American White Cross Laboratories, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 4, 1940

24 N.L.R.B. 361 (N.L.R.B. 1940)

In the Matter of AMERICAN WHITE CROSS LABORATORIES, INC. and
TEXTILE WORKERS UNION OF AMERICA
Case No. C-1475.-Decided June 4,1940
Surgical Dressings Manufacturing Industry-Settlement: stipulation providing-
for compliance with the Act, including disestablishment of company-dominated
union, reinstatement and back pay as to one employee-Order: entered on stipu-
lation.
Mr. Albert Ornstein, for the Board.
Mr. Isidor Tow, of New Rochelle, N. Y., for the respondent.
Messrs. Alfred Udoff and Robert Oliver,'of New York City, for the
Union.
Mr. John K. Odisho, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND.
ORDER
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On February 25, 1939, Textile Workers Organizing Committee, now
known as Textile Workers Union of America, herein called the
Union, filed with the Regional Director for the Second Region (New
York City) a charge alleging that American White Cross Laborato-
ries, Inc., New Rochelle, New York, herein called the respondent, had
engaged in and was engaging in certain unfair labor practices affect-
ing commerce , within the meaning of the National Labor Relations
Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act, and a petition alleging that a
question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation
of employees of the respondent and requesting an investigation and
certification pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the Act. On March 14 the
Union filed with the Regional Director an amended charge; on April
7, a second amended charge ; on April 22, an amended petition ; and
on April 25, 1939, a third amended charge.
On June 15, 1939, the Board, acting pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the
Act, and Article III, Section 3, of National Labor Relations Board
Rules and Regulations-Series 1, as amended, ordered an investigation
on the amended petition and authorized the Regional Director to
conduct it and to provide for an appropriate hearing upon due notice,
and, acting pursuant to Article II, Section 37 (b), and Article III,
24 N. L . R. B., No. 2S.
361
362 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Section 10 (c) (2), of said Rules and Regulations, further ordered
that the two cases be consolidated for all purposes and that one record
of the hearing be made.
Upon the charge and amended charges, the Board, by the Regional
Director, issued its complaint dated June 26, 1939, against the respond-
ent, alleging that the respondent had engaged in and was engaging in
unfair labor practices affecting commerce, within the meaning of
Section 8 (1), (2), (3), and (5) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
With respect to the unfair labor practices, the complaint as amended
at the hearing alleged in substance that the respondent (1) formed,
dominated, and interfered with the formation and administration of
a labor organization of its employees known as White Cross Employees
Welfare Association, herein called the Association, and contributed
support to it; (2) discouraged membership in the Union by discharg-
ing and refusing to reinstate Rita Di Benedetto, Marion Brower, Mil-
dred Dawley, and Mildred Mason, employees of the respondent,
because they joined and assisted the Union; (3) on and after March 1,
1939, refused to bargain collectively with the Union, although the
Union had been designated by the majority of the respondent's em-
ployees within an appropriate unit as their representative for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining; and (4) by the foregoing acts, by urg-
ing, persuading, and warning its employees to refrain from joining
or remaining members of the Union, threatening them with discharge
or other reprisals if they did not become or remain members of the
Association, keeping under surveillance the meetings and meeting
places of the Union and in other ways interfered with, restrained, and
coerced its employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section
7 of the Act. The respondent filed an answer to the complaint denying
that it had engaged in the unfair labor practices.
Copies of the complaint, petition, and notice of hearing were duly
served upon the respondent, the Union, and the Association. Pur-
suant to the notice, a hearing on the consolidated cases was held from
July 6 to July 18, 1939, at New Rochelle, New York, before Henry
J. Kent, the Trial Examiner duly designated by the Board. The
Board, the respondent, and the Union were represented by counsel and
participated in the hearing. The Association failed to enter an ap-
pearance and took no part in the proceedings. Full opportunity to be
heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evi-
dence bearing on the issues was afforded all parties. Upon motion of
the Board's attorney, the Trial Examiner dismissed the complaint as
to Rita Di Benedetto and Marion Brower. During the hearing, coun-
sel for the Board moved to amend the complaint to allege that the
respondent on or about March 27, 1939, compelled, forced, and coerced
Mildred Dawley and Mildred Mason to quit their employment because
-AMERICAN WHITE CROSS LABORATORIES, INC. 363
they joined and assisted the Union. The motion was granted. At the
close of the hearing counsel for the Board moved to conform the
pleadings to the proof. The motion was granted. At the close of the
Board's case counsel for the respondent moved to dismiss the com-
plaint and the several allegations thereof. The motion was denied
except with respect to the allegation that the respondent kept under
surveillance the meetings and meeting places of the Union. In this
latter respect the motion was granted. At the close of the hearing
counsel for the respondent again moved that the complaint and the
several allegations thereof be dismissed. The Trial Examiner reserved
ruling at the hearing but subsequently denied the motion in his Inter-
mediate Report. During the course of the hearing, the Trial Ex-
aminer made several rulings on other motions and on objections to the
admission of evidence.
On January 16, 1940, the Trial Examiner filed his Intermediate Re-
port, copies of which were duly served upon the parties, finding that
the respondent had engaged in and was engaging in unfair labor prac-
tices affecting commerce, within the meaning of Section 8 (1), (2), (3),
and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act, but not within the meaning of
Section 8 (5) of the Act. He recommended that the respondent cease
and desist from its unfair labor practices and take certain affirmative
action remedial of their effect. Thereafter, the respondent filed ex-
ceptions to the Intermediate Report and a brief in support of its
exceptions.
On April 15, 1940, the respondent, the Union, the Association, and
the Regional Director for the Second Region entered into an agree-
ment in settlement of the case. On May 17, 1940, the above parties
entered into and filed with 'the Board a supplemental stipulation."
The agreement and supplemental stipulation provide as follows :
SUPPLEMENTAL STIPULATION
It is hereby stipulated and agreed by and between The Ameri-
can White Cross Laboratories, Inc., Textile Workers Union of
America, White Cross Employees Welfare Association, and
Elinore M. Herrick, Regional Director for the National Labor
Relations Board, Second Region :
I. An agreement made by and between the parties hereto on
the 15th day of April 1940, a true copy of which is attached
hereto and marked Appendix A, shall be deemed captioned in
the same manner as this Supplemental Stipulation is captioned.
II. White Cross Employees Welfare Association is a labor
organization within • the meaning of Section 2, subsection (5),
" The agreement of April 15, 1940, is embodied in Appendix A of the Supplemental
Stipulation.
364 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
of the National Labor Relations Act. White Cross Employees
Benefit Association is another name for the same labor organ-
ization also known as White Cross Employees Welfare Associa-
tion, which organization is a party to this Supplemental Stipu-
lation.
III. The following paragraph shall be added to the end of
SCHEDULE A of the agreement made on the 15th day of April
1940, a true copy of which agreement is attached hereto and
marked Appendix A :
And it is further ordered that the complaint, as amended, be,
and it hereby is, dismissed in so far as it alleges that the respond-
ent engaged in unfair labor practices within the meaning of
Section 8 (5) of the Act.
IV. All of the provisions of the agreement made on the 15th
day of April 1940, a true copy of which is attached hereto and
marked Appendix. A, are hereby reiterated and republished
except in so far as they may be inconsistent with the provisions
of this Supplemental Stipulation.
V. This Supplemental Stipulation shall be filed with the Chief
Trial Examiner of the Board and when so filed shall become a
part of the record of the above captioned proceeding.
VI. This Supplemental Stipulation shall not go into effect
unless and until it has received- the approval of the Board.
VII. The entire agreement among the parties hereto is con-
tained within the terms of the agreement made on the 15th day
of April 1940 and this Supplemental Stipulation and there is no
agreement of any kind which varies, alters, or adds to the terms
of these instruments.
APPENDIX A
Agreement made this 15th day of April, 1940, by and among
The American White Cross Laboratories, Inc., hereinafter re-
ferred to as the "Employer"; Textile Workers,Union of America,
hereinafter referred to as the "Union"; White Cross Employees
Welfare Association , hereinafter referred to as the "Association";
and Elinore M. Herrick , Regional Director , National Labor Rela-
tions Board, Second Region , hereinafter referred to as the
"Regional Director".
Whereas, the Union on April 25th, 1939 filed a third amended
charge against the Employer with the Regional Director, and
Whereas, the Regional Director on June 26 , 1939, issued a com-
plaint based on said charge against said employer, and
Whereas, a hearing was held from July 6 to July 18, 1939, on
said complaint before a duly appointed ;Trial Examiner of the
AMERICAN WHITE CROSS LABORATORIES, INC. 365
National Labor Relations Board, hereinafter referred to as the
Board, and
Whereas, said Trial Examiner on January 16, 1940, issued his
Intermediate Report in said proceeding which was served upon
all parties, and
Whereas, all parties desire to dispose of the issues created by
the complaint and the Intermediate Report without the necessity
of further proceedings before the board,
Now, therefore, it is mutually agreed :
1. The parties hereby waive their rights to further proceedings
before the Board and to the making of findings of fact and con-
clusions of law by the Board.
2. The parties agree that all the matters alleged in the third
amended charge and the complaint in the above proceeding shall
be deemed to have been disposed of by virtue of the orders of the
Board and of the United States Circuit Court of Appeals herein-
after described.
3. The parties hereby agree to the issuance by the Board, with-
out further notice of proceedings of an order, a copy of which
is annexed hereto as Schedule A and made part hereof, which
order shall have the same force and effect as if made after full
hearing presentation of evidence and the making of findings of
facts and conclusions of law thereon.
4. The parties hereby consent to the entry of an appropriate
United States Circuit Court of Appeals, without notice of appli-
cation therefor, of an enforcement order embodying the terms of
the Board's order set forth in Schedule A.
5. The employer admits that it is engaged in commerce within
the meaning of Section 2, subdivision 6 and 7, of the National
Labor Relations Act and likewise admits as fact the allegations
in Schedule B annexed hereto and made part hereof.
6. Nothing contained or referred to herein or in the orders
of the Board or in United States Circuit Court of Appeals herein
described shall be construed as a withdrawal or modification of
the charge filed by the Union against the Employer in another
proceeding known on the records of the Regional Director as
Case No. II-C-2589; nor shall it prejudice or impair the right
of the Regional Director to issue a complaint thereon.
7. The entire agreement among the parties is contained within
the terms of this instrument and there is no agreement of any
kind which varies, alters, or adds to the terms of this agreement.
8. This agreement of settlement shall be filed with the Chief
Trial Examiner of the Board and when so filed shall become a
part of the record of the above captioned proceeding.
366 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
9. This agreement shall not go into effect unless and until
it has received the approval of the Board.
SCHEDULE A
The respondent, The American White Cross Laboratories,
Inc., its officers, agents, successors and assigns, shall:
1. Cease and desist from :
(a) In any manner dominating or interfering with the ad-
ministration of, or contributing financial or other support to,
The American White Cross Employees Benefit Association or
any other labor organization of its employees;
(b) In any manner discouraging membership in the Textile
Workers Union of America or in any other labor organization
by discrimination against the employees with regard to the hire,
tenure or any condition or incident of their employment ;
(c) Urging, persuading or warning its employees not to be-
come or remain members of the Textile Workers Union of
America or of any labor organization of their own choosing;
(d) In any manner interfering with, restraining, or coercing
its employees in the exercise of their rights to self-organization;
to form, join or assist labor organizations; to bargain collectively
through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in
concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or
other mutual aid or protection.
2. Take the following affirmative action which will effectuate
the policies of the Act :
(a) Withdraw all recognition from the American White Cross
Benefit Association as the representative of its employees or any
of its employees, for the purpose of dealing with the respondent
concerning grievances, rates of pay, wages, hours of employ-
ment, or any other condition or incident of employment, and
completely disestablish said American White Cross Employees
Benefit Association as such representative;
(b) Offer to Mildred Dawley immediate and full reinstate-
ment to her former position or employment without prejudice
to her seniority or other rights and privileges;
(c) Pay over to the said Mildred Dawley the sum of Seventy
Five ($75) Dollars, as full compensation for any loss of pay
she may have suffered by reason of her discharge in violation
of the National Labor Relations Act.
(d) Post immediately in conspicuous places in its New Rochelle,
New York plant, and maintain for a period of at least sixty (60)
consecutive days, notices to its employees stating (1) that respond-
ent will cease and desist in the manner aforesaid; (2) that respond-
ent has withdrawn all recognition from the American White
AMERICAN WHITE CROSS LABORATORIES, INC. 367
Cross Employees Benefit Association as the representative of
respondent's employees for the purpose of dealing with the
respondent concerning grievances, labor disputes, wages, rates
of pay, hours of employment, or other conditions of employment,
and that the said Association is completely disestablished as such
representative; (3) that the contract between the respondent and
the said association is null and void and of no legal effect what-
soever.
(e) Notify in writing the Regional Director of the Board for
the Second Region, within (10) ten days of the receipt of a copy
of this order, setting forth in detail the steps the respondent has
taken to comply with the foregoing requirements.
SCHEDULE B
1. The American White Cross Laboratories, Inc., hereinafter
referred to as the respondent, is and has been since January 6th,
1912, a corporation duly organized under and existing by virtue
of the Laws of the State of New York, having its principal office
and place of business at 52 Webster Avenue, in the City of New
Rochelle, County of Westchester, and State of New York, and
is now and has been continuously engaged at said place of business
in the manufacture, sale and distribution of surgical dressings
and related products.
2. The principal raw materials purchased for use in the manu-
facture of surgical dressings or related products are raw cotton,
surgical gauze, absorbent cotton, crude rubber, chemicals and
decorated tin spools. During the year 1939, which is a representa-
tive year in respondent's business, approximately $200,000 of
such raw materials were purchased by the respondent, of which
approximately 80 percent by value were purchased from points
outside of the State of New York and shipped to its place of
business in New Rochelle.
3. During the year 1939, which is a representative year in re-
spondent's business, the total sales of respondent's manufactured
products were approximately $800,000 of which approximately
80 percent were sold by it and shipped to points outside of the
State of New York.
4. The respondent is engaged in commerce within the meaning
of Section 2, subdivisions 6 and 7 of the National Labor Relations
Act.
On May 21, 1940, the Board issued its order approving the above
stipulation and supplemental stipulation and making them a part
of the record. On May 27, 1940, the Board further ordered, pursuant
to Article II, Section 36 (d), and Article III, Section 10 (c) (4), of
368 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series -2, as,
amended, that the complaint case be severed from the representation
case, that a request of the Union for permission to withdraw its
petition be granted, and that Case No. R-1443 (the representation case).
be closed.
Upon the basis of the above agreement and supplemental stipula-
tion, and the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following::
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE RESPONDENT
American White Cross Laboratories, Inc., a New York corpora-
tion, with its principal place of business in New Rochelle, New York,,
is engaged in the manufacture, sale, and distribution of surgical
dressings and related products. During 1939, which is a representa-
tive year in the respondent's business, approximately $200,000 worth
of raw materials, consisting of raw cotton, surgical gauze, absorbent
cotton, crude rubber, chemicals, and decorated tin spools, were pur-
chased by the respondent. Eighty per cent of such raw materials
came from points outside New York. During the same period the
respondent's sales aggregated approximately $800,000, 80 per cent
of which were shipped to points outside New York.
We find that the above-described operations of the respondent
constitute a continuous flow of trade, traffic, and commerce among
the several States.
ORDER
Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and stipulation, and
the entire record in the case, and pursuant to Section 10 (c) of the
National Labor Relations Act, the National Labor Relations Board
hereby orders that the respondent, American White Cross Labora-
tories, Inc., New Rochelle, New York, and its officers, agents, suc-
cessors, and assigns shall:
1. Cease and desist from :
(a) In any manner dominating or interfering with the admin-
istration of, or contributing financial or other support to The
American White Cross Employees Benefit Association or any other
labor organization of its employees;
(b) In any manner discouraging membership in the Textile
Workers Union of America or in any other labor organization by
discrimination against the employees with regard to the hire, tenure,
or any condition or incident of their employment;
(c) Urging, persuading, or warning its employees not to become
or remain members of the Textile Workers Union of America or
of any labor organization of their own choosing;
AMERICAN WHITE CROSS LABORATORIES, INC. 369
(d) In any manner interfering with, restraining, or coercing its
employees in the exercise of their rights to self-organization, to form,
join , or assist labor organizations, to bargain collectively through
representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in concerted
activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual
aid or protection.
2. Take the following affirmative action which will effectuate the
policies of the Act :
(a) Withdraw all recognition from the American White Cross
Benefit Association as the representative of its employees or any of
its employees, for the purpose of dealing with the respondent con-
cerning grievances, rates of pay, wages, hours of employment, or any
other condition or incident of employment, and completely dis-
establish said American White Cross Employees Benefit Association
as such representative;
(b) Offer to Mildred Dawley immediate and full reinstatement
to her former position or employment without prejudice to her
seniority or other rights and privileges ;
(c) Pay over to the said Mildred Dawley the sum of Seventy Five
($75) Dollars, as full compensation for any loss of pay she may
have suffered by reason of her discharge in violation of the National
Labor Relations Act;
(d) Post immediately in conspicuous places in its New Rochelle,
New York plant, and maintain for a period of at least sixty (60)
consecutive days, notices to its employees stating: (1) that respond-
ent will cease and desist in the manner aforesaid; (2) that respondent
has withdrawn all recognition from the American White Cross Em-
ployees Benefit Association as the representative of respondent's
employees for the purpose of dealing with the respondent concern-
ing grievances, labor disputes, wages, rates of pay, hours of em-
ployment, or other conditions of employment, and that the said
Association is completely disestablished as such representative; (3)
that the contract between the respondent and the said Association
is null and void and of no legal effect whatsoever;
(e) Notify in writing the Regional Director of the Board for
the Second Region, within ten (10) days of the receipt of a copy
of this Order, setting forth in detail the steps the respondent has
taken to comply with the foregoing requirements.
AND rr IS FURTHER ORDERED that the complaint, as amended, be,
and it hereby is, dismissed in so far as it alleges that the respondent
engaged in unfair labor practices, within the meaning of Section
8 (5) of the Act.