Philip Lewis & Sons

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Dec 12, 1946

71 N.L.R.B. 976 (N.L.R.B. 1946)

In the Matter of REUBEN A ND SAMUEL LEWIS, A PARTNERS]-TIP,
DOING BUSINESS AS PIIILIP LEwis & SONS. E nnPLOV Pai and UN rri 1)
STEELWORKERS OF AMERICA, C. 1. 0., PETITIONER
Case No. 1-R-3320.-Decided December 1;,,1946
Mr. Sidney R. Lewis, of Chelsea, Mass., for the Employer.
Mr. Leo Dirrane, of Boston, Mass., for the Petitioner.
' Mr. Morton B. Spero, 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 October 23, 1946, before Thomas H. Ramsey, hear-
ing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free
front prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations
Board makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FA CT
I. THE BUSINESS OF TILE EMPLOYER 1
Reuben Lewis and Samuel Lewis, partners, doing business under the
name of Philip Lewis & Sons, are engaged in the business of buying
and selling scrap metal at their only plant located in Chelsea, Massa-
chusetts. The Employer annually purchases within the Common-
wealth of Massachusetts over $100,000 worth of scrap metal. The Em-
ployer's sales of scrap metal amount annually to more than $10:5,000,
of which approximately 50 percent represents shipments to points
outside the Coriimonwealth.
The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
H. TIIE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress
of Industrial Organizations, claiming to represent employees of the
Employer.
The niuno of the Employer nppeais in the caption as amended at the hearing.
71NLRB,No164
976
PHILIP LEWIS & SONS
Ill. T11E QUESTION CONCERNING lJA'REsENT_ATION
977
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 the Employer, within the meaning
of Section !) (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
We find, in accordance with the agreement of the parties, that all
production and maintenance employees of the Employer, excluding
all executives, office and clerical employees, and all or any other
supervisory employees with authority to hire, promote, discharge,
discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or
effectively recommend such action, constitute a unit appropriate for
the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section
9 (b) of the Aet.2
V. THE 1EfERII [NATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
The Employer's normal coniplement is 10 employees, of whoiii 6
are in the app; -opriate unit. Although the Employer apparently hires
its employees on a permanent basis, it has in the past experienced a
rapid turn-over among these employees. According to the testimony
of the Employer, it has on many occasions had to hire a new produc-
tion force at the beginning of the work week. With respect to its
present production force, the record shows that 2 of its 6 employees
have worked virtually continuously for the Employer since the filing
of the instant petition in August 1946, and the others have been hired
more recently. The Employer argues from the foregoing that there
is a likelihood that none or only a small percentage of its present
working force will still be in its employ at the time of an election, if
one is directed herein, and that no election should therefore be directed
among its employees.
We are not persuaded that the above facts warrant withholding an
election at this time. The changes which concern the Employer relate
merely to an alteration in the constituency of the unit due to a labor
turn-over. Personnel changes such as these are obviously speculative,
and depend to a considerable degree upon the condition of the labor
market. Accordingly, inasmuch as we are unable to foretell with any
2 Pursuant to a consent election agreement to which the parties hereto were signatory,
a consent election was conducted on June 6, 1942, under Board auspices in a similar unit;
Case No 1-R-1084 The Petitioner won, and a contract was thereupon executed However,
this agreement was never enforced by either party.
978 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
certainty the future personnel experience of the Employer, we are of
the opinion that the Act will best be effectuated by the direction of
an election.3
We shall direct that the question concerning representation which
has arisen be resolved by an election by secret ballot, subject to the
limitations and additions set forth in the Direction.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the
purposes of collective bargaining with Reuben and Samuel Lewis, a
partnership, doing business as Philip Lewis & Sons, Chelsea, Massa-
chusetts, 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
Director 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 Steelworkers of America, C. I. O., for the purposes of
collective bargaining.
2 Accoid: Matter of Natchez Hardwood Company, 71 N L. R B 24.