Hazleton Brick Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Sep 19, 1942

44 N.L.R.B. 222 (N.L.R.B. 1942)

In the Mattel' Of HAZLETON BRICK COMPANY and UNITED BRTCK & BLOCK
WORKERS L. I. UNION Nol 1227, C. I. O.
Case No. If-1410.-Decided September 19,194
Jurisdiction : brick manufacturing industry
Investigation - and Certification of Representatives : existence, of question.- re-
fusal to accord petitioner recognition : contract for 31/2 years, which had been',
in effect for 13 months, with union which had changed its affiliation and the-
successorship of which was a matter of dispute between rival organizations.
held no bar; election necessary
Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : all employees, exclusive of the
supervisory and clerical force ; stipulation as to.
Practice and 'Procedure : 'notwithstanding-jurisdictional dispute between affili-
ated but competing labor organizations, Board made a determination of repre-
sentatives where the effective resolution of the existing conflict could not be
had without resort to the administrative processes of the Act.
Mr. Hugh L. Cbmnpbell, of Hazle Village, Pa., for the Company.
Mr. Philip F. Boller, of Wilkes-Barre, Pa., for United Construction
Workers.
Mr. Thomas Canna, of Wilkes-Barre, Pa., for Local 1227.
Mr. George J. Hadfinoff, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon petition duly filed by United Brick & Block Workers L. L
Union No. 1227, C. I.-O., herein called Local 1227, alleging that a
question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representa-
tion of employees of Hazleton Brick Company, Hazleton, Pennsyl-
vania, herein called the Company, the' National Labor Relations
Board provided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice before
J. J. Cunniff, Trial Examiner. Said hearing was held at Hazleton,
Pennsylvania, on August 27, 1942. The Company, Local 1227, and
United Construction 'Workers Division of District 50, United Mine
Workers of America, herein called United Construction Workers, ap-
peared, participated, and were afforded full opportunity to be heard,
44N L. R. B, No. 39.
222
HAZLETO \T BRICK COMPANY 223
to examine 'and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce, evidence
bearing, on the issues. The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the,
hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF TI-IE COMPANY
Hazleton Brick Company, a Pennsylvania corporation, is engaged
at Hazleton, Pennsylvania, in the manufacture, sale, and distribution
of bricks. During the calendar year 1941, the Company secured all
its raw materials from, its premises at Hazleton, Pennsylvania., Dur-
ing the same period approximately 25 percent of the Company's
finished products, valued at approximately $39,000, were sold outside
the State of Pennsylvania. The Company admits that it is engaged
in commerce within the meaning.of•tlie National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
United Brick R Block Workers L. I. Union No. 1227, is a labor
organization affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations,'
admitting to membership employees of the Company.
United Con'struction Workers Division of District 50 is a labor
organization affiliated with the United Mine Workers of America,
admitting to membership employees of the Company.
IIi. TIIE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
In July 1942, Local 1227 requested the Company to recognize it as
the-collective bargaining representative of the Company's-employees.
The Company refused the request. On August 3, 1942, Local 1227 filed
its petition requesting an investigation and certification of- repre-
sentatives. The Company contend's that a contract between the Com-
pany and Local 141 of United Construction Workers Organizing Com-
Inittee,l constitutes a bar to this proceeding. The United 'Construc-
tion Workers appeared specially and moved for a dismissal of the
petition on'the same ground as that stated by the Company.
The 'Company's employees were organized into Local 141 of United
Construction Workers Organizing Committee some time in May 1940.
After negotiations with the Company. Local 141 entered into a closed
shop contract with the Company to be effective from October 1, 1940, tO
April 15, 1944, and renewable from year to year thereafter in the
' The iepiesentacive of United Cousti action \Vorkeis .who appeaied at the hearme
asserted that United Constiuctiou \Voikeis a division of Distuct 50, United Mine -woikeis
of Ameiu•a, iNas the successor to United Construction \Voikeis Organizing Committee
224 :DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
absence of notification by either party. • Since October 1, 1940, and,
until the happening of the events hereinafter recited, both the Com-
pany and Local 141 have operated under the terms and conditions, of
this contract. -
At a meeting of Local 141 in April 1942, and as a result of dissension
between the United Mine Workers of America and the Congress of
Industrial Organizations, the membership present unanimously
adopted a resolution rejecting affiliation with District 50, United Mine
Workers of America. On July 9, 1942, United Construction Workers
rev=oked the charter of Local 141.2 On July 20, 1942, the former mem-.
bership of Local 141 obtained a charter from the United Brick &•
Block Workers of America, becoming Local 1227. Upon, receipt of the
new charter all former officers of Local 141 became officers of Local
1227 and all former members of Local 141 became members of Local
1227. No other local union of United Construction Workers,.
U. M. W. A.,.in lieu of Local 141 was ever organized. The Company
having been, informed of the change in affiliation of its employees
'refused recognition to Local 1227, as the bargaining representative
of its employees. Thereafter, Local 1227 filed its petition requesting
an investigation and certification of representatives.
In view of all the circumstances, we cannot agree with the contention
advanced by the Company and United Construction Workers, that
the contract between the Company and Local 141 constitutes. a bar to
the present proceeding. The contracting union is no longer in exist-
ence and two rival organizations, each claiming to be the successor to
the contracting union, seek to represent the employees. Under these
circumstances, the contract cannot bar a present investigation and
determination of representatives.3 Moreover, we have frequently. held
that a contract for an unreasonable length of time and which has been
in effect for a year or more does not constitute a bar to an investigation
and certification of representatives." At the date of the hearing the
contract of October 1, 1940, had been in effect for more than 18 months
and had almost 2 years to run.
Although we take judicial notice that both Local 1227 and United
Construction Workers, are affiliated with the Congress of Industrial
Organizations, as we stated in the Matter of Harbison-Walker Re-
fractories Company and United Construction Workers, Division of
District 50, U. M. W., affiliated with C. 'I. 0.; and Industrial Union'
affiliated with, C. I. 0:5
2The charter was surrendered to United Construction Workers, about 1 week later.
3Hatter of Ila,bison-lValher Refractories Co. and United Brick Workers L I Union No.
1207, C 1 0, 43 N L R B 1349
+illatter of Wichita Union Stoclfa1ds Companil and Packinghouse Workers Organizing
Committee, Local No 91,, affiliated with C. 1 0 , 40 N L R B. 369 and cases therein cited.
1 43 N. L. R. B. 936.
HAZLETON BRICK COMPANY 225
"In the past the Board has, as a' matter of policy, refused to permit
rival unions affiliated with the same parent organization to resort to
the administrative processes of the Act for settlement of their rep-
resentation disputes where adequate and appropriate machinery was
available to them under the procedures of the parent organization.
At oral argument in the present case, counsel for the C. I. 0. stated
that the C. I. 0. had attempted to settle"the dispute here involved
but that U. C. W.-U. M. W. had refused to recognize the superior
authority of the parent body. It is consequently apparent that effec-
tive resolution of the existing conflict cannot be had without resort
to the administrative processes of the Act."
A report prepared by the Regional Director, and introduced in
evidence at the hearing indicates that Local 1227 represents a substan-
tial number, of employees in the unit hereinafter found to be
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 National Labor
Relations Act.
TV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
We find, in accordance with a stipulation by the parties, that all
employees of the Company at its Hazleton, Pennsylvania, plant, ex-
clusive of the supervisory and clerical force, constitute a unit appro-
priate 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.
In view of its claim to rights under the closed shop contract, we
shall direct that United Construction Workers be placed on the ballot
even though it made no showing of present representation among the
employees of the Company.
° The Regional Director reported that Local 1227 submitted 66 applications for mem-
bership cards, of which 58 bear either the written or printed names of persons whose
navies appear on the Conipany's pay roll of July 15, 1912, which contains the names of
64 employees in the alleged appropriate unit The Regional Director further reported that
the United Construction workers informed him that it has not secured any application,
designation , or authorization cards from employees of the Company.
487 495-42-vol 44--15
226 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 Rela-
tions Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 8, of National Labor
Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, it is
hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation ordered by the Board
to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining
with Hazleton Brick Company, Hazleton, Pennsylvania, 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 direc-
tion and supervision of the Regional Director for the Fourth 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 the employees in the unit found appropriate in Section IV,
above, who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately pre-
ceding the date of this Direction, including any such employees who
did not work during said pay-roll period because they were ill or on
vacation or in the active military service or training df the United
States, or temporarily laid off, but excluding any who have since quit
or been discharged for cause, to determine whether they desire to be
represented by United Brick & Block Workers L. I. Union No. 1227,
affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, or by United
Construction Workers Division of District 50, United Mine Workers
of America, for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by neither.
MR. WM. M. LEISERSON took no part in the consideration of the
above Decision and Direction of Election.
In the Matter Of HAZELTON BRICK COMPANY and UNITED BRICK A N]>
BLOCK-WoRKERs L. I. UNION No. 1227, C. I. O.
Case No. R-4210
AMENDMENT TO DIRECTION OF ELECTION
October 10, 1942
On September 19, 1942, the National Labor Relations Board, herein
called the Board, issued a Decision and Direction of Election in the
above-entitled proceeding,' directing that an election be held not
later than thirty (30) days from the date of the Direction, under
the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Fourth
Region (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania). The Board, having been ad-
vised by the Regional Director that a longer period within which
to hold the election is necessary, hereby amends the Direction of
Election by striking therefrom the words "not later than thirty (30),
days from the date of this Direction," and substituting therefor the,
words "not later than forty-five (45) days from the date of this.
Direction."
144 N. L. R. B. 222.
44 N. L. R. B., No. 39a.
227
G