International Shoe Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Dec 31, 1946

71 N.L.R.B. 1318 (N.L.R.B. 1946)

In the Matter Of INTERNATIONAL SIIOE COMPANY, Box DEPARTMENT,
EMPLOYER and RETAIL, WHOLESALE AND DEPARTMENT STORE UNION,
CIO, PETITIONER
Case No. 14-R-1471.-Decided December 31,1916
Messrs. A. G. Eberle, Richard 0. Runner, and L. B. Brown, all of St.
Louis, Mo., for the Employer.
Messrs. Lou Berra and Phillip Reichardt, both of St. Louis, Mo., for
the Petitioner.
Messrs. John A. Glatt and Herman Hartinan, both of St. Louis,
Mo., for the Independent.
Mr. Charles Bond, of St. Louis, Mo., for the A. F. of L.
Mr. Warren H. Leland, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
ORDER
Upon a, petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at St. Louis,
Mo., on August 19 and 22, 1946, before Keith W. Blinn , hearing of-
ficer . 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
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
International Shoe Company, a Delaware corporation with its
principal office in St. Louis, Missouri, operates shoe factories, tan-
neries, and auxiliary plants in several states in the United States. We
are concerned in this proceeding only with the Employer's Box De-
partment located at 3417 South Broadway, St. Louis, Missouri. Dur-
ing the year 1945, the Employer purchased raw materials and supplies
valued in excess of $800,000, of which more than 50 percent was re-
ceived from points outside the State of Missouri. During the same
period, the Employer manufactured and distributed finished products
valued in excess of $1,500,000, of which more than 50 percent was
shipped and distributed to points outside the State of Missouri.
The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
71 N L R. B No 207.
1318
INTERNATIONAL SHOE COMPANY
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
1319'
The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress,
of Industrial Organizations, claiming to represent employees of the
Employer.
Delmar Warehouse Employees Association, herein called the In-
dependent, is an unaffiliated labor organization, claiming to repre-
sent employees of the Employer.
III. THE ALLEGED QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On May 29, 1944, the Employer and the Independent executed a
collective bargaining agreement providing, inter alia, as follows:
Article XI: Amendment to this agreement may be made at
any time during the life of this agreement by mutual consent of
Organization representatives and Company representatives. Such
amendments shall be in writing and signed by both parties, shall
become a part of this agreement, and shall terminate at the same
time as does this agreement.
Article XII: This agreement shall be effective from May 25,"
1944, until May 25, 1945, and for each annual period thereafter-
unless, upon request of the Company not less than fifteen (15)
days, nor more than thirty (30) days prior to May 25, 1945, or
May 25th of any year thereafter, the Organization fails to pro-
duce proof satisfactorily to the Company, prior to May 25th of
that year, that it represents a majority of the employees covered'
by this agreement, or unless terminated by written notice of can-
cellation given by either party to the other not less than thirty
(30) nor more than sixty (60) days prior to May 25, 1945, or
May 25th of any year thereafter,
On April 23, 1946, the Independent advised the Employer, by let-
ter, that it desired to negotiate certain amendments to the existing
contract. Thereafter, on May 4, 1946, the Independent furnished
the Employer with a list of eight matters concerning which it desired
to negotiate.' "
On May 9, 1946, in accordance with the provisions of the 1944
contract, the Independent submitted to the Employer proof, in the
form of an affidavit sworn to by one of its officials, that it represented
a majority of the Employer's employees. On May 14, 1946, the Em-
ployer and Independent met to negotiate, and the Employer submitted
a proposed new contract for discussion.2 At this meeting the parties
I These matters included a check-off system 2 weeks' vacation after 2 vears' seniority
6 holidays with pay ; 10 days' sick leave and "30 clays' accumulation in 3 years" , minimum
starting rate of 70 cents per hour increased to SO cents in 60 days 10112 cents per hour
increase effective June 1, 1946, clrstiihution of emplotees to other departments, should a
department be shut clown , and a more clarified senioritn clause
2 The contract pioposed to amend the 1944 agreement by adding among other things:
provisions for a check-off of dues , for double time pay for work on Sundays, for certain
1320 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
agreed only to accept the check-off provision contained in the proposed
new contract and to retain the seniority clause of the 1944 agreement.
Following this conference, a notice signed by duly authorized repre-
sentatives of the Employer and Independent was posted in the plant
on May 27, 1946, advising the employees that the 1944 contract had
been renewed and -Would be effective until "at least May 25, 1947."
The Petitioner advanced its rival claim to representation on May
29, 1946, and on the same day filed the petition in this proceeding.
Subsequently, on June 17, 1946, the Employer and the Independent
met to discuss the matter of wages. They met again on June 19, 1946,
and agreed to a 7-cent per hour increase, subject to approval of the
Wage Stabilization Board,3 and they also reached agreement on a new
vacation plan 4
The Employer contends that the 1944 contract, as renewed, precludes
a current determination of representatives. We agree.
All negotiations by the contracting parties before May 27, 1946,
were effectively closed on that day by the posting of the notice of
renewal which was signed by their representatives. When this
occurred the Petitioner had not yet advanced its claim to representa-
tion, nor had it filed its petition. On May 27, 1946, it is clear, the
1944 contract, as renewed, was a bar to an election.
It is true that the contracting parties dealt with each other after
that date. But inasmuch as the few matters then discussed were
within the purview of Article XI of the 1944 contract, which per-
mitted amendments, we cannot conclude that there was such an
`'opening up" as would warrant the direction of an election.6
Accordingly, we find that the 1944 contract is a bar to a current
determination of representatives, and we shall dismiss the petition.
ORDER ,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for investigation and certifica-
tion of representatives of employees of International Shoe Company,
Box Department, St. Louis, Missouri, filed by Retail, Wholesale and
Department Store Union, CIO, be, and it hereby is, dismissed.
rights to accrue to employees whose wages are changed from piece work to hourly rates or
vice versa; for "make-up" pay paid by the Employer to employees who have not received
their normal compensalioi while on jury service , and for a new vacation plan
3 The Wage Stabilization Board soon thereafter approved the increase.
4 The wage increase and vacation plan have been put into effect, although these changes
have not yet been incorporated in the 1944 contract
See Matter of Green Ran Diop Forge Companit, 57 N L R B 1417
We need not say what effect we would have given to a petition filed very shortly before
the renewal notice was posted
6 Contrast Matter of Olin Industries, Inc , 67 N L R B 1043, and Matter of U. S.
Vanadium Corporation, 6S N L R B 3S9, wherein the contracting parties negotiated with
respect to subjects which were not within the compass of a clause allowing certain changes
duiing the contract term In those cases, the Board directed elections Contrast, also,
Matter of Duquesne Light Com pany, 71 N L R B. 336, wherein the contracting parties
undertook virtually to rewrite their agreement, claiming exemption by reason of a broad
contractual provision permitting amendments There, too, the Board ordered an election.