West Virginia Pulp & Paper Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 7, 1945

61 N.L.R.B. 438 (N.L.R.B. 1945)

In the Matter Of WEST VIRGINIA PULP & PAPER COMPANY and PAPER
WORKERS ORGANIZING COMMI'i'rEE (C. I. 0.)
Case No. 5-R-17,517.-Decided April 7, 1945
Mr. James W. Towsen, of New York City, and Mr. Charles E. Boyd,
Jr., of Covington, Va., for the Company.
Mr. Frank Grasso, of Richmond, Va., for the C. I. O.
Mr. Lawson Wimberly, of Washington, D. C., and Mr. E. W. Wright,
of Covington, Va., for the I. B. E. W.
Mr. Julius Kirle, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon an amended petition duly filed by Paper Workers Organizing
Committee (C. I. 0.), herein called the C. I. 0., alleging that a ques-
tion affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of
employees of West Virginia Pulp & Paper Company, Covington, Vir-
ginia, herein called the Company, the National Labor Relations Board
provided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice before Sidney
J. Barban, Trial Examiner. Said hearing was held at Covington,
Virginia, on February 13, 1945. The Company, the C. I. 0., and
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local Union No.
464, A. F. of L., herein called the I. B. E. W., appeared and partici-
pated. All parties were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to
examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bear-
ing on the issues. At the hearing, the I. B. E. W. moved to dismiss
the petition. For reasons set forth in Section III, infra, the motion
is hereby denied. 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:
61 N. L. R. B., No. 56.
438
WEST VIRGINIA PULP & PAPER COMPANY
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
439
West Virginia Pulp & Paper Company is engaged in the manufac-
ture and distribution of pulp and paper-mill products and chemical by-
products. Its principal office is at New York City and it owns and
operates mills at Covington, Virginia; Mechanicville, New York;
Williamsburg and Tyrone, Pennsylvania; Luke, Maryland; and
Charleston, South Carolina. The Company's Covington, Virginia,
plant is the only plant directly concerned in this proceeding. The
Company purchases annually for its Covington plant materials valued
at in excess of $6,500,000, of which approximately 50 percent is shipped
to the plant from points outside the State of Virginia. The Company
manufactures annually at its Covington plant products valued at in
excess of $14,500,000, of which approximately 98 percent is shipped
from the plant to points outside the State of Virginia.
The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
H. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
Paper 'Workers' Organizing Committee, affiliated with the Con-
gress of Industrial Organizations, is a labor organization admitting
to membership employees of the Company.
Local Union No. 464 of International Brotherhood of Electrical
Workers, affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, is a labor
organization admitting to membership employees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The C. I. 0., by letter dated October 31, 1944, advised the Company
that it represented a majority of the electrical employees at the
Company's Covington plant and that it had filed a petition with the
Board. The Company in its reply refused to recognize the C. I. O.
On November 18, 1942, the Board certified the I. B. E. W. as the
bargaining representative of all hourly paid electrical employees at
the Company's Covington, Virginia, plant? Allegedly as a result of
the time consumed in compiling data pertaining to wages and working
conditions, the I. B. E. W. did not enter into negotiations with the
Company until April 12, 1943, at which time it submitted to the
Company the draft of a proposed bargaining contract. The Company,
although recognizing the I. B. E. W. for the purpose of handling
grievances under the Board's certification, refused to enter into
'45 N . L. R. B. 59.
440 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
negotiations with the I. B. E. W. until its contract with the Inter-
national Brotherhood of Pulp, Sulphite & Paper Mill Workers (A. F.
of L.), covering the remaining production and maintenance employees,
expired on August 1, 1943.2 The Company maintained such position
despite the intervention of the Conciliation Service of the Department
of Labor until June 24, 1943, when it agreed to enter into negotiations
with the I. B. E. W. Between June 24, 1943, and September 11, 1943,,
the Company and the I. B. E. W. met on at least four different occa-
sions but were unable to consummate a bargaining agreement. How-
ever, during the latter negotiation, a draft of a proposed contract
embodying provisions agreed upon and a stipulation containing dis-
puted issues were drawn up and submitted to the War Labor Board.
Following a panel hearing, appeal to the Regional War Labor Board,
and review by the National War Labor Board, the National War Labor
Board, on June 13, 1944, issued a Directive disposing of all of the
disputed issues except those pertaining to grievance procedures and
apprentice training concerning which further negotiations were or-
dered. However, no further negotiations were entered into between
the I. B. E. W. and the Company from the time of the issuance of the
Directive to the filing of the petition in the instant proceeding on
November 1, 1944.
The I. B. E. W. contends that the petition should be dismissed on
the ground that the Board's certification of the I. B. E. W., the pro-
posed contract embodying the provisions agreed upon by the Company
and the I. B. E. W., and the proceedings before the War Labor Board,
constitute a bar to a present determination of representatives. We
find no merit in these contentions.
The Board has held that a newly organized or certified representa-
tive is entitled to a reasonable opportunity to obtain the benefits of
representation as evidenced by a collective bargaining contract, and
that when delay in obtaining such a contract is caused by resort to the
orderly processes of Government, the Board will not proceed with a
new investigation and determination of representatives.3 In the
instant case, however, the failure of the I. B. E. W. to obtain a written
collective bargaining contract from the Company can in no wise be
attributed to delay caused by proceedings before the War Labor Board.
On the contrary, it appears from the record that the I. B. E. W.'s
failure to commence negotiations prior to April 12, 1943, was due to
its own lack of data pertaining to wages and working conditions and
2 This contract originally covered the production and maintenance employees of the
Company's Covington , Virginia ; Luke, Maryland ; and Williamsburg, Pennsylvania , plants,
including the electrical employees at the Covington, Virginia , plant In 1942, when the
I. B. E. W. filed its petition in behalf of the electrical employees at the Covington , Virginia,
plant, the International Brotherhood of Pulp, Sulphite & Paper Mill Workers, A . F. of L.,
relinquished jurisdiction of the electrical employees to the I. B E. W.
-8 See Matter of Allis - Chalmers Manufacturing Company, 50 N. L: R. B 306.
WEST VIRGINIA PULP AND PAPER COMPANY 441
that its failur, to consummate a written contract subsequent to the
Directive of the National War Labor Board was due to its inability to
arrange a conference with the Company for the purposes of further
negotiation. Inasmuch as in the latter situation the I. B. E. W. did
not file a charge alleging that the Company refused to bargain within
the meaning of Section 8 (5) of the Act, such inability on the part of
the I. B. E. W. to arrange for negotiations cannot be here considered
as a valid explanation of its failure to consummate a contract with the
Company 4
In view of the above circumstances, we find that the prior certifica-
tion and the proceedings before the War Labor Board do not constitute
a bar to a present determination of representatives. Nor does the
proposed contract taken in conjunction with the stipulation and Direc-
tive of the National War Labor Board constitute a bar to the instant
proceeding, inasmuch as such contract was never signed .5
A statement of a Board agent, introduced into evidence at the hear-
ing, indicates that the C. I. 0. represents a substantial number of
employees in the unit hereinafter found appropriate."
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning
the representation of employees of the Company within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
We find, substantially in accordance with the agreement of the
parties, that all hourly paid electrical employees of the Company at
its Covington, Virginia, plant, excluding 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
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 Election
herein, subject to the limitations and additions set forth in the
Direction.
4 See Matter of Jackson Box Company , 59 N L . R B. 808.
5 See Matter of Escor, Inc , 46 N. L. R. B. 1035.
9 The Field Examiner reported that the C. I. 0 submitted 27 cards ; that the names of
25 persons appearing on the cards were listed on the Company ' s pay roll of November 16,
1944, which contained the names of 44 employees in the claimed appropriate unit ; and
that 25 of the cards were dated from September 29, 1944, to November 2, 1944, and 1 was
undated.
442 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
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, as amended, it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with West Virginia
Pulp & Paper Company, Covington, Virginia,, an election by secret
ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than sixty
(60) days from the date of this Direction, under the direction and
supervision of the Regional Director for the Fifth 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 Regula-
tions, among the employees 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
on vacation or temporarily laid off, and including employees in the
armed forces of the United States who present themselves in person
at the polls, but excluding 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 C. I. 0., or by Local Union No. 464, I. B. E. W. for
the purposes of collective bargaining, or by neither.
4 The C I. O. and the I B. E. W. requested that they be designated on the ballot as set
forth above The request is hereby granted