Colonial Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Nov 12, 1946

71 N.L.R.B. 644 (N.L.R.B. 1946)

In the Matter of COLONIAL CORPORATION, EMPLOYER and UNITED
ELECTRICAL, RADIO AND MACHINE WORKERS OF AMERICA, C. I. Oy
PETITIONER
Case No.1-RD223.Decided November 12, 1946
Messrs. Benjamin Levin and A. Morris Kobrick, both of Boston,
Mass., for the Employer.
Mr. James Marino,, of Boston, Mass., for the Petitioner.
Mr. Warren H. Leland, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at Boston,
Massachusetts, on August 15, 1946, before Leo J. Halloran, hearing
officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from
prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations
Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
Colonial Corporation, a Massachusetts corporation maintaining its
plant and offices in Roxbury, Massachusetts, is engaged in the manufac-
ture of electrical candle sets. During the 3-month period commenc-
ing May 1, 1946, the Employer purchased raw materials valued at
approximately $15,000 from sources outside the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts. During the same period, the Employer sold finished
products valued in excess of $30,000 to customers located outside the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
H. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress
of Industrial Organizations, claiming to represent employees of the
Employer.
71 N. L. R. B., No. 98.
644
COLONIAL CORPORATION
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
645
The Employer refuses to recognize the Petitioner as the exclusive
bargaining representative of employees of the Employer until the
Petitioner has been certified by the Board in an appropriate unit.
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning
the representation of employees of thb Employer, within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
In accordance with the agreement of the parties, we find that all
production and maintenance employees of the Employer at its Rox-
bury, Massachusetts, plant, excluding executives, office and clerical
employees, salespeople, and all supervisory employees with authority
to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in
the status of employees, or effectively recommend such action, consti-
tute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within
the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
The Employer urges that an election would be inappropriate at the
present time because it does not now have a full complement of em-
ployees. The record reveals that on July 15, 1946, there were approxi-
mately 55 employees in the alleged appropriate unit. On August 15,
1946, the day of the hearing, despite a work shortage lasting approxi-
mately 2 weeks, the number of persons in the alleged appropriate unit
had increased to 72. At the time of the hearing, the Employer was
hiring and training employees at the rate of 15 a week, and it antici-
pated that within 4 weeks this rate would be increased to about 25 a
week, until it reached a maximum strength of 300 employees.
Considering the present turn-over, the Employer estimates that it
will reach its maximum strength some time between November 15,
1946, and January 15, 1947. And the Employer has stated that "it is
by no means unlikely that the plant will have its force of 300 workers
well in advance of November 15, the suggested date." It appears,
therefore, that according to the Employer's own calculations the
present number of employees in the unit should be in excess of 50
percent of the anticipated full complement of employees. Since the
present complement is clearly a representative group, we are of the
opinion that an election at the present time is appropriate.'
I See Matter of The Firestone Tired Rubber Company, 69 N. L. R. B. 634 ; and Matter of
Tuttle Silver Company, Inc , 66 N L. R. B. 238.
646 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
We shall, however, entertain a new petition for an investigation
and certification of representatives affecting the employees involved
herein within less than a year, but not before the expiration of 6
months from the date of any certification we may issue in the instant
proceeding upon proof, (1) that the number of employees in the ap-
propriate unit is more than double the number eligible to vote in the
election hereinafter directed; and (2) that the Petitioner represents
a substantial number of employees in the expanded appropriate unit.2
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the
purposes of collective bargaining with Colonial Corporation, Roxbury,
Massachusetts, an election by secret ballot shall be conducted as early
as possible, but not later than thirty (30) days from the date of this
Direction, under the direction and supervision of the Regional Di-
rector for the First Region, acting in this matter as agent for the
National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Sections 203.55 and
203.56, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-
Series 4, 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 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 or not they desire to be represented
by United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America, C. I.
0., for the purposes of collective bargaining.
CHAIRMAN HERZOG took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Direction of Election.
2 See Matter of Aluminum Company of America, 52 N. L. R. B 1040.