Aeolian American Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 25, 1953

106 N.L.R.B. 897 (N.L.R.B. 1953)

AEOLIAN AMERICAN CORPORATION 897
3. By causing Respondent Company to discharge Edward Gorski and Raymond Boettcher;
to withhold vacation pay from Roger Biesel,JohnMayer, and Peter Voeller; and to arbitrarily
reduce the working hours of Peter Voeller ; because of their failure of refusal to maintain
membership in Respondent Union, the Respondent Union caused Respondent Company (an
employer) to discriminate in regard to hire or tenure of employment, or other terms or
conditions of employment , to encourage or discourage membership in a labor organization;
and Respondent Union thereby engaged in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Sec-
tion 8 (b) (1) (A) and (2) of the Act.
4. By discharging Edward Gorski and Raymond Boettcher, and arbitrarily reducing the
working hours of Peter Voeller, because of their failure of refusal to maintain membership
in Respondent Union, the Respondent Company engaged in unfair labor practices within the
meaning of Section 8 (a) (1) and (3) of the Act.
5. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair labor practices affecting commerce
within the meaning of Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
[Recommendations omitted from publication.]
AEOLIAN AMERICAN CORPORATION and DISTRICT LODGE
NO. 6, INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS,
AFL, Petitioner and INDEPENDENT UNION OF PIANO
WORKERS. Case No. 3-RC-1216. August 25, 1953
DECISION AND ORDER
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Hymen Dish-
ner, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the
hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby
affirmed.'
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, the
Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case
to a three-member panel. [Chairman Farmer and Members
Styles and Peterson.]
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds:
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the mean-
ing of the Act.
2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent
employees of the Employer.
3. No question affecting commerce exists concerning the
representation of employees of the Employer within the mean-
ing of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act, for
the following reasons:
The Employer and the Intervenor asserttheircurrentagree-
ment, effective from December 1, 1952, to November 30, 1953,
as a bar to this proceeding. The Petitioner contends that the
contract is not a bar because it contains an invalid union-
security clause.
The contract contains the following:
1In view of our disposition of this case, we do not pass upon the hearing officer's refusal
to admit testimony that all employees were members of the Union at the time the current
contract was executed.
106 NLRB No. 141.
898 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
FOURTH: Subject to the Labor Management Relations Act
of 1947 or any amendments thereto, all employees referred
to in this agreement now or hereafter employed during the
term of this agreement shall within thirty (30) days follow-
ing the commencement of such employment be members of
the Union in good standing or become and remain members
in good standing throughout such employment as a condition
of cntinued employment.
TWENTY-SEVENTH: Any provision contained in this
agreement which in any way violates any State of Federal
Law or Rule shall be deemed to be inoperative or amended
so as to comply with such Law or Rule. The invalidity of
any provision or any part thereof shall not affect any other
provision valid or the contract as a whole.
This contract does not expressly accord to the old employee s
who are not members of the union the statutory grace period of
30 days from the effective date of the contract. However, the
Intervenor and the Employer have included the same union-
security clause in each of their contracts,'whichhave been con-
tinuous since 1949.2 In view of the continuing contractual re-
quirement of union membership, we find that the 1952 contract
is not invalid and that it is a bar to the petition.3 Accordingly,
we shall dismiss the petition.`
[The Board dismissed the petition.]
2 Union-shop authorization had been secured in 1948, in accordance with the requirements
of the Act at that time.
3 Kind and Knox Gelatine Company, 104 NLRB 1034; Sylvania Electric Products, Inc., 100
NLRB 357; Josten Engraving Company, 98 NLRB 49; Charles A. Krause Milling Co., 97 NLRB
536.
It is clear that the old employees in the contract were either (1) union members on Decem-
ber 1, 1952, in which case they would not be entitled to the statutory grace period (Krause
case, supra ; or (2) were nonmembers, who had received at least 30 days' grace; or (3) were
nonmembers who, having been hired less than 30 days before December 1, 1952, had not yet
received 30 days' grace but would be entitled under the 1952 contract to complete their 30-
day grace period, beginning with the date of their employment.
Chairman Farmer joins in the finding that the contract is a bar, but finds it unnecessary to
determine here whether the contract is for all purposes valid.
41n view of our disposition of this case, it is not necess try to pass on the contention of the
Employer and the Intervenor that the savings clause validates the contract.
TREADWELL ENGINEERING COMPANY and PATTERN
MAKERS LEAGUE OF NORTH AMERICA , EASTON ASSO-
CIATION, AFL, Petitioner . Case No. 4-RC - 2015. August 25,
1953
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Morris
Mogerman, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made
106 NLRB No. 147.