Consolidated Paper Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsMar 5, 1940

21 N.L.R.B. 125 (N.L.R.B. 1940)

In the Matter of CONSOLIDATED PAPER COMPANY and CONSOLIDATED PAPER WORKERS' LOCAL INDUSTRIAL UNION, #902, AFFILIATED WITH THE CONGRESS OF INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATIONS Case No. R-1701.-Decided March 5, 1940 Paper Manufacturing Industry-Investigation of Representatives : controversy concerning representation of employees : Company refuses to recognize either of rival unions until certified by the Board-Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : all employees at Aurora , Illinois , plant, except those on Company's pay roll under the headings , "Supervision ," "Office," "Inspectors," and "Truck Drivers" ; Company 's contention for a five-plant unit not sustained .Election Ordered Mr. Charles F. McErlean, for the Board. Mr. John Meloaat, of Monroe, Mich., and Mr. Altor G. Bale, of Aurora, Ill., for the Company. Mr. John J. Brownlee, of Chicago, Ill., and Mr. Albert Krzywonos, of Joliet, Ill., for the Union. Mr. John Chivari, of Aurora, Ill., for the Independent. Mrs. Augusta Spaulding, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION STATEMENT OF THE CASE On October 11, 1939, Consolidated Paper Workers' Local Industrial Union, #902, Affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organiza- tions, herein called the Union, filed with the Regional Director for the Thirteenth Region (Chicago, Illinois) a petition, and on January 16, 1940, an amended petition, alleging that a question affecting com- merce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of Con- solidated Paper Company, Aurora, Illinois, and Monroe, Michigan, herein called the Company, and requesting an investigation and cer- tification of representatives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act. On January 13, 1940, the National Labor Relations Board, herein called the Board, acting pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the Act and Article III, Section 3, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regula- tions-Series 2, ordered an investigation and authorized the Regional 21 N. L. R. B., No. 20. 125 126 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Director to conduct it and to provide for an appropriate hearing upon due notice. On January 16, 1940, the Regional Director issued a notice of hearing, copies of which were duly served upon the Company, the Union, and Independent Paper Workers' Organization, herein called the Independent, an unaffiliated labor organization claiming to rep- resent employees directly affected by the investigation. Pursuant to the notice, a hearing was held on January 25, 1940, at Aurora, Illi- nois, before Henry W. Schmidt, the Trial Examiner duly designated by the Board. The Board and the Independent were represented by counsel, the Union by its officials, and the Company by its officials. All parties participated in the hearing. Full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evi- dence bearing on the issues was afforded all parties. At the com- mencement of the hearing the Company requested that the Board take judicial notice of the entire record in Case No. R-1686, a rep- resentation proceeding concerning other plants of the Company in Michigan, in which hearing had been held in Detroit, Michigan, on January 18, 1940.1 No objections were made, it being stated that this request did not include incorporation of the record in Case No. R-1686 into the record in the present proceeding. At the hearing the Union moved to amend its petition dated January 16, 1940, in respect to the description of the appropriate bargaining unit. The Trial Examiner did not rule on this-motion. The motion is hereby granted. During the course of the hearing the Trial Examiner made several rulings on the admission of evidence. The Board has re- viewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner and finds that no prejudi- cial errors were committed. The rulings are hereby affirmed. Upon the entire record in the case, the Board make the following : FINDINGS OF FACT 1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY Consolidated Paper Company is a Michigan corporation, having its principal office and place of business in Monroe, Michigan. The Company is engaged in the manufacture of paperboard products, such as bookbinding board, corrugated cases, folding paper boxes, and folding boxboard. The Company has five plants. Three plants are situated in Monroe, Michigan, within the radius of a mile : North Division Plant with 750 employees, South Division Plant with 723 employees, and Plant No. 1 with 122 employees. At River Rouge, Michigan, 31 miles from Monroe, is Plant No. 10, with 171 employees ; i See Matter of Consolidated Paper Company and Local Industrial Union, Locals 1001 and 1000 (C. 1. O.), 21 N. L. R . B. 116, decided this day. CONSOLIDATED PAPER COMPANY 127 and at Aurora, Illinois, 300 miles from Monroe, Michigan, is Plant No. 2, with 149 employees. In its petition the Union claims to repre- sent the employees at the Aurora plant. The principal product of the Company at its Aurora plant is bind- ing-board used in the book industry. For the year ending June 30, 1939, the Company used 22,542 tons of raw materials, consisting of waste paper, carbon black, alum, and coal, at the Aurora plant. Of this tonnage 76 tons were shipped to the Aurora plant from points outside Illinois. During the same period the Company shipped 7,466 tons of binding-boards and allied products from the Aurora plant, 2,814 tons of which were sent to points outside Illinois, amounting to 38 per cent of the total products. The Company maintains sales offices at New York City; Chicago, Illinois; Buffalo, New York; Kansas City, Missouri; Cleveland, Ohio; Boston, Massachusetts; Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; Detroit, Michigan ; and Toledo, Ohio. H. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED . The Consolidated Paper Workers' Local Industrial Union, # 902, is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Or- ganizations. It admits to membership employees of the Company at the Aurora plant. Independent Paper Workers' Organization is an unaffiliated labor organization. It admits to membership employees at the Aurora plant. III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION About September 29, 1939, the Union requested the Company to bargain with it as the exclusive bargaining representative of the pro- duction and maintenance employees at the Aurora plant. The In- dependent also requested the Company to bargain with it as the representative of the employees at the Aurora plant. Both claimed to represent a majority of employees at that plant. The Company takes the position that it will recognize the bargaining representatives certified by the Board. We find that a question has arisen concerning the representation of employees of the Company. IV. THE EFFECT OF THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION UPON COMMERCE We find that the question concerning representation which has arisen in connection with the operations of the Company, described in Section I above, has a close, intimate, and substantial relation to 128 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD trade, traffic, and commerce among the several States, and tends to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce and the free flow of commerce. V. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT The Union and the Independent stipulated that a unit appropriate for collective bargaining consists of all employees of the Company at the Aurora plant except those listed on the Company's pay roll under the headings, "Supervision," "Office," "Inspectors," and "Truck Drivers." The Company does not disagree as to the description of employees in the above stipulation, but contends that such employees at all its five plants constitute a single bargaining unit. In support of a unit limited to the employees of the Aurora plant it appears that such plant is 300 miles from the nearest Michigan plant of the Company. The distance gives no opportunity for in- termingling with employees of other plants. The Aurora plant com- pletes its own product and is the only plant that produces binder- board. It receives its raw materials directly from the sellers and ships its finished products from the plant directly to the purchasers or the consumers. It could function independently as an entirely sep- arate plant if a purchasing and bookkeeping department were installed. In support of the Company's contention it appears that all plants are under one general management. A group-insurance policy covers the employees at all the plants. The pay rolls, billing and sales, general supervision, and the majority of the purchasing for all the plants is handled at Monroe, Michigan. The custom of transferring men during slack seasons from the smaller Michigan plants to the larger Michigan plants has been developed under a single labor policy, and the Company questions the desirability of the continu- ance of that practice if only the smaller plants are unionized. How- ever, there is no transfer of employees from the Aurora plant to the Michigan plants, and transfers from the latter plants to the Aurora plant are rare. Although the paper products of the several plants differ, they are capable of making the same product. It appears that comparable conditions of labor and wages and hours prevail in the several plants. Only the three small plants of the Company are organized. The two large plants in Monroe, at which most of the Company's em- ployees work, are unorganized. The employees at the two small Michigan plants are organized by another C. I. O. affiliate.2 Giving due weight to the Company's suggestions, we see no reason to deny to 2 See Matter of Consolidated Paper Company and Local Industrial Union, Locals 1001 and 1006 (C. 1 0 ), decided this day, 21 N L R. B 116 CONSOLIDATED PAPER COMPANY 129 employees of this small plant at Aurora the right to bargain collec- tively through representatives of their own choosing, although under other circumstances a unit comprising all five plants might not be deemed inappropriate. We find that all employees of the Company at the Aurora plant except those listed on the Company's pay roll under the headings, "Supervision," "Office," "Inspectors," and "Truck Drivers," constitute` a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining and that said unit will insure to employees of the Company at the Aurora plant the full benefits of their right to self-organization and to collec- tive bargaining and otherwise effectuate the policies of the Act. VI. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES The Union and Independent stipulated that the question concerning representation should be resolved by an election by secret ballot. We find that an election by secret ballot is necessary to resolve the ques- tion concerning representation and shall direct the holding of such an election. The Union and Independent stipulated that those eligible to vote in the election should be the employees in the appropriate unit whose names appear on Board Exhibits 8-A, 8-B, 8-C, and 8-D, the Company's pay roll of January 14, 1940, for the Aurora plant. We will direct that those eligible to vote in the elections shall be the em- ployees described in the above stipulation, including employees who have been hired on a permanent basis between January 25, 1940, the date of the hearing, and the date of this Direction and excluding em- ployees who since January 25, 1940, have quit or been discharged for cause. Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following: CONCLUSIONS OP LAW 1. A question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the repre- sentation of employees of Consolidated Paper Company, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act. 2. All employees of the Company at the Aurora plant except those listed on the Company's pay roll under the headings, "Supervision," "Office," "Inspectors," and "Truck Drivers," constitute a unit appro- priate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act. 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 Re- 130 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD lations Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 8, of National La- bor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, it is hereby DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation authorized by the Board to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining ,with Consolidated Paper Company, Monroe, Michigan, and Aurora, Illinois, 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 of Election, under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Thirteenth Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Article III, Section 9, of said Rules and Regulations, among all em- ployees of Consolidated Paper Company at its Aurora plant whose names appear on Board Exhibits 8-A, 8-B, 8-C, and 8-D, the Com- pany's pay roll of January 14, 1940, for the Aurora plant, including employees who have been hired on a permanent basis between Janu- ary 25, 1940, the date of the hearing, and the date of this Direction, but excluding those whose names appear under the headings, "Super- vision," "Office," "Inspectors," and "Truck Drivers," and those who since January 25, 1940, have quit or been discharged for cause, to determine whether said employees desire to be represented by Con- solidated Paper Workers' Local Industrial Union, #902, Affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, or by Independent Paper Workers' Organization, for the purposes of collective bargain- ing, or by neither.