something you can improve by
paying this amount to outsiders to act as your leaders"; and they were
warned that, particularly in view of the "black record of wartime
strikes" of the outside unions, it would be "most difficult to maintain
the ... relationship which now exists, should either of these unions
inject themselves into our organization." Thus, the inference was un-
mistakable that the employees had nothing to gain and much to lose
if they chose an outside union instead of continuing to rely entirely
on management to safeguard and advance their interests.
Likewise during this period, management wrote a letter to the Re-
gional War Labor Board, hereinafter called the R. W. L. B., urging
approval of a previously requested general wage increase at TAPCO.
T. P. and TAPCO thereupon posted notices to their employees, set-
ting forth a copy of this letter, and reiterating that T. P. would imme-
diately put into effect whatever wage increase was approved for the
employees at TAPCO. The previous request had been filed only by
6 Typical of management's distortion of the purpose of the elections is President Frederick
C Crawford's speech to the employees of TAPCO's first shift :
The issue you are voting for is whether you want to change the leadership that has
cairied-this company from a tiny one to one of the greatest ones in America, with
an enviable reputation known for decency, happiness, progress, and wages. You are
voting as to whether you want to change that leadership for outside leadership. That
is the issue You want this record of not a lost hour of work and all petty problems
settled'1 Or do you want a record of brawls, and petty strife, and all the troubles
that seem to follow when outside leadership comes in' . . . Don't you be careless
about this election. It is the future of this company that you are voting for.
THOMPSON PRODUCTS, INC. 1385
TAPCO in conjunction with the company-dominated and supported
Aircraft Workers Alliance, Inc.,' hereinafter called the A. W. A.
During the same period, T. P. issued to its employees overseas-type
hats bearing four different slogans,- for both supervisory and non-
supervisory employees to wear at work. The slogans were:
"Play ball with T. P.-no strikes"
"My chips are on T. P."
"It's me and T. P. together"
"T. P.'s okay by me."
These hats were placed in foremen's offices; to obtain one, an employee
had to ask his foreman. Previously, T. P. had never issued work
hats bearing any slogans. By this device T. P. could readily ascertain
which employees were pro-union, and which were anti-union. We
are satisfied, in view of T. P.'s anti-union attitude, that by issuing
these types of hats at this time, T. P. intended to and did bring
pressure to bear on its employees publicly to declare themselves for
or against the unions on the ballot.' T. P. further evinced its union
hostility at this time by posting bulletins throughout its plants an-
nouncing that until the Board obtained a court decree enforcing its
disestablishment order with respect to the company-dominated and
supported Brotherhood of Independent Workers, Inc.,! hereinafter
called B. I. W., the outside unions' rival which had been excluded
from the T. P. ballot, T. P. would continue to recognize that organi-
zation as the representative of its members for the purpose of adjust-
ing grievances.
Similarly during the election campaign, TAPCO posted bulletins
to its employees announcing that until the Board obtained a court
decree enforcing its disestablishment order with respect to the com-
pany-dominated and supported A. W. A. which was excluded from
the TAPCO ballot, TAPCO would continue to recognize the A. W. A.
as the sole bargaining representative of its employees.
CONCLUSIONS
T. P. and TAPCO improperly interfered with the elections by the
speeches delivered at the plants during regular working hours to the
assembled employees, who were instructed to attend by their super-
visors and who incurred no loss of pay for the time so spent. While
we recognize an employer's right of free speech even where a Board
election is involved, in this case T. P. and TAPCO took advantage
of an avenue of communication to bring to bear upon the employees
See 57 N L R B 925.
e See Matter of Agar Packing & Provision Corp., 58 N L . R. B 738
See 57 N. L. R. B 925.
1386 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
the weight of their economic power in a manner not available to the
unions. The employees were not free to disregard the summons of
their supervisors to attend these meetings. The managerial author-
ity of T. P. and TAPCO was frther implemented by paying the em-
ployees for the time spent in listening to the arguments of T. P. and
TAPCO. The views of T. P. and TAPCO were thus presented in
an atmosphere which afforded to them tactical advantages which
proponents of a contrary view could not match. In view of the
economic dependence of the listeners upon T. P. and TAPCO, a factor
which rendered the employees unduly responsive to the slightest sug-
gestions of the- speakers, and in view of the compulsion upon the
listeners to give heed, the adjurations of the speakers passed from the
realm of the free competition of ideas envisaged by the First Amend-
ment into that of coercion. In this setting the presentation of T. P.
and TAPCO as candidates in the elections and the anti-union tenor
of the speeches with their emphasis upon a continuation of the exist-
ing dependable employer-employee relationship as an insurance of
continued progress and post-war orders, when viewed against the gen-
eral atmosphere of hostility to outside unions engendered by the
publications of T. P.-and TAPCO, were bound to have a restraining
influence upon, and to interfere with the freedom of choice of,, the,
employees.
Adequate bases for our conclusion that the employees have been
prevented from exercising a free and untrammeled choice among the
alternatives on the ballots also appear : (1) in the issuance by T. P.
of the anti-union hats, hereinabove described, which exerted pressure
upon the employees publicly to declare themselves against the unions
on the ballots; (2) in the financial inducement to vote against the -
unions inherent in the promises of- T. P. and TAPCO, appearing in
notices posted in the plants, that T. P. would immediately put into effect
whatever wage increases the R. W. L. B. approved at TAPCO pursuant
to a prior application made only by TAPCO; 10 and (3) in the an-
nouncement of T. P. and TAPCO, appearing in bulletins posted in
the plants, to the effect that even if one of the unions on the ballots
were to 'receive a majority management would not accord it the
exclusive recognition required by the Act, but would continue to rec-
ognize labor organizations which were not on the ballots.1' Recogni-
tion of a minority union even for the purpose of handling grievances,
for its members has-been held violative of the Act where an exclusive
bargaining representative has been selected 12 Accordingly, even
10 Cf Matter of Continental Oil Company, 58 N. L . R B 169.
11 Consequently, we find it unnecessary to decide whether the other statements and
conduct hereinabove set forth interfered with the elections
12 Hughes Tool Co. v. N. L R. B , 147 F. (2d) 69 (C C. A. 5).
THOMPSON PRODUCTS , INC. 1387
assuming that the A. W. A. and the B. I. W. were bona fide labor organi-
zations, the anticipatory announcement of T. P . and TAPCO that they
would not accord to the unions which might win the elections the
exclu's'ive recognition to which the Act entitled them could not help but
interfere with the employees' full freedom of choice in selecting a
bargaining representative.13
We find no merit in the contentions of T. P . and TAPCO that their
preelection activities should not be permitted to invalidate the elec-
tions, because both the Board 's representatives and the union candi-
dates permitted the elections to be held with knowledge of such activ-
ities. The cases cited in support of this contention hold only that a
union's failure to seek postponement of an election after it learns of
facts allegedly constituting improper interference may be relevant to
a determination of whether or not improper interference has actually
occurred . Here we find that the elections were improperly interfered
with. In administering the public policies declared in the Act, we
cannot permit such interference on the ground that postponement of
the elections was the exclusive remedy.
We find that the elections were not truly representative of the em-
ployees' free choice and did not reflect their free and untrammeled
wishes as to collective bargaining representation . We shall , there-
fore, set the elections aside.
" Nor may T. P. and TAPCO defend their conduct in this respect upon the asserted
ground that the A. W. A. and the B. I. W. were improperly kept off the ballots. To sanction
their conduct on such grounds would be to concede that our Direction of Elections was
a useless act ab initio. Cf. Madden v. Brotherhood and Union of Transit Employees of
Baltimore, 147 F. (2d) 439 (C. C. A. 4).