Malcolm Konner Chevrolet, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 18, 1963

141 N.L.R.B. 541 (N.L.R.B. 1963)

MALCOLM KONNER CHEVROLET, INC., ETC. 541
Malcolm Konner Chevrolet, Inc., and Konner Chevrolet, Inc.
and George Gibson and Amalgamated Local Union 355, Party
to the Contract
Amalgamated Local Union 355 and George F. Gibson and Mal-
colm Konner Chevrolet , Inc., and Konner Chevrolet, Inc.,
Party to the Contract . Cases Nos. 22-CA-1282 and 22-CB-527.
''larch 18, 1963
DECISION AND ORDER
On November 9, 1962, Trial Examiner James V. Constantine issued
his Intermediate Report in the above-entitled proceeding, finding
that the Respondents had engaged in and were engaging in certain
unfair labor practices and recommending that they cease and desist
therefrom and take certain affirmative action, as set forth in the
attached Intermediate Report. He also found that the Respondents
had not engaged in certain other alleged unfair labor practices and
recommended dismissal of these allegations of the complaint. There-
after, the Respondents and the General Counsel filed exceptions to the
Intermediate Report and supporting briefs.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the Act, the Board
has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-
member panel [Chairman McCulloch and Members Rodgers and
Fanning].
The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner made
at the hearing and finds that no prejudicial error was committed.
The rulings are hereby affirmed. The Board has considered the Inter-
mediate Report and the entire record in these cases, including the
exceptions and briefs, and hereby adopts the findings, conclusions,
and recommendations of the Trial Examiner, except as noted below.'
ORDER
The Board adopts as its Order the Trial Examiner's Recommended
Order with the modifications noted below 2
'The Trial Examiner found , and we agree , that Respondent Donner Chevrolet, Inc.,
gave unlawful assistance to Respondent Local 355 by soliciting membership for it, and
also coercively interrogated its employees as to whether they had signed or circulated a
petition stating that they did not wish to be represented by Local 355, and unlawfully
discharged employee Gibson for opposing Local 355. We shall enter our usual order in
such circumstances, which the Trial Examiner neglected to do, that the Respondent
Employer withdraw and withhold recognition from, and cease giving effect to its con-
tracts with, the Respondent Union, unless and until the Union has been certified by the
Board. See, e.g., A. C. Smith Corporation, Granite City Plant, 132 NLRB 339; Trenton
Manufacturing and Distributing Company, 129 NLRB 797.
2 Change paragraph (d) in section B, subsection 1, to paragraph ( e) and substitute
therefor the following paragraph ( d), and make a similar addition to the counterpart
thereof in Appendix B:
(d) Recognizing or bargaining with Local 355 as the collective -bargaining agent
of its shop workers and salesmen , and performing, enforcing , or giving effect to its
contracts of June 30, 1962, with Local 355, or any modification , supplement , renewal,
141 NLRB No. 43.
542 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
INTERMEDIATE REPORT AND RECOMMENDED ORDER
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon two separate charges filed by George F. Gibson on June 19, 1962,' the
General Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board, by the Regional Director
for the Twenty-second Region (Newark, New Jersey), issued his consolidated com-
plaint , dated August 3, 1962,2 against Malcolm Konner Chevrolet, Inc., and Konner
Chevrolet, Inc. (Case No. 22-CA-1282), and Amalgamated Local Union 355 (Case
No. 22-CB-527). As amended, said complaint in substance alleges that Respond-
ent Employers have engaged in and are engaging in conduct forbidden by Section
8(a)(1), (2), (3), and (4) of the National Labor Relations Act, herein called the
Act, and that Respondent Local 355 has engaged in and is engaging in conduct
proscribed by Section 8(b) (1) (A) and (2) of the Act. Respondent Employers and
Respondent Union each filed an answer which, as amended at the trial, admitted
some facts but denied committing any unfair labor practices.
Pursuant to due notice, a hearing was held before Trial Examiner James V. Con-
stantine at Newark, New Jersey, on September 4 and 5. All parties were repre-
sented at and participated in the hearing, and were given and availed themselves of
an opportunity to adduce evidence, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and
to offer oral argument. The parties were also granted the right to file briefs. Re-
spondent Employers have submitted briefs.
Upon the entire record in this case, and from my observation of the witnesses, I
make the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF RESPONDENT EMPLOYERS
Malcolm Konner Chevrolet, Inc., a New Jersey corporation, was engaged until
June 4 at Caldwell, New Jersey, as a franchised dealer for new and used Chevrolet
cars. Its president and treasurer is Malcolm Konner, its secretary is Malcolm's
wife, Florence, and its only stockholders are said Malcolm and Florence Konner.
As hereinafter found, this corporation went out of business and was succeeded on
June 4 by Malcolm Konner Chevrolet Corp. at Paramus, New Jersey, and that the
latter is owned and operated by the former's stockholders. Both corporations en-
gaged in the business of selling at retail automobiles, automobile parts, and related
products During the year preceding June 4 Malcolm Konner Chevrolet, Inc., sold
products valued in excess of $500.000 and received goods valued in excess of $50,000
directly from points outside the State of New Jersey. I find that Malcolm Konner
Chevrolet, Inc., is engaged in commerce as defined in Section 2(6) and (7) of the
Act and that it will effectuate the purposes of the Act to assert jurisdiction over it
and its successor.
Konner Chevrolet, Inc., a New Jersey corporation, was engaged at Pine Brook,
New Jersey, until June 4 as a franchised dealer for Chevrolet cars, both new and
used. On June 4 it moved to Caldwell, New Jersey. Its president is Mitchell
Konner, a brother of Malcolm Konner, and its stockholders are said Mitchell, his
wife, and Jacob Konner, his father. As hereinafter narrated, I have found that
Konner Chevrolet, Inc , as a separate corporation, is neither integrated with nor a
successor to Malcolm Konner Chevrolet, Inc. Konner Chevrolet, Inc., is engaged
in the business of selling at retail automobiles, automobile parts, and related products.
or extension thereof, unless and until Local 355 has been duly certified by the
National Labor Relations Board as the exclusive representative of said employees.
Change paragraphs (c) and (d) in section B, subsection 2, to (d) and (e), respec-
tively, and add the following new paragraph ( c), and make a similar addition to the
counterpart thereof in Appendix B:
(c) Withdraw and withhold all recognition from Local 355 as the collective-
bargaining representative of its shop workers and salesmen, unless and until Local 355
shall have been certified by the National Labor Relations Board as the exclusive
representative of such employees.
Change section C, subsection 1, paragraph (b), to read as follows:
Enforcing or maintaining in effect its collective-bargaining contracts, or any supple-
ment, extension to, or modification of said contracts, with Malcolm Konner Chevrolet,
Inc . Konner Chevrolet, Inc , and any successor to Malcolm Konner Chevrolet, Inc ,
or Konner Chevrolet, Inc.
3 The charges in Case No . 22-CA-1282 were amended on June 25 and July 18.
2 All events mentioned hereafter occurred in 1962 except as otherwise stated.
MALCOLM KONNER CHEVROLET, INC., ETC. 543
During the year ending June 1962, Konner Chevrolet, Inc., sold products valued
in excess of $500,000, and received goods valued in excess of $50,000 directly from
points outside the State of New Jersey. I find that Konner Chevrolet, Inc., is en-
gaged in commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act, and that
it will effectuate the policies of the Act to assert jurisdiction over it.
II. THE LABOR ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
Amalgamated Local Union 355, herein called the Union or Local 355, is a labor
organization within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act.
III. THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
Many of the factual issues were in dispute . Where dispute exists , it has been
resolved in accordance with my evaluation of the credibility of the witnesses and
the more probable inferences from the evidence. The following findings are based
on the credited evidence.
A. The relationship between Respondent Corporations
Malcolm Konner as an individual has been a General Motors franchised dealer
since 1935. According to him, General Motors has adopted as a policy (1) not
to grant more than one franchise to a dealer, and (2) the holder of a franchise,
known as the "principal," must be a specific individual regardless of whether he
conducts the business as a sole proprietor, through a corporation, or otherwise.
Malcolm was the designated principal in the franchise which he operated at Cald-
well, New Jersey, through Malcolm Konner Chevrolet, Inc., as the franchised dealer.
At sometime in 1959, Malcolm applied for a Chevrolet dealer's franchise in Paramus,
New Jersey. As a condition to approving this, Malcolm testified, General Motors
insisted that Malcolm "cancel" the dealership in Caldwell. On June 4 he obtained
the Paramus franchise, but contemporaneously with it Malcolm signed a paper
"cancelling out" the dealership of Malcolm Konner Chevrolet, Inc., at Caldwell.
As a result of acquiring a franchise in Paramus naming him as the "principal,"
Malcolm formed a new corporation to become the franchised dealer and to run the
business at this new location, because, as he testified, "That was one of Chevrolet's
requirements." The new corporation, organized under the laws of New Jersey, is
named Malcolm Konner Chevrolet Corporation. Both Malcolm Konner Chevrolet,
Inc., and Malcolm Konner Chevrolet Corp. have the same stockholders, officers, and
directors.
Since June 4 Malcolm Konner Chevrolet, Inc., has been in the process of being
liquidated. Its assets have been disposed of as follows: Some automobile parts were
"sold" to Malcolm Konner Chevrolet Corp. in Paramus and some were exchanged
for other parts with Konner Chevrolet, Inc., when the latter was located in Pine
Brook. Automobiles on hand on June 3 were mostly sold to Konner Chevrolet, Inc.,
to Malcolm Konner Chevrolet Corp., and to other dealers; some were retained.
The real estate in Caldwell occupied by Malcolm Konner Chevrolet, Inc., is owned
in part by Malcolm Konner and his wife, and in part by Malcolm Konner, Inc., a
separate corporation wholly owned by Malcolm Konner and his wife. These owners
had leased such premises to Malcolm Konner Chevrolet, Inc. This lease was "can-
celed" on June 4, 1962.
The property formerly occupied by Konner Chevrolet, Inc., at Pine Brook is owned
by Te-Kon Realty Corporation, which is not connected with the former in any
way. Te-Kon leased the same to Konner Chevrolet, Inc. The parts owned by
Konner Chevrolet, Inc., at Pine Brook were transferred to, exchanged, or sold to
Malcolm Konner Chevrolet Corp. in Paramus in return for parts in Caldwell belong-
ing to Malcolm Konner Chevrolet, Inc. However, all cars-whether new or used-
belonging to Konner Chevrolet, Inc, at Pine Brook, were removed to its new loca-
tion in Caldwell .3 It occupies the premises vacated by Malcolm Konner Chevrolet,
Inc., in Caldwell.
When Konner Chevrolet, Inc., moved to Caldwell, it retained about eight em-
ployees and laid off about three or four. One of those laid off, Phil Barish ( the sales
manager) is now employed by Malcolm Konner Chevrolet Corp. However,
Konner Chevrolet, Inc., when it moved to Caldwell, hired some, but not all, of the
8 When Mitchell Bonner moved his franchise from Pine Brook to Caldwell, he was first
required by General Motors to "cancel out" in Pine Brook. Apparently be was not re-
quired to organize a new corporation for this purpose. Ile Is the "principal" named in
both the Pine Brook and the Caldwell franchise.
M4 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
former employees of Malcolm Konner Chevrolet, Inc. One of these former em-
ployees so hired was George F. Gibson; another is Service Manager Joe Medwin.
All employees of Malcolm Konner Chevrolet , Inc., except an office girl, were
released from its employ on June 4. The girl was retained to assist in the liquida-
tion of the corporation. Most of those released were hired by Malcolm Konner
Chevrolet Corp. or Konner Chevrolet, Inc.
Concluding Findings as to the Relationship Between Respondent Corporations
Although Malcolm Konner Chevrolet Corp., is a new corporation incorporated
on or about June 4, I find that it is a successor to Malcolm Konner Chevrolet, Inc.
This follows from the fact-which I find-that (a) the "principal" owning the
franchise is the same person in both, (b) the stockholders and officers of both
coporations are identical, (c) Malcolm Konner Chevrolet Corp. was organized by
the same stockholders solely to take over and continue the business of Malcolm
Konner Chevrolet, Inc., at a new location, (d) the remaining assets of Malcolm
Konner Chevrolet, Inc, were transferred to Malcolm Konner Chevrolet Corp. with-
out consideration,4 and (e) some parts of Malcolm Konner Chevrolet, Inc., were
transferred to Konner Chevrolet, Inc., in return for the latter's transferring some
,of its parts to Malcolm Konner Chevrolet Corp.
On the other hand, I find that Konner Chevrolet, Inc., is not integrated with or a
successor to Malcolm Konner Chevrolet, Inc. This finding as to nonintegration is
based upon the following factors: (a) no common ownership of stock exists; and
(b) there is not a single common director or officer. The fact that the corporations
involved are separately owned by brothers and that the brothers to some extent
cooperate with each other is insufficient to establish integration J. G. Roy and
Sons Company v. N.L.R.B., 251 F. 2d 771 (C.A. 1). Nor is Konner Chevrolet,
Inc., a successor to Malcolm Konner Chevrolet, Inc. While it is true that some
exchange of parts and of employees occurred between them, this took place as a
convenience when each changed its location and the former moved to the old loca-
tion of the latter. This exchange under the circumstances falls short of proving
successorship, and I so find.
B. The discharge of George F. Gibson
Gibson was hired as a body and fender mechanic on September 30, 1960, by
Malcolm Konner Chevrolet, Inc., in Caldwell, New Jersey. He worked under a
service manager in charge of the shop workers. However, Joe Medwin, another
service manager who is in charge of new car service, had authority over Gibson
to the limited extent of telling the latter which used cars to work on and what to do
with them. Medwin, whom I find to be a supervisor under Section 2(11) of the
Act, was described by Gibson as "General Manager of the place," and boss of the
polishers and all salesmen.
Sometime in May, Medwin asked employee Charles W. McMickle to ascertain the
sentiment of the employees regarding a union . Medwin added that he "could bring
over somebody with the union" if the employees desired a union. Shortly after
this, also in May, Medwin called Gibson and another employee to his office.
Informing these two employees that the shop "was going to be a unionized shop,"
he told each of them to sign a set of three cards which he presented to each of
them. One card in the set is a standard form of application for membership in
Local 355, another is an application for Blue Cross and Blue Shield (which, it was
stipulated, is "used by [Local 3551 for employees who desire coverage"), and the
third is a standard application form for group insurance in united welfare fund and
available to employees represented by Local 355 "in various bargaining units."
These employees did subscribe thereto.
After they had signed , Medwin also told these two employees , in response to a
question by Gibson about the Union, that there would be no pay raise, that "it was
just job security," and that a "representative" would soon come there to talk to the
men. Finally, Medwin told them that if they did not want the Union they "did
not have to have it." While there, Gibson observed several other employees who
4 Although there is testimony that such assets were "sold" by Malcolm Donner Chev-
rolet, Inc, to Malcolm Konner Chevrolet Corp., I find that no genuine sale occurred, and
that the situation amounted to no more than a transfer of assets from one of Malcolm's
wholly owned corporations to another of his wholly owned corporations. By "wholly
owned" I mean completely owned by Malcolm and his wife.
MALCOLM KONNER CHEVROLET, INC., ETC. 545
entered Medwin's office "to sign their cards." Medwin also spoke to these employ-
ees, repeating to them in substance the remarks he had previously made to Gibson.6
On the following Monday, Henry Stirt spoke to the mechanics and shopmen in
Medwin's office. About 14 employees were present. After introducing himself as
the representative of Local 355,6 he described the benefits which the employees would
enjoy "in the contract and the insurance we [the employees] were getting." When
some employees complained to him that the hospitalization plan of Local 355 failed
to compare favorably with that which they then had, Stirt stated that he would
"clarify it" at a later meeting. As the meeting adjourned Stirt asked Gibson to
remain for a discussion. Previously that day Gibson had been selected shop
steward in Medwin's office by the employees.
On the next Thursday, Stirt, accompanied by another "member" of Local 355,
again spoke to the same group of employees in the rear building of Malcolm Konner
Chevrolet, Inc. Medwin also attended. Stirt described the differences between
the existing hospitalization policies and those to which the employees would be
"changed over." After this meeting, Gibson asked Stirt to have a vote among the
employees on a collective-bargaining contract, as that was their desire. However,
Stirt refused.
About a week later Gibson again saw Stirt at the plant Gibson and two other
employees asked that Stirt obtain a raise in wages for those on salary, but Stirt
replied that it could not be done until the "present contract" expired. Then in the
presence of a few more employees who had joined the group, Gibson asked Stirt
to follow that provision of the constitution of the Union which prescribed that a
vote be taken on a contract. Stirt replied, "I can't." Stirt then spoke to Gibson
alone in a nearby room to which Stirt invited him. When Gibson told Stirt what
the men wanted to have included in the contract, Stirt replied that they were pulling
Gibson's leg, that he, Stirt, did not want to be bothered, and that, if Gibson "con-
tinued," he, Gibson, would get himself in trouble.
On or about June 1, Local 355 and Malcolm Konner Chevrolet, Inc., executed a
collective-bargaining contract.? The next day Stirt gave Gibson a copy of a contract
with "Konner Chevrolet of Caldwell and Paramus, New Jersey," describing it as
"the contract of the Union . our [the employees'] contract." When Gibson
again asked for a vote by employees on the new contract Stirt replied that he could
not do it, but asked Gibson "to work with" him After some discussion relating to
the dissatisfaction of the employees with the new insurance policies, Gibson told
Stirt that Gibson and the employees did not think the Union was worth anything
because "all he was selling us was insurance, and it wasn't worth it to have a union
in for it."
On or about June 6 Gibson telephoned Stirt that the men were dissatisfied with
the contract which Stirt had given him, and again asked that a vote be taken on the
contract. Two days later Stirt came to the shop and listened to the men's com-
plaints about their wages. Stirt replied he could do nothing until the "following
contract." Gibson demanded a vote on the contract, insisting that the constitution
endowed the men with this prerogative. Stirt then called Gibson aside, again warned
him that he would get into trouble "if he continued this," and repeated his previous
request that Gibson "work with" him.
On or about June 19 Gibson filed charges with the Board On that same day,
Gibson circulated a petition among the men. Its text stated that its subscribers,
employees of Konner Chevrolet, Inc., "hereby want to terminate membership with
Local Union Amalgamated 355 on the grounds of misrepresentation." About 10
employees signed it. About 4 p.m. on June 22, John, a service manager of Konner
Chevrolet, Inc., laid off Gibson with expressions of regret that he had to do this,
that he did not want to be the instrument chosen therefor, and that Gibson was
being laid off because work was slow. However, Gibson had not been reprimanded
6 The following employees also signed a set of three cards at Medwin's request after
Medwin repeated to them substantially the same talk he gave Gibson: Edward Lyckowski,
Hugh Grapes, John Bowden. Philip Lipscomb, Donald Richmond, and George Heflebower
Roger Novrit also signed after being told by another employee that Medwin wanted this
to be done
6I find that Stirt, who is secretary-treasurer and a business agent of Local 355, is an
agent of said Union within the meaning of Section 2(13) of the Act
7 Malcolm Konner testified that this contract (his copy of which he had destroyed)
was "canceled" and "nullified" on June 4 because on that d.ite the franchise of Malcolm
Konner Chevrolet, Inc. at Pine Brook was teiminated and it stopped doing business As
hereinafter narrated, I find that this contract has not been abrogated.
546 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
for his work at any time . 8 Gibson was paid as wages 40 percent of the price charged
to customers for his work. However, he was guaranteed a minimum weekly salary,
regardless of whether it amounted to 40 percent or less of such charge. Sometimes
he received the minimum salary although he had not performed enough work to
meet this minimum ; but he also often produced more work than the minimum.
On or about June 20, Medwin, a supervisor of Konner Chevrolet, Inc., asked
employee Lyckowski if he had signed Gibson's petition .9 And on or about June 26
Malcolm Konner told Lyckowski that Gibson had 15 names on the petition and
asked Lyckowski if he had signed it.
Concluding Findings as to the Discharge of George F. Gibson
In my opinion , Gibson was discharged for being the instigator and prime mover
of (a) the movement to obtain a vote of employees on the collective -bargaining
contract between Malcolm Konner Chevrolet, Inc., and the Union, and (b) the
preparation and circulation of the petition to repudiate the Union as bargaining
agent of the employees of Konner Chevrolet, Inc. I so find. I further find that the
Union caused Konner Chevrolet, Inc., to effect such discharge. These conclusions
are based upon the entire record, including the following facts, all of which I find:
(a) Gibson was engaged in protected activity when, as steward, he constantly
asked, and often insisted , that Stirt take a vote regarding the substantive provisions
of the contract.
(b) Gibson was active in attempting to dislodge the Union as bargaining repre-
sentative after he and the employees became dissatisfied with it and thus became
an instrument of antagonism to both the Union and Konner Chevrolet, Inc.
(c) Gibson was the elected job steward of the employees, and, therefore, acted
as spokesman and leader of the employees in fulfilling their wishes to correct
distasteful provisions of the contract, especially with respect to insurance benefits.
(d) Gibson was discharged precipitately and without prior warning. Moreover,
I find that the reason given for his discharge, namely, slow work, was a pretext to
conceal the fact that he was actually discharged for his protected activity.
While it is true that Gibson did engage in some of the above-described activities
while employed by Malcolm Konner Chevrolet, Inc., the evidence nevertheless dis-
closes, and I find, the he also engaged in all of them after June 4 when he became
an employee of Konner Chevrolet, Inc., and that Mitchell Konner and Supervisor
Medwin knew of Gibson's petition by June 20. I further find that Stirt resented
Gibson's attitude toward and actions against the Union and that Stirt not only
sought to dissuade Gibson from them but also warned him that he would get into
trouble on account thereof While there is no direct evidence that Stirt expressly
asked for Gibson's dismissal, a reasonable inference may b_- drawn-and I draw it-
that (1) Stirt's opposition to Gibson was the efficient cause for Gibson's discharge,
(2) Mitchell Konner and Supervisor Medwin became aware of such opposition,
and (3) Konner Chevrolet, Inc., discharged Gibson at the request of Stirt because
of such opposition.
In view of the foregoing findings I do not credit the evidence that Gibson was
discharged because his performance was insufficient to justify his guaranteed weekly
wage. It is therefore unnecessary to decide whether Gibson in fact produced enough
to earn his guaranteed weekly wage.
Accordingly, I find that Konner Chevrolet, Inc., has discharged Gibson unlawfully
and that the Union has caused such discharge unlawfully. However, I do not find
that Gibson was terminated because he filed charges with the Board. Although it
may be suspicious, the mere fact that Gibson was let go 3 days after he filed charges
is insufficient to show that such filing prompted his discharge . Hence I find that
this branch of the complaint has not been established.
8 Although Malcolm Konner testified that both he and the service manager "constantly
reprimanded Gibson for the type of work that he was doing," I do not credit this testi-
mony Not only did the service manager fail to testify to corroborate this, but this was
not assigned as the reason for his discharge by Service Manager John. In any event,
I find that if his work was poor, it was overlooked by retaining him as an employee
Malcolm also testified that Gibson was reprimanded as a chronic complainer over his pay-
checks I make no finding thereon as it was not contended that these complaints moti-
vated his discharge.
9Medwin also asked , on June 26 or within a few days before or thereafter , the follow-
ing employees: Hugh Grapes , John Bowden , and Donald Richmond. On June 20 , Mitchell
Konner asked employee Richmond the same question
MALCOLM KONNER CHEVROLET, INC., ETC. 547
C. The alleged unlawful assistance to and recognition of Local 355
1. As to Malcolm Konner Chevrolet, Inc.
As found above, in May 1962, Supervisor Joe Medwin solicited membership in
Local 355. This is found to be coercive, even though Medwm told employees that,
they did not have to have a union unless they wanted one. The vice of such conduct
lies in the active solicitation of individual employees in Medwin's office; it is not
obliterated by the statement that they were not required to have a union. Hence
I find that it also constitutes unlawful assistance to the Union. Since Medwin
interviewed all or nearly all of the employees in the shop, and these employees consti-
tute more than a majority of a unit composed of shop workers and salesmen,10 I-
find that any majority which Local 355 may represent is a coerced majority, and
that such coercion existed on June 1, 1962. I also find that Malcolm Konner
Chevrolet, Inc., and Local 355 executed a collective-bargaining contract on June 1,
1962, covering a unit consisting of "all shop workers and salesmen excluding office
and all others excluded under the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure
Act," and containing a union-shop clause. Although Malcolm Konner testified
that he destroyed this contract on June 4 because Malcolm Konner Chevrolet, Inc.,
on that date ceased operations, I find that such contract continued in existence, and
that Malcolm Konner Chevrolet Corp., as the successor to Malcolm Konner Chevro-
let, Inc., became a party thereto. This finding flows from the fact that Local 355
has not repudiated the contract and that a unilateral rescission is ineffective to-
terminate the contract.il New England Lead Burning Company, 133 NLRB 863.
This contract contains a union-security and a checkoff clause. But I find that
these clauses are illegal and are not saved by the proviso to Section 8(a) (3) because
I find that the Union obtained its majority by employer assistance "defined in Sec-
tion 8(a) of this Act as an unfair labor practice." See Section 8(a) (3). However,
no evidence was adduced to show that any fees or dues were collected thereunder.
Accordingly, I find that the evidence fails to establish that the checkoff clause was
enforced.
2. As to Konner Chevrolet, Inc.
On June 30 Konner Chevrolet, Inc., and Local 355 executed two collective-
bargaining contracts. One covered "all salesmen" and the other embraced "all
shop workers." The General Counsel's complaint does not attack the latter con-
tract, so that I make no findings with respect thereto. While the "all salesmen"
contract is assailed as illegal because it contains a union-shop clause when the Union
did not enjoy an uncoerced majority, the evidence offered fails to show such facts.
Since the burden of proof on this issue rests on the General Counsel, I find that he
has failed to sustain it. Accordingly, I find that those paragraphs of the complaint
attacking this contract must fail for want of proof. There is credible evidence from
employee Eugene Rudin that late in May, Phil Barish, sales manager for Konner
Chevrolet, Inc., asked him to sign an application card for membership in Local 355,
and that Barish was doing this "to keep the Teamsters' Union out." There is also
credible evidence from employee Buster Ledell that early in May, Barish told him
that he had to sign the hospitalization and united welfare fund applications forms
of Local 355, and that "when we moved to Caldwell I [Ledell] would join the union
when I come up there." I find this evidence, which I credit, falls short of estab-
lishing a coerced majority. But it does show-and I find-unlawful solicitation for
and assistance to the Union.
The General Counsel also alleges that since June 4 Konner Chevrolet, Inc., has
adopted, maintained in effect, and enforced the contract of June 1 between Malcolm
Konner Chevrolet, Inc., and Local 355. As I have found that Konner Chevrolet,
Inc., is not integrated with or a successor to Malcolm Konner Chevrolet, Inc., it
is incumbent on the General Counsel to show affirmatively that Konner Chevrolet,
Inc., adopted, maintained in effect, and enforced this contract. But no such evidence
has been adduced. Hence I find that this aspect of the complaint has not been
sustained.
10 There were about 14 shop workers and 5 or 6 salesmen employed in this unit.
u The terms of this contract are substantially set forth in General Counsel's Exhibit
No. 3, a contract between "Konner Chevrolet" and Local 355, which I find was given by
Stirt to Gibson as a copy containing the terms of the contract between Local 355 and,
Malcolm Konner Chevrolet, Inc.
708-006-64-vol. 141-36
548 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
D. Other alleged violations
1. As found above:
(a) Supervisor Joe Medwin and President Malcolm Konner interrogated em-
ployees of Malcolm Konner Chevrolet , Inc., as to whether they had signed or cir-
culated a petition stating that they did not wish to be represented by Local 355.
(b) Joe Medwin solicited the employees of Malcolm Konner Chevrolet, Inc., to
execute applications for membership in Local 355, for hospitalization, and for united
welfare fund, on behalf of Local 355.
(c) President Mitchell Konner of Konner Chevrolet, Inc., on June 20 asked em-
ployee Richmond whether Richmond has signed Gibson's petition, and Supervisor
Barish of said Respondent solicited on behalf of Local 355.
2. Concluding findings as to the other alleged violations
a. As to interrogation
Although interrogation may be unobjectionable when pursued for a lawful objec-
tive, none of the facts found herein discloses that the questioning of employees by
Medwin and Malcolm Konner and Mitchell Konner sought information for a legiti-
mate purpose. Rather it is patent that employees were interrogated to ascertain
the extent of dissatisfiaction with a union which had received the blessings of Malcolm
and Mitchell Konner. Such interrogation is coercive and is barred by Section 8
(a)(1). I so find. Orkin Exterminating Company, Inc., 136 NLRB 399; S. H.
Kress & Co., 137 NLRB 1244. N.L.R.B. v. Crystal Laundry & Dry Cleaning Co.,
308 F. 2d 626 (C.A. 6), is clearly distinguishable. It is no defense that some
employees so interrogated denied signing the petition; the blemish of such conduct
emanates from the act of propounding the questions, regardless of the reply or
reaction thereto.
b. As to assistance to Local 355
By handing out the sets of three cards to employees, Respondent Malcolm Konner
Chevrolet, Inc., unlawfully assisted Local 355. Since this conduct is alleged to
violate Section 8(a)(1) only, and not Section 8(a)(2), of the Act, I find that it
interferes with, restrains, and coerces employees contrary to the provision of said
Section 8 ( a) (1). But I make no finding as to whether it also is forbidden by Section
8(a)(2). This conclusion is not undermined by the employer 's accompanying state-
ment that the employees were free to join the Union or not. In my opinion it is
unlawful for an employer to actively solicit membership upon behalf of a union ex-
cept as permitted by Sections 8(a)(3) and 302(c)(4). Neither of these sections is
operative on this record. See Salmirs Oil Company, 139 NLRB 25. And regardless
of the content of the interviews , an important consideration is the fact that they
were held in the office of top management . Revere Copper and Brass, Inc., 138
NLRB 1377.
And I also find that Konner Chevrolet, Inc., unlawfully solicited employees to
join Local 355 or to subscribe to the Union's insurance program by the conduct of
Supervisor Barish. Although a violation of Section 8(a)(1) and ( 2), I do not find
the latter because not pleaded.
IV. THE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES UPON COMMERCE
Those activities of Respondents which have been found to be unlawful set forth in
section III, above , occurring in connection with the operations of Respondent Com-
panies as set forth above in section I, above, have a close, intimate, and substantial
relation to trade, traffic , and commerce among the several States, and tend to lead
to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce and the free flow of commerce.
V. THE REMEDY
It having been found that each Respondent has engaged in certain unfair labor
practices it will be recommended that each of them cease and desist therefrom and
that each take specific affirmative action, as set forth below, designed to effectuate the
relevant policies of the Act.
Having found that Respondent Malcolm Konner Chevrolet, Inc., has rendered
illegal assistance to the Union and, at a time when this corporation knew that the
Union's majority was coerced, entered into an illegal contract containing an illegal
union-shop provision, it will be recommended that said contract be denied any force
or effect and that said Company withhold recognition from the Union unless and
until the Union has been certified by the Board.
Although I have found that Malcolm Konner Chevrolet, Inc., entered into an
illegal contract containing a union-shop clause and a checkoff clause , I am unable
MALCOLM KONNER CHEVROLET, INC., ETC. 549
to find that either clause was enforced . Hence , it will not be recommended that
employees be reimbursed for initiation fees or dues. Local 60, United Brotherhood
of Carpenters and Joiners of America, AFL-CIO, et al. v. N.L.R.B., 365 U.S. 651.
Cf. Galveston Maritime Association, Inc.; et al., 139 NLRB 352.
It will be further recommended that Konner Chevrolet, Inc., offer, and that the
Union withdraw opposition to, immediate and full reinstatement to George F. Gibson
to his former position or one substantially equivalent thereto, and that they jointly
and severally make him whole for any loss of earnings suffered by his discriminatory
discharge by paying to him a sum of money for such loss. Said sum shall be equal
to such earnings as he would have earned as wages from the date of the discrimina-
tion against him to the date of reinstatement, or a proper offer of reinstatement, as
the case may be, less his net earnings during such period. Computation thereof
shall be calculated on a quarterly basis in accordance with F. W. Woolworth Com-
pany, 90 NLRB 289. The backpay obligations of these Respondents shall include
the payment of interest at 6 percent to be computed in the manner set forth in
Isis Plumbing & Heating Co., 138 NLRB 716. It will also be recommended that
these Respondents preserve and, upon request, make available to the Board or its
agents, all pertinent records and data necessary to assist in any analysis and deter-
mination of the amount of backpay due.
Since the discharge of Gibson goes "to the very heart of the Act" (N.L.R.B. v.
Entwistle Mfg. Co., 120 F. 2d 532 (C.A. 4) ), it will be recommended that the remedy
against Konner Chevrolet, Inc., and the Union be coextensive with the legislative
objectives promulgated in Section 7 of the Act. Hence, a broad order will be
recommended against these Respondents.
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact, and upon the entire record in
this case, I make the following:
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. The Union is a labor organization within the meaning of Section 2(5) of
the Act.
2. Respondents , Malcolm Konner Chevrolet , Inc., and Konner Chevrolet, Inc.,
are employers engaged in commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of
the Act.
3. Malcolm Konner Chevrolet Corp. is a successor to Malcolm Konner Chevrolet,
Inc.
4. By coercively interrogating its employees concerning their having signed or
circulated a petition stating they did not wish to be represented by the Union, Re-
spondents Malcolm Konner Chevrolet , Inc., and Konner Chevrolet , Inc., have en-
gaged in conduct proscribed by Section 8(a) (1) of the Act.
5. By illegally discharging George F. Gibson for opposing the Union , Respond-
ent Konner Chevrolet, Inc., has unlawfully encouraged membership in a labor or-
ganization , contrary to the provisions of Section 8 (a) (1) and (3) of the Act.
6. By rendering illegal assistance to the Union , and by recognizing , and entering
into, maintaining , and giving effect to an illegal contract with the Union , Respondent,
Malcolm Konner Chevrolet , Inc., has engaged in and is engaging in conduct forbid-
den by Section 8 (a) (1) and (2) of the Act.
7. By obtaining recognition and a collective -bargaining contract when it did not
enjoy an uncoerced majority, by enforcing the terms of said contract, and by
-causing Konner Chevrolet , Inc., to discharge George F . Gibson in violation of
Section 8(a)(3) of the Act, the Union has engaged in and is engaging in conduct
forbidden by Section 8(b) (1) (A) and (2) of the Act.
8. By rendering illegal assistance to Local 355 in soliciting membership on its
behalf. Konner Chevrolet has engaged in conduct forbidden by Section 8(a)(1)
of the Act.
9. The aforesaid conduct constitutes unfair labor practices affecting commerce
within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
10. Respondents have not committed any other unfair labor practices as alleged in
the complaint.
RECOMMENDED ORDER
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, and
upon the entire record in the case , it is recommended that:
A. Respondent Malcolm Konner Chevrolet , Inc., its officers , agents, successors,
and assigns , shall:
1. Cease and desist from:
(a) Coercively interrogating its employees concerning their having signed or
circulated a petition stating that they did not wish to be represented by Local 355.
550 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
(b) Urging and soliciting its employees to execute application cards for member-
ship in, and hospitalization insurance cards on behalf of, Local 355, and to join
Local 355, or in any other manner offering illegal assistance and support to it or
encouraging its members to join it.
(c) Maintaining in effect and enforcing its contract of June 1, 1962, with Local
355, or any modification, supplement, renewal, or extension thereof.
(d) Recognizing or bargaining with Local 355 as the collective-bargaining agent
of its shop workers and salesmen unless and until such labor organization has been
duly certified by the National Labor Relations Board as the exclusive representative.
of said employees.
(e) In any like or related manner interfering with, restraining, or coercing its,
employees in exercising rights guaranteed to them by Section 7 of the Act.
2. Take the following affirmative action designed to effectuate the policies of
the Act:
(a) Post at its plant in Paramus, New Jersey, copies of the attached notice marked
"Appendix A." 12 Copies of said notice, to be furnished by the Regional Director
for the Twenty-second Region, shall, after being signed by a duly authorized repre-
sentative of Respondent, be posted by it immediately upon receipt thereof, and be
maintained by it for 60 consecutive days thereafter, in conspicuous places, including
all places where notices to employees are customarily posted. Reasonable steps
shall be taken by Respondent to insure that said notices are not altered, defaced, or
covered by any other material.
(b) Withdraw recognition from Local 355 as the exclusive bargaining agent of its
salesmen and shop workers unless and until said labor organization shall have been
certified by the Board as the exclusive representative of such employees.
(c) Notify the Regional Director for the Twenty-second Region, in writing,
within 20 days from the date of receipt of this Intermediate Report and Recom-
mended Order, what steps Respondent has taken to comply herewith.13
B. Respondent Konner Chevrolet, Inc., its officers, agents, successors, and assigns,.
shall:
1. Cease and desist from:
(a) Interrogating employees concerning their having signed or circulated a
petition stating that they do not wish to be represented by Local 355.
(b) Encouraging membership in Local 355, or in any other labor organization,.
by discharging employees or discriminating against employees in any manner in
respect to their tenure of employment or any term or condition of employment.
(c) Unlawfully aiding or assisting Local 355 by soliciting membership on its-
behalf.
(d) In any other manner restraining, coercing, or interfering with employees in
the enjoyment or exercise of rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act.
2 Take the following affirmative action designed to effectuate the policies of
the Act
(a) Offer George F. Gibson immediate and full reinstatement to his former or a
substantially equivalent position, without prejudice to his seniority or other rights
and privileges previously enjoyed, and jointly and severally with the Union, make him
whole for any loss of pay he may have suffered, plus interest at the rate of 6 percent,
by reason of Respondent's discrimination against him.
(b) Preserve and, upon request, make available to the Board or its agents, for-
examination and copying, all payroll records, social security payment records, time-
cards, personnel records and reports, and all other records necessary to analyze the
amount of backpay due under the terms of this Recommended Order.
(c) Post at its plant in Caldwell, New Jersey, copies of the attached notice marked
"Appendix B." 14 Copies of said notice, to be furnished by the Regional Director
for the Twenty-second Region, shall, after being signed by a duly authorized repre-
sentative of Respondent, be posted by it immediately upon receipt thereof, and be
maintained by it for 60 consecutive days thereafter, in conspicuous places, including
all places where notices to employees are customarily posted. Reasonable steps
12 If this Recommended Order is adopted by the Board, the words "A Decision and'
Order" shall be substituted for the words "The Recommended Order of a Trial Examiner"
In the notice. In the further event that the Board's Order is enforced by a decree of a
United States Court of Appeals, the wards "Pursuant to a Decree of the United States
Court of Appeals, Enforcing an Order" shall be substituted for the words "Pursuant to a
Decision and Order."
11 If this Recommended Order is adopted by the Board, this provision shall be modified-
to read: "Notify said Regional Director, in writing, within 10 days from the date of this-
Order, what steps Respondent has taken to comply herewith "
14 See footnote 12, supra.
MALCOLM KONNER CHEVROLET, INC., ETC. 551
shall be taken by Respondent to insure that said notices are not altered, defaced, or
covered by any other material.
(d) Notify the Regional Director for the Twenty-second Region, in writing, within
20 days from the receipt of this Intermediate Report, what steps Respondent has
taken to comply herewith.15
C. Respondent Local 355, its officers, agents, representatives, successors, and
assigns, shall:
1. Cease and desist from:
(a) Causing or attempting to cause Konner Chevrolet, Inc., to discriminate against
employees in violation of Section 8(a) (3) of the Act in order to encourage member-
ship in said Local 355.
(b) Enforcing or maintaining in effect its collective-bargaining contract, or any
supplement, extension to, or modification of, said contract, with Malcolm Konner
Chevrolet, Inc., and any successor to Malcolm Konner Chevrolet, Inc.
(c) Claiming recognition from, or asserting that it is the exclusive bargaining agent
of the employees of, Malcolm Konner Chevrolet, Inc., and any successor thereto,
unless and until it shall have been certified by the Board as such representative.
(d) In any other manner restraining or coercing employees in the exercise of
the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act.
2. Take the following affirmative action designed to effectuate the policies of the
Act:
(a) Post at its offices and meeting halls in Jackson Heights, New York, copies
of the attached notice, marked "Appendix C." 16 Copies of said notice, to be
supplied by the Regional Director for the Twenty-second Region, shall, after being
signed by an authorized representative of Respondent, be posted by it immediately
upon receipt thereof, and be maintained by it for 60 consecutive days thereafter, in
conspicuous places, including all places where notices to members are customarily
posted. Reasonable steps shall be taken by Respondent to insure that said notices
are not altered, defaced, or covered by any other material.
(b) Notify Konner Chevrolet, Inc., that it has no objection to the employment
of George F. Gibson.
(c) Jointly and severally with Konner Chevrolet, Inc., reimburse George F.
Gibson for any loss of pay he may have suffered, plus interest at the rate of 6
percent, by reason of the discrimination against him caused by Local 355.
(d) Preserve and, upon request, make available to the Board, or its agents, for
examination and copying, all records necessary to analyze the amount of backpay
payable under the terms of this Recommended Order.
(e) Notify the Regional Director for the Twenty-second Region, in writing, within
20 days from the receipt of this Intermediate Report, what steps Respondent has
taken to comply herewith.17
It is further recommended that the complaint be dismissed in all other respects.
It is finally recommended that unless each Respondent shall within the prescribed
period notify the said Regional Director that it will comply, the Board issue an
order requiring any Respondent who fails to do so to take the action aforesaid ap-
plicable to such Respondent.
is See footnote 13, supra.
10 See footnote 12, supra.
37 See footnote 13, supra
APPENDIX A
NOTICE TO ALL EMPLOYEES
Pursuant to the Recommended Order of a Trial Examiner of the National Labor
Relations Board, and in order to effectuate the policies of the National Labor Rela-
tions Act, we hereby notify our employees that:
WE WILL NOT coercively interrogate employees concerning their having signed
or circulated a petition stating that they did not wish to be represented by
Amalgamated Local Union 355.
WE WILL withdraw and withhold all recognition from Amalgamated Local
Union 355 as a collective-bargaining representative of all our employees in-
cluded in the following described unit:
All shopworkers and salesmen, excluding office and all others excluded
under the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act.
WE WILL NOT recognize said labor organization as such representative unless
and until so certified by the National Labor Relations Board.
552 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
WE WILL NOT give any force or effect to that agreement signed with said Local
355, dated June 1, 1962, or to any modification, extension, renewal, or supple-
ment thereto.
WE WILL NOT encourage membership in Amalgamated Local Union 355 by
soliciting on its behalf, by recognizing or entering into an agreement with
said Local 355 until so certified, or in any other manner prohibited by law.
WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner interfere with, restrain, or coerce
our employees in the exercise of their right to self-organization, to form labor
organizations, to join or assist any labor organization, to bargain collectively
through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in other concerted
activities for the purposes of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protec-
tion, or to refrain from any or all such activities, except to the extent that such
right may be affected by an agreement requiring membership in a labor organiza-
tion as a condition of employment, as authorized by Section 8 (a) (3) of the Act,
as modified by the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959.
All our employees are free to become, remain, or to refrain from becoming or
remaining members of any labor organization.
MALCOLM KONNER CHEVROLET, INC.,
Employer.
Dated------------------- By-------------------------------------------
(Representative) (Title)
This notice must remain posted for 60 consecutive days from the date of posting,
and must not be altered, defaced, or covered by any other material.
Employees may communicate directly with the Board's Regional Office, 614 Na-
tional Newark Building, 744 Broad Street, Newark, New Jersey, Telephone No.
Market 4-6151, if they have any question concerning this notice or compliance
with its provisions.
APPENDIX B
NOTICE TO ALL EMPLOYEES
Pursuant to the Recommended Order of a Trial Examiner of the National Labor
Relations Board, and in order to effectuate the policies of the National Labor
Relations Act, we hereby notify our employees that*
WE WILL NOT coercively interrogate employees concerning their having signed
or circulated a petition stating that they did not wish to be represented by
Amalgamated Local Union 355.
WE WILL NOT encourage membership in said Local 355 by illegally discharg-
ing employees or in any other manner discriminating against them in regard to
their hire or tenure of employment or any term or condition of employment, or
by soliciting on its behalf.
WE WILL NOT in any other manner interfere with, restrain, or coerce our
employees in the exercise of rights guaranteed to them by Section 7 of the Act.
WE WILL offer George F. Gibson immediate and full reinstatement to his
former or a substantially equivalent position, without prejudice to his seniority
or other rights and privileges previously enjoyed.
WE WILL jointly and severally with Amalgamated Local Union 355 make
George F. Gibson whole for any loss of pay, plus interest, suffered by reason
of the discrimination against him.
All our employees are free to become, remain, or to refrain from becoming or
remaining members of any labor organization.
KONNER CHEVROLET, INC,
Employer.
Dated------------------- By-------------------------------------------
(Repiesentative) (Title)
NOTE: We will notify the above-named employee if presently serving in the
Armed Forces of the United States of his right to reinstatement upon application in
accordance with the Selective Service Act after discharge from the Armed Forces.
This notice must remain posted for 60 consecutive days from the date of posting,
and must not be altered, defaced, or covered by any other material.
Employees may communicate directly with the Board's Regional Office, 614
National Newark Building, 744 Broad Street, Newark, New Jersey, Telephone No.
Market 4-6151, if they have any question concerning this notice or compliance with
its provisions.
CLARK'S FROZEN CUSTARD, INC., ETC. 553
APPENDIX C
NOTICE TO ALL MEMBERS OF AMALGAMATED LOCAL UNION 355 AND TO THE EM
PLOYEES OF MALCOLM KONNER CHEVROLET, INC., AND KONNER CHEVROLET, INC.
Pursuant to the Recommended Order of a Trial Examiner of the National Labor
Relations Board, and in order to effectuate the policies of the National Labor
Relations Act, we hereby notify our employees that:
WE WILL NOT act as or claim to be the exclusive bargaining representative of
any of the salesmen or shop employees of Malcolm Konner Chevrolet, Inc., for
the purpose of dealing with it concerning grievances, labor disputes, wages, rates
of pay, hours of employment, or other conditions of employment unless and
until we have been certified by the Board as such representative.
WE WILL NOT give any force or effect to the agreements signed with said
Local 355, by Malcolm Konner Chevrolet, Inc., on June 1, 1962, and by Konner
Chevrolet, Inc., on June 30, 1962, or to any modifications, extensions, renewals,.
or supplements thereto.
WE WILL NOT cause or attempt to cause Konner Chevrolet, Inc., to discharge
or to in any way discriminate against George F. Gibson, or any other employee,
in violation of Section 8 (a) (3) of the Act.
WE WILL notify Konner Chevrolet, Inc., in writing, that we withdraw our
objections to the employment of George F. Gibson and request his reinstate-
ment to his former or to an equivalent position.
WE WILL jointly and severally with Konner Chevrolet, Inc., make whole
George F. Gibson for any loss of pay suffered as a result of the discrimination
against him, plus interest.
WE WILL NOT in any other manner restrain or coerce employees of Malcolm
Konner Chevrolet, Inc., and Konner Chevrolet, Inc., in the exercise of the
rights guaranteed to them by Section 7 of the Act, except to the extent that
such rights may be affected by an agreement requiring membership in a labor
organization as a condition of employment, as authorized by Section 8 (a) (3)
of the Act, as modified by the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure
Act of 1959.
AMALGAMATED LOCAL UNION 355,
Labor Organization.
Dated------------------- By-------------------------------------------
(Representative) (Title)
This notice must remain posted for 60 consecutive days from the date of posting,
and must not be altered, defaced, or covered by any other material.
Employees may communicate directly with the Board's Regional Office, 614
National Newark Building, 744 Broad Street, Newark, New Jersey, Telephone No.
Market 4-6151, if they have any question concerning this notice or compliance with
its provisions.
Clark's Frozen Custard, Inc.; Dutchland Dairy Stores, Inc.;
Clark's Dairy Stores, Inc.; Tosa Avenue Dairy Store, Inc.;
Howell Avenue Dairy Store, Inc.; Lincoln Avenue Dairy Store,
Inc.; Hales Corners Dairy Store, Inc. and Retail Store Em-
ployees Union Local #444, Retail Clerks International Asso-
ciation , AFL-CIO. Case No. 13-CA-5133. March 18, 1963
DECISION AND ORDER
On January 14, 1963, Trial Examiner Eugene E. Dixon issued his
Intermediate Report in the above-entitled proceeding, finding that the
Respondents had engaged in and were engaging in certain unfair labor
practices and recommending that they cease and desist therefrom and
take certain affirmative action, as set forth in the attached Intermediate
141 NLRB No. 51.