Republic Drill & Tool Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 20, 1946

66 N.L.R.B. 955 (N.L.R.B. 1946)

In the Matter Of REPUBLIC DRILL & TooL COMPANY and UNITED
ELECTRICAL, RADIO & MACHINE WORKERS OF AMERICA,
LOCAL 1114, C. I. O.
Case No. 13-C-2386.-Decided March 20, 1946
DECISION
AND
ORDER
On August 9, 1945, the Trial Examiner issued his Intermediate
Report in the above-entitled proceeding, finding that the respondent
had engaged in and was engaging in certain unfair labor practices
and recommending that it cease and desist therefrom and take certain
affirmative action, as set forth in the copy of the Intermediate Report
attached hereto. Thereafter, the respondent filed a brief in support
of the Intermediate Report ; counsel for the Board filed exceptions,
and a supporting brief, to the Trial Examiner's failure to find that
the respondent violated Section 8 (2) of the Act. None of the parties
requested oral argument before the Board at Washington, D. C., and
none was held.
The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner at the
hearing and finds that no prejudicial error was committed. The rul-
ings are hereby affirmed. The Board has considered the Intermediate
Report, the briefs and exceptions of the parties, and the entire record
in the case, and hereby adopts the findings, conclusions, and recom-
mendations of the Trial Examiner with the following modifications.
1. We agree with the Trial Examiner that the respondent violated
Section 8 (1) of the Act by conducting polls at the plant in June 1943
and 1944 on the employees' desires concerning union affiliation, and
that it did not violate the Act by the speeches fully set forth in the
Intermediate Report. We also agree with the Trial Examiner that
the "Republic Plan," including the "Trustees" and the "General As-
sembly," but excluding the House Committees, do not constitute a
labor organization, within the meaning of the Act, and that, therefore
the complaint should be dismissed as to them.
2. The Trial Examiner found that "although the evidence tends
to show that the House Committees are labor organizations existing
in violation of Section 8 (2) of the Act, the undersigned is unable
66 N. L. R. B., No. 117.
955
956 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
to make findings of fact and conclusions of law to that effect because
of the lack of service upon those organizations." We are in agree-
ment with, and adopt, the Trial Examiner's ruling resulting from the
lack of service upon said organizations. However, in order best to
effectuate the policies of the Act, we shall direct that the allegations
of the complaint that the respondent violated Section 8 (2) of the Act
with respect to the House Committees be severed from the allegations
of the complaint adjudicated in this Decision and that the record be
reopened for the purpose of serving the House Committees and hold-
ing a new hearing with respect to the allegations that the respondent
violated Section 8 (2) of the Act with respect to the House Com-
mittees.
ORDER
Upon the entire record in the case, and pursuant to section 10 (c)
of the National Labor Relations Act, the National Labor Relations
Board hereby orders that the respondent, Republic Drill & Tool Com-
pany, Chicago, Illinois, and its officers, agents, successors, and assigns,
shall :
1. Cease and desist from interfering with, restraining, and coercing
its employees in the exercise of the right to self-organization, to form
labor organizations, to join or assist United Electrical, Radio & Ma-
chine Workers of America, Local 1114, C. I. 0., or any other labor
organization, to bargain collectively through representatives of their
own choosing, and to engage in concerted activities, for the purposes
of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection, as guaran-
teed in Section 7 of the Act.
2. Take the following affirmative action which the Board finds will
effectuate the policies of the Act :
(a) Post in its plant in Chicago, Illinois, copies of the notice at-
tached to the Intermediate Report herein, marked "Appendix A." 1
Copies of said notice, to be furnished by the Regional Director for the
Thirteenth Region, shall, after being duly signed by the respondent's
representatives, be posted by the respondent immediately upon receipt
thereof, and maintained by it for sixty (60) consecutive days there-
after, in conspicuous places, including all places where notices to
employees are customarily posted. Reasonable steps shall be taken
by the respondent to insure that said notices are not altered, defaced,
or covered by any other material;
(b) Notify the Regional Director for the Thirteenth Region in
writing, within ten (10) days from the date of this Order, what steps
the respondent has taken to comply herewith.
1 Said notice, however, shall be, and it hereby is, amended by striking from the first
paragraph thereof the words "The Recommendations of a Trial Examiner" and sub-
stituting in lieu thereof the words "A Decision and Order."
REPUBLIC DRILL & TOOL COMPANY 957
AND rr is HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED that the complaint be, and it
hereby is, dismissed insofar as it alleges that the respondent violated
Section 8 (2) of the Act with respect to the "Republic Plan," includ-
ing the "Trustees" and the "General Assembly," but excluding the
House Committees;
AND IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED that the allegation of the com-
plaint that the respondent violated Section 8 (2) of the Act with
respect to the House Committees be, and it hereby is, severed from
the remaining allegations in the complaint and that the record be
reopened and the proceeding be remanded to the Regional Director
for the Thirteenth Region for further hearing consistent with this
Decision.
MR. GERARD D. REILLY took no part in the consideration of the
above Decision and Order.
INTERMEDIATE REPORT
Mr. Gustaf B. Erickson, for the Board.
Mr. F. H. Towner, of Winston, Strawn & Shaw, of Chicago, Ill., for the
respondent.
Messrs . Henry Meihs, T. Louis Majors, and Louis Torre, of Chicago , Ill., for
the Union.
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon an amended charge duly filed on August 18, 1944 , by United Electrical,
Radio & Machine Workers of America , Local 1114, C.I.O., herein called the
Union , the National Labor Relations Board , herein called the Board, by its
Regional Director for the Thirteenth Region ( Chicago, Illinois ), issued its
complaint dated August 22, 1944, against Republic Drill & Tool Company,
herein called the respondent , alleging that the respondent had engaged in and
was engaging in unfair labor practices affecting commerce , within the meaning
of Section 8 (1) and (2) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the National Labor
Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act.
With respect to the unfair labor practices , the complaint alleged in substance
that the respondent ( 1) instituted , sponsored , and interfered with the forma-
tion and administration of the General Assembly , a labor organization of its
employees , and contributed financial and other support thereto ; (2) instituted,
sponsored , and conducted employee meetings in the plant for the purpose of
handling grievances of employees through "trustees " and "house committees"
appointed by the respondent ; (3) distributed publications containing questions
of employees concerning wages, hours, and working conditions and sponsored
and conducted elections in which employees voted as to whether they wished
to he represented by a labor organization or by the respondent's supervisory
employees ; and (4 ) by the aforesaid acts urged and persuaded its employees
not to become or remain members of the Union , or of any labor organization
other than the General Assembly.
On August 30, 1944, the respondent filed a motion to dismiss the complaint,
0
958 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
which the Chief Trial Examiner , on September 1, denied . On September 9, the
respondent filed an answer admitting certain of the allegations of the complaint,
but denying that it had engaged in any unfair labor practices.
Pursuant to notice , a hearing was held on October 3 and 4, 1944, before
Henry J . Kent , a Trial Examiner duly designated by the Chief Trial Examiner.
The Board , the respondent, and the Union were represented by counsel and
participated in the hearing . Full opportunity to be heard, to examine and
cross-examine witnesses , and to introduce evidence bearing upon the issues
was afforded all parties . On October 4, at the close of the hearing , counsel
for the Board and for the respondent engaged in oral argument.
On November 28, 1944, pursuant to Article II, Section 30, of the Board's
Rules and Regulations , Series 3 , as amended , the Chief Trial Examiner Issued
an order directing that the hearing be reopened , that the General Assembly be
served with a copy of the complaint and a notice of hearing as provided for in
article II, Section 5 of the Rules and Regulations,' and that the General As-
sembly be given an opportunity to file an answer to the complaint within
10 days from the date of service upon it.
Pursuant to notice, a further hearing was held on December 19 , 1944 , partici-
pated in by the Board , the respondent , and the Union. The Board , prior to the
hearing, attempted to obtain service upon the General Assembly by addressing
registered envelopes containing copies of the complaint and notice of hearing
to the General Assembly and to H . A. Brogan, Earl F. Reinhart , and Clarence
Avildsen , officers of the respondent , as "trustees" of the General Assembly.'
Brogan , Reinhart , and Avildsen refused receipt of the registered articles.,
At the hearing , counsel for the Board moved to amend the complaint so as to
substitute, In effect , Republic Plan in place of the General Assembly as a labor
organization alleged to have been formed and dominated by the respondent'
The Trial Examiner granted this motion . Counsel for the Board then at-
tempted, in open court , to obtain service of the amended complaint upon
Brogan , Reinhart , and Avildsen as "trustees" for the Republic Plan. These
individuals refused service on the ground that they did not represent Republic
Plan. The Trial Examiner , upon motion , granted the respondent 5 days within
which to file a motion to dismiss the complaint . The respondent filed such a
motion on December 21. On January 2, 1945 , the Trial Examiner issued an
order denying this motion , directed that a further hearing be conducted on
January 8, and granted the respondent until that date to file an answer to
the amended complaint . On January 8, at the hearing , the respondent filed
1 The pertinent provision of Article II, Section 5, of the Rules and Regulations reads
as follows :
"Whenever the complaint contains allegations under Section 8 (2) of the Act, any
labor organization referred to in such allegations shall be duly served with a copy
of the complaint and Notice of Hearing."
s As is hereinafter found, the General Assembly is not a labor organization , and the
term "trustee" is a mere euphemism used to express Brogan 's, Reinhart's and Avildsen's
purported conception of their relationship to the respondent's employees.
2 The envelope addressed to the General Assembly was returned to the Post Office,
marked "refused."
* This allegation of the complaint , as amended , reads as follows :
The respondent by its officers and agents has, since October 1942 , had in effect and
now has in effect a general scheme or plan in which employees participate and
which exists for the purpose , in whole or in part, of dealing with the respondent
concerning grievances , labor disputes , wages, rates of pay , hours of employment, or
conditions of employment variously known and referred to as the Trustees, House
Committee, Counsellors , General Assembly and Republic Plan , herein referred to in
the aggregate as the Republic Plan . The Republic Plan is a labor organization
within the meaning of Section 2 ( 5) of the Act.
s
REPUBLIC DRILL & TOOL COMPANY 959
its answer denying the allegations with respect to the unfair labor practices.
On January 9, the Trial Examiner upon motion, issued an order giving Republic
Plan 10 days within which to file an answer to the complaint , and adjourned
the hearing to January 22.1
On January 22, the hearing was resumed and concluded before Horace A.
Ruckel, the undersigned Trial Examiner, designated by the Chief Trial Exam-
iner to act in place and stead of Henry J. Kent.
Upon the entire record in the case, the undersigned makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE RESPONDENT
Republic Drill & Tool Company is a corporation having its principal office
and place of business at Chicago , Illinois, where it is engaged in the design,
manufacture, sale, and distribution of high speed and carbon twist drills. The
respondent, in the course and conduct of its business , uses raw materials In
the amount of approximately $100,000 per month . Of these raw materials,
large quantities are purchased and transported in interstate commerce from
and through States of the United States other than the State of Illinois, to
its plant at Chicago . The respondent 's finished products amount to approxi-
mately $500,000 per month in value. Of these finished products, large quanti-
ties are sold and transported in Interstate commerce from its plant in Chicago,
Illinois, to and through States of the United States other than the State of
Illinois.
The respondent's sole customer is the United States Government . The re-
spondent employs approximately 1100 employees.
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
United Electrical , Radio & Machine Workers of America , Local 1114, is a
labor organization admitting employees of the respondent to membership. It
is affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations.
III. THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
The General Assembly, Republic Plan and the House Committees ; other alleged
interference, restraint, and coercion
1. The General Assembly
During the fall of 1942 the respondent Instituted the practice of calling its
employees together In meetings . These meetings , usually referred to as general
assemblies, took place once or twice a month , or whenever the respondent's
officers believed that they had something of particular interest or importance
to announce. Until February 1943 , the general assemblies were presided over
by Earl Reinhart, the respondent's president , or by Clarence Jacobsen, one
5 During this interval the Board attempted to obtain service on Republic Plan by
mailing to Brogan , Reinhart , and Avildsen , as "trustees", registered envelopes containing
copies of the Trial Examiner 's order of January 9 giving Republic Plan 10 days from
the date of service of such order to file its answer to the amended complaint. The
registered articles were refused by Brogan , Reinhart , and Avildsen.
960 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
of its three executive vice presidents, and after February by H. A. Brogan,
another executive vice president,' who in that month assumed charge of and
devoted all his time to personnel management.
It was the practice for Reinhart and Jacobsen, and thereafter for Brogan,
to prepare speeches of some considerable length and to read them to the em-
ployees in the general assembly. Copies of all these speeches, beginning with
that delivered at the first assembly on September 16, 1942, are in evidence. It
is hereinafter considered whether certain statements therein contained were
violative of Sections 8 (1) of the Act as constituting interference, restraint, or
coercion. It is clear, however, that these periodic assemblies did not constitute
a labor organization. There was no employee participation whatsoever, aside
from occasional and spontaneous questions from the floor, and even these were
not encouraged. Nor was there any dealing between the respondent and the
employees. The latter were present for the sole purpose of being addressed by
an officer of the respondent concerning the respondent's policies and problems,
and to hear announcements of one kind or another deemed to have a bearing
on the safety, happiness, and general morale of the employees. In view of
these facts, it is irrelevant that some of these announcements pertained to
wages and working conditions.
At an assembly on October 9, 1942, Reinhart announced the Installation of
a number of "suggestion" boxes in the plant, and urged the employees to
deposit therein suggestions designed to make the plant "a better place to work
in." Some of these suggestions were read at subsequent assemblies and
commented upon by the speaker. About twice a month all the suggestions
received during the preceding 2 weeks were mimeographed and posted on the
plant bulletin board. Later this practice was abandoned, and the suggestions,
together with the respondent's reply thereto, were set forth in The Republic
Forum, a plant paper issued irregularly by the personnel department , begin-
ning in April, 1944?
2. Public opinion polls and "Republic Plan"
On June 17, 1943, when addressing a general assembly, Brogan made refer-
ence to a previously circulated petition, concerning which the record Is other-
wise silent, by which, according to Brogan, 90 percent of the employees "said
that they were for C. A. (Avlldsen) and not for the C. I. O." Brogan stated
that he had been informed by an active adherent of the Union that this peti-
tion was not representative of the employees' views because most of the union
members had signed it only to avoid being conspicuous. Brogan went on to
declare that for this reason the respondent would conduct a poll by secret ballot
to determine whether the employees preferred the Union to the "Trustees."'
The poll was conducted on June 25 , and ballots In the following form were
6 The respondent 's officers are : Clarence Avildsen , chairman of the board of directors ;
Earl Reinhart , president ; and Clarence Jacobsen , George Avildsen , and H. A. Brogan,
executive vice presidents.
The Republic Forum contained little aside from comments and complaints about
working conditions and suggestions as to how they might be improved All suggestions
were numbered consecutively , and the respondent's answer was set forth after each
suggestion. After three issues The Republic Forum ceased publication.
s The significance of this term Is hereinafter described . It had reference to the re-
spondent's officers. -
REPUBLIC DRILL & TOOL COMPANY 961
distributed to the employees ° who then marked them and deposited them in
ballot boxes located in the plant :
Ballot for Election of Trustees
q YES I am in favor of having the Management continue as our
Trustees , until such time as the employees decide thru an
election that the Management is no longer deserving of this
trust.
q NO I am not in favor of having the Management continue as our
Trustees . I believe this trust should be placed with others,
more capable of acting as our Trustees.
q I am undecided about the question of Trustees and cannot make
up my mind how to vote.
Brogan testified as follows with respect to the origin of the term "Trustees,"
and his conception of its meaning :
Q. Now, will you tell me what is meant by the term "trustees"?
A. All right ; it is our philosophy about the responsibility of the manage-
ment of our company * * * we feel that we have a triple responsibility.
The word "trustees" is not used in a legal sense. You might say "custodian"
would be an equally well suited word.
We feel that we have a responsibility to the stockholders of our company
to operate the company in such a way that their investment will be pro-
tected and they will be able to realize a satisfactory return on that invest-
ment. We also feel that we have a responsibility to the customers who buy
our products . We are the custodians of their interest to the extent that
we must furnish them with a product of suitable quality at a price that is
consistent with the prices asked by our competitors and we also recognize
a responsibility to the employees of the company.
* * * We have told our employees many times that we only want to
assume that full responsibility insofar as the employees are concerned as
long as they are satisfied with the manner in which we are discharging
that responsibility.
Q. Who, by name , are the trustees?
A. Those individuals that I have mentioned as the management.
The term "trustee" meant less to President Reinhart than it did to Vice-
President Brogan:
Q. You are one of the trustees?
A. I can only repeat I am one of the officers. This term "trustee" is
something that is more or less-I hardly know what word to use-it is
just a term.
Ostensibly , the employees were asked in the poll of June , 1943 , to vote
whether they wished the respondent 's officers to continue to represent their
interests as employees . Thus viewed , the poll is meaningless . Actually, however,
both the respondent and the employees understood that the latter were choosing
between the respondent 's officers and a union . That this was the respondent's
understanding is made clear not only by Brogan's remarks at the general
assembly on June 17 , but also by the following incident . In the first issue of
The Republic Forum for April , 1944, the following "suggestion" and answer
appeared:
9 By another ballot, the employees voted also on the question as to whether Independ-
ence Day should be observed by closing the plant on Sunday, July 4, or on July 5 By
a third ballot, they voted on the retention of certain "extra" services provided by the
respondent.
686572--46-62
962 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
NO. 136-THAT OLD RUMOR
There is a rumor going around that we are again to vote on a union.
If that is true we want the union to run the election and not the company.
If a meeting10 is held beforehand and our trustees get up on the platform
and hand the girls a lot of soft soap-the trustees , of course , knowing that
a great many of the girls are saps enough to fall for their banter-We also
want a representative of the Union to speak and give his views on the
question at hand. If there is an election we want a fair and unbiased one.
Not signed.
ANSWER
At the time of the last election on the Union question, The Trustees
announced that if a majority desired to be represented by a union, instead
of the present plan of dealing direct with the management, we could write
6 or 7 different unions to come in and talk to the employees * * * This
offer was never taken up because in a secret ballot * * * the employees
of Republic voted as follows :
94% voted "No union."
3% voted "For a union."
Now that we will soon vote on unions again , we shall again extend our
invitation to the unions * * * (Emphasis added.)
Brogan virtually admitted while testifying that the balloting in June, 1943,
was a vote on the question of a union :
Q. Now, I will give you Board's Exhibit 6 and ask you where on that
ballot an employee is given an opportunity to vote on the question of
whether he wants a union.
A. It is not here. I can see that very easy . The only reference that
is made here that might answer your question is wherein the ballot reads :
"I am not in favor of having the management continue as our Trustees.
I believe this trust should be placed with others, more capable of acting
as our "Trustees."
Q. Now, what do you have in mind there , a Union?
A. The obvious alternative would be a Union.
The second poll on the question of a union, foreshadowed in the question
and answer quoted above from The Republic Forum, was preceded , on June 2,
by a general assembly where Brogan announced that another such poll would
be taken. Brogan declared :
* * * We are going to continue to act as your trustees , and we are
going to continue to let you vote on the question of the union, providing,
of course, that a majority of you wish to vote on that question * * *
* * * Now * * * before going ahead with such an election, we
plan to have each of you fill out a questionnaire which is designed to find
out how you feel about our employee relations policy. If the answers to
these questions show that you are in favor of voting on the Union question,
we will go ahead and hold another election, but we shall not call it an
"election" because that word is misleading * * *. Since the proposed
election here would not be on any particular Union, it is a mistake to call
it an "election." It is really a REFERENDUM.
On June 3, the respondent circulated a questionnaire , in effect a sample
ballot, setting forth seven propositions to be voted upon. On this questionnaire
the phrase "Republic Plan" is used for the first time :
10 Unquestionably the correspondent refers to a general assembly.
REPUBLIC DRILL & TOOL COMPANY 963
QUESTIONNAIRE
To BE ANSWERED By
The Employees of the Republic Drill & Tool Company, Chicago, Illinois
Subject : EMPLOYEE RELATIONS POLICIES
1. Are you in favor of continuing the "REPUBLIC PLAN" of holding
General Assemblies of the Employees, at which the Management reports
on incoming orders, the prospects for new orders, current profits, produc-
tion schedules, and other matters of interest to Employees, such as wages,
hours, working conditions, safety, handbills of labor organizing committees,
labor laws, vacations, picnics, dances, etc?
YES q
NO q
DON'T KNOW q
2 Are you in favor of continuing the "REPUBLIC PLAN" of holding,
from time to time, Secret Ballot Referendums-in which Employees act as
Judges and Clerks of Election--on such questions as
(1) Whether all or some of the "Extras" should be eliminated and
the cost added to the pay checks ;
(2) Whether the Employees should be represented by a Labor
Union, and
(3) other polices of general interest to Employees?
YES q
NO q
DON'T KNOW q
3. Republic's Management has announced this Policy:
In our efforts to deal honestly and fairly with all Employees, we are sure
to make mistakes. Since we are eager to correct such mistakes, we urge
the Employees to bring them to our attention as Complaints and Sugges-
tions. At this time, these Complaints and Suggestions are being presented
in several ways, as follows :
a. Individually Written Suggestions (Signed or Unsigned)
b. Group Petitions
c House Committee Meetings
d. Handbills or letters of Union Organizing Committees
e Private talks with Foreman or Counselor
f. Private talks with officers of the Company
g. Department Meetings attended voluntarily, on Employees' own time,
before or after work
Are you in favor of continuing this "REPUBLIC PLAN" for handling
Complaints and Suggestions?
YES q
NO q
DON'T KNOW q
4 Are you in favor of continuing the "REPUBLIC FORUM" in which
the Company publishes the Suggestions, Questions and Opinions of Repub-
lic Employees, together with the answers and comment of the Personnel
Department?
YES q
NO q
DON'T KNOW q
964 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
5. Republic's Management has told the Employees :
"Labor and Capital here at Republic must work together If we are to
successfully compete with the Labor and Capital In other drill companies,
and thereby get our fair share of the drill business of the country."
Do you feel that the Employees should support this policy?
YES q
NO q
DON'T KNOW q
6. Republic's Management has announced this Policy :
Regardless of whether the Employees are represented by a Union, we
shall do our best to carry out our pledge to act as Trustees for the 3
groups which must be treated fairly if the Company is to be successful,
namely: (a) The Customers, (b) The Employees, (c) The Stockholders.
If you were "The Management" would you adopt such a Policy?
YES q
NO q
DON'T KNOW q
7. Are you in favor of the recently announced plan of Republic's Man-
agement 'to try to get the War Labor Board's approval of a new Profit-
Sharing Bonus Plan, so that eventually all Republic Employees may be
fairly rewarded through Profit-Sharing Bonuses, In addition to Incentive
Pay, in the form of either Individual Production Bonuses, Group Produc-
tion Bonuses, or Group Efficiency Bonuses?
YES q
NO q
DON'T KNOW q
The election was held on June 8. From 72 to 88 percent of the employees
casting ballots voted "yes" on the above propositions. The results were made
known to the employees in a special issue of Republic News" for June 10.^
It appears clear that the respondent employed the term "Republic Plan" as an
euphemism to characterize its personnel policy, in much the same way that it
dubbed its officers "Trustees." There was, in fact, no existing organization by
that name nor does it appear that any was contemplated. Even as a term,
"Republic Plan," as contrasted with "Trustees," does not seem to have achieved
much currency. It received no mention in either of two subsequent general
assemblies addressed by Brogan, on July 5 and September 11, in spite of the
fact that on the latter date Brogan described at some length, for the benefit
of new employees, the results of the balloting on June 8. This was a strange
omission if, as the Board contends, "Republic Plan" was a labor organization
newly formed for the respondent's employees. Nor did "Republic Plan" re-
ceive mention in subsequent issues of Republic News. The issues of The
Republic Forum, with one exception," make no reference whatsoever to "Repub-
lic Plan," although that publication existed for the sole purpose of publishing
and answering questions pertaining to the working conditions of the employees.
"Republic News was issued monthly by the respondent and contained news of genera]
interest to employees.
'9 The respondent published comments on the results, such as the following comment
on Question 6, the "Trustee" question :
MANAGEMENT COMMENT: With this support of its Trustees policy by 76%
of Republic's employees, the management will continue to act as Trustees for the
three groups mentioned.
'S The third and final issue of The Republic Forum, for September, 1944, states in a
box on the first page that, it is published "because it is part of the 'Republic Plan'
which was approved by 84 out of every 100 Republic employees in a secret ballot Opinion
Poll held on June 10, 1944."
REPUBLIC DRILL & TOOL COMPANY 965
The undersigned finds Brogan's testimony as to the meaning of "Republic
Plan," to be in accord with the facts revealed by the record as a whole:
Q. (By Mr. Towner.) Mr. Brogan , is there any organization of any kind
known as Republic Plan?
A.'No.
Q. What Is the Republic Plan?
A. Well, I would designate it as a description of the pattern we follow
in our employee relations program.
Q. Is it in existence as an organization at all?
A. No.
Q. Has it any officers?
A. No.
Q. Does it function in any respect as an organization?
A. No.
Brogan 's testimony is supported by that of Reinhart:
Q. Do you know any organization or accumulation of persons or anything
of that character known as Republic Plan?
A. No.
Q. Does it have any existence as far as you are concerned?
A. No.
* * * * * * *
Q. As a matter of fact, it is an idea , isn't it? Isn't that about what it is?
A. I suppose so. I couldn 't explain it in any other way.
* * * * * * *
And by that of Avildsen :
Q. Have you any labor organization known as Republic Plan?
A. No.
* * * * * *
Q. In fact, have you ever in your life heard of it as an existing corporeal
thing?
A. No.
3. The House Committees
In January 1943, the respondent instituted the House Committees , reference
to which has been made above. A House Committee composed of the oldest em-
ployee from each department in point of service, was appointed by the respond-
ent for each of the three shifts. Each departmental representative served for
4 months and was automatically succeeded by the employee with the next
longest service in his department . A chairman and a secretary were chosen
by the membership of the committee . The House Committees met once a month
in meetings customarily attended by a representative from the personnel
department or by the shift superintendent. Employee representatives were
paid two dollars for their attendance . The House Committees received com-
plaints from employees relative to working conditions , and passed them on to
management for investigation and adjustment . For the purpose of channeling
complaints to the House Committees, floor subcommittees were established
whose duties were to receive complaints from employees during the intervals
between meetings of the House Committees and to name a representative to
report them at those meetings.
There was no interrelation between the House Committees and the general
assemblies in either their structure or functioning . Neither the grievances
966 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
presented to the House Committees nor the manner of their adjustment formed
any part of the subject matter of the program of these assemblies. The House
Committees, however, participated in the conduct of the public opinion poll in
June, 1943, by choosing from among their own members employees chose
duties were to take charge of the ballot boxes and to count the ballots.
4. Speeches made at the General Assemblies
Brogan testified as follows respecting the respondent's reaction to the dis-
tribution of union handbills:
Q. Isn't it true, then, that every time, the Union may have distributed
:i handbill advocating the joining of the Union by employees, you had a
general assembly meeting following?
A. Definitely. We had announced that policy to the employees, when
the Union distributes a handbill, we pick up the ones that are lying on
the sidewalk and get extra copies and post them up on the bulletin board
in our plant and we say this handbill will be one of the subjects for dis-
cussion at our next assembly.
The following excerpted comments upon union organization, made by Rein-
hart at a general assembly on November 21, 1942, are fairly representative of
extensive remarks made by Reinhart and Brogan on that and other occasions."
* * * We are trustees. We are not bosses. We are workers, and if
we do not do a good job as trustees, we will be out of work, because there
won't be any Republic Drill left.
* * * * * *
Sometimes when a group of employees are thinking about whether or not
to join a union, they are led to believe that the capitalists or employers
are always on one side and that the laborers are on the other side and that,
therefore, they need a union to come in and represent them. Now that is
undoubtedly true in some cases.
* * * * * * *
1, * * There are about 14 or 15 drill companies in this country. Ac-
cording to the latest information, the employees of 3 of these companies
have joined unions, and the remaining 11 or 12 companies do not have
unions * * * In each of these 3 cases, where the employees felt they
had to have a union In order to get their rights, the drill company was
run by a hired man who represented an absentee owner, usually a retired
banker, who did not know what was going on and only wanted more
dividends. Under such circumstances, I am sure the workers had very good
grounds for joining a union. I have no doubt that the managers of these
companies were so afraid of these tough old bankers whom they repre-
sented, that (they) did not demand for the workers what they were en-
titled to, and the result is that the workers had to join a union to get what
they deserved. In this case, the managers of these 3 drill companies were
trustees alright, but they were trustees not for the 3 groups the way we
are, but simply the trustees for one man-a rich old banker, who probably
said "I am not going to live very long anyway, and I want to make all I
can before I die." Now that Is the story about the other drill companies
so far as I know it.
* * * Now all that leads up to this point. Since the C. I. O. know
14 The manuscript of this speech, which is in evidence, includes approximately 6,000
words.
REPUBLIC DRILL & TOOL COMPANY 967
what we are saying to you at these meetings, they are going to put out
more handbills in which they will make more claims and in which they
will no doubt deny things which I am saying here. Therefore, when you
get these handbills, don't get too excited about them and give us a chance
to tell you our side of the story. That is the American way of doing things
As I have told you before, the leaders of the C. I. 0. are high class citizens,
who have done a swell job for the workers they represent. They are
honest and conscientious men and they are very sincere in their feeling
that every worker in this Country should be in a C. I. 0. union. That is
only natural for them to feel that way.
I don't know what they are going to say in the next handbill, but it
would be very likely for them to cite cases where C. I. 0. workers are
being paid higher hourly rates then some of our highest hourly rates. So
when you see these rates don't get too excited and don't think we have let
you down. Please remember that at our last meeting when I told you
about the Fairchild rates that there were no doubt cases where C. I. C.
rates were higher than at Fairchild. I also told you that there are C. I. 0.
rates which are lower than at Fairchild. Naturally, you would not expect
the C. I. 0. to tell you about the lower rates . They will tell you only
about the higher rates.
* * * All this excitement about your wage rate came about through
the fact that the C. I. 0. handed out a bulletin telling you in effect that
we had misrepresented the facts to you. Now when the C. I. 0. put out
this bulletin, I am sure they did not know all the facts. I am sure they
sincerely thought they did know all the facts and thought we were just
like the average employer, trying to take advantage of the poor working
girl.
* * * * * * *
At one of last Saturdays meetings, several girls stood up in the meeting
and said-"Do we have to join a union?" I said that I would not try to
answer any questions that day but would be- glad to do so at the next
meeting.
You may not consider this a satisfactory answer to the question but I
am very sincere when I say that if a majority of the workers here at
Republic want a union then I think everyone should join it and make of it
100%. Whatever we do-lets not have a lot of fighting and bad feeling.
* * * * * * *
* * * I just want to say one more thing and that is that no one will
be fired or punished or discriminated against in any way because he or
she is an organizer for a union or a shop steward for a union, All members
of the C. I. 0. organizing committee are free to talk to their fellow workers
in the canteen and locker rooms, during the rest period and during the
lunch period. Naturally, we know you are not going to talk about unions
or anything else during working hours because you can't talk and do your
work.-If the members of the organizing committee wish to wear a union
button or if they want to post union bulletin board, they may do so.
The following excerpts are taken from a speech made by Brogan before the
General Assembly on June 17, 1943, a few days prior to the polling of the
employees on the question of "Trustees":
If the voting shows that the majority do not wish the Management to
act as their Trustees, we should be glad to invite representatives of several
large Unions to come in and talk to you during your lunch hour or after
968 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
your regular working hours. We would be glad to make the cafeteria
available for meetings of this nature so long as the employees attended
the meetings on their own time and not during working hours. For ex-
ample, we would be glad to invite representatives of the C. I. O. to tell you
why they feel their union should represent you. We would also be glad
to invite representatives of the American Federation of Labor. Likewise,
we would invite representatives of the International Brotherhood of
Machinists, who recently withdrew from the American Federation of Labor.
We would also be glad to invite District 50 of the United Mine Workers,
which is the division of John L. Lewis' Union which is devoted to organ-
izing unions outside of the coal mines. This union has been active in the
Chicago Area lately. Out at Scully-Jones Co., a tool-manufacturer here
in Chicago, another Union called "The Brotherhood of Mine, Mill and
Smelter Workers" have been trying to organize their employees. We
could also invite this union to come in and talk with you. In fact, we
would be glad to invite representatives of any other union which you
might wish to suggest. If you wish to have a union, we feel that the least
we can do for you is to afford you every opportunity to select the union
which a majority of you feel will do the best job of representing you. * * *
I am sure many of you people must say to yourself-"it seems to me that
every plant has a Union now-a-days. If we don't have one here at Republic
we may be missing something." The answer to that is simply this-yes,
you may be missing something and maybe you would be better off if you
had a Union. However, so that you will not feel you are completely off
base for not having a Union so far, I do think I should remind you that
there are some very large plants in this country which do not have Unions
today and never did have them because the employees felt that they have
nothing to gain from a union.
At a general assembly held on September 11, 1944, Brogan made the follow-
ing statement , among others of a similar nature:
In the charges which the U. E. C. I. O. have made against us , they state
that at these general assemblies which we hold from time to time really
amount to a labor organization dominated by the Company and that it is
illegal for us to conduct employee meetings for the purpose of handling
employee grievances and that by publishing and distributing publications
such as the Republic Forum, the Company sets itself up as a rival con-
tender of the union for the loyalty of its employees. The C. I. O. also
claims that it is illegal for us to hold elections in which employees vote
whether they wish to be represented by a union. They also claim that we
have urged you, warned you, and persuaded you not to join the union and
that all these things constitute unfair labor practices within the meaning
of the Wagner Act.
After receiving this complaint from the National Labor Relations Board,
we turned the matter over to our lawyers in order to get from them a legal
opinion as to whether or not we have violated the Wagner Act. * * *
Our old-timers know that we have frequently told you, from this platform,
that we will do nothing whatsoever to interfere with the organization of
a union here at Republic. In fact, you will recall that we have even
offered to allow representatives of the union to come into the plant and
talk to you here in the Cafeteria in your lunch period. * * * If the
employees of this plant have not formed a union up to this time, it is
probably because they do not want a union and not because this company
REPUBLIC DRILL & TOOL COMPANY 969
has restrained them in any way whatsoever. But to be sure there is no
misunderstanding, I will tell you again that any Republic employee may
john any union at any time he wishes, and that the management of Republic
will not discharge him or discriminate against him in any way because he
has done so.
On October 14, 1944, at a general assembly held after the first hearing in
this case was closed, and before it was resumed on December 19, Brogan again
spoke on the subject of union organization. The following excerpts are typical
of his speech as a whole:
At the National Labor Relations Board on Tuesday, we filed as evidence
in this hearing, a complete copy of every assembly talk ever given since
Republic Drill started. A complete set of these assembly talks are now
available to the U. E. C. I. O. This means that the U E C. I. O. now
has a complete record of everything we have ever said to you at these
meetings. This is perfectly all right and the way it should be. In fact.
had the U. E. C. I. O. ever asked us for a copy of these talks we would
have provided them with such copies. It is quite probable that the organ-
izing committees of the U. E. C. I. O. will review these talks and perhaps
find instance where we may have failed to do some of the things we said
we would. Should this happen, it is quite possible that the U. E. C. I. O.
will call your attention to these things through their handbills. In any
event, we will continue our policy of answering all of the U. E. C. I. O.
handbills so that you will always know the facts. * * *
In our next general assembly we will discuss in detail the four points
brought out in the last Union handbill which were: 1. Equal pay for equal
work; 2. the revision of the little Steel formula now under consideration;
3. The Republic Incentive Plan ; 4. the matter of wage cuts.
As we have said at previous meetings, the labor unions of this country
have done a tremendous amount of good for the workers of America. The
U. E. C. I. O. is a very powerful union because its leaders are very able
men who have done an outstanding job for the workers. Many of you
have brothers and sisters or fathers who are members of a U. E. C. I. O.
union and you know they have received many benefits through the
U E C I. O. That means when the U. E. C. I. O. says something to our .
employees you take it seriously. If they tell you, as they did in the last
handbill, that it would be cheaper for Republic Drill to invest thousands
of dollars to keep the union out of the plant rather than install a fair
incentive system which will guarantee the employees 1% return in wages
for lrjo increase in production, you have a right to take such a statement
seriously unless we can show you that the U. E. C. I. O. made a mistake
when they made this statement. I am sure that the U. E. C. I. O. would
not deliberately try to mislead you, * * *
CONCLUSIONS
The Board contends that the General Assembly, the House Committees, and
the Trustees, taken together, constitute an organization known as the Republic
Plan, and that Republic Plan is a company-dominated labor organization exist-
ing in violation of Section 8 (2) of the Act. The undersigned finds this con-
tention unsupported by the record.
The General Assembly is simply a gathering together of the respondent's
employees, in meetings called by the respondent. Assuming it to be an organi-
zation in any sense of the word, it still falls short of being a labor organization,
970 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
as defined by the Act," because of the absence of employee participation, and
because dealing with the respondent is no part of its purpose . The employees,
in these assemblies , merely constitute an audience to which the respondent
makes announcements which it deems to be of interest or importance to its
employees. The fact that many of these announcements have to do with deci-
sions as to wages and working conditions-decisions arrived at by the respond-
ent acting unilaterally-does not serve to constitute the assembly a labor
organization , any more than other announcements pertaining to problems of
production serve to convert it into a labor-management committee.
It is equally clear from the record that the term "Trustees," as applied to
Reinhart , Brogan , and Avildsen , was a mere euphemism , the use of which the
respondent encouraged so as to soften and obscure the reality of the relation-
ship of employer and employee. The euphemism, when used in conjunction
with other euphemisms such as "Republic Plan" and with such paraphernalia
of an aggressive personnel department as opinion polls and The Republic
Forum, had the effect, if not the purpose, of creating In the minds of the
employees the illusion that they shared to some extent In the operation of the
plant , that the respondent was not a mere employer and the employees mere
employees, and that the Republic Drill & Tool Company was not a mere
business enterprise. Far from being an over-all organization which Included
the General Assembly , House Committees , and Trustees among its integral
parts, "Republic Plan," actually, was only a term descriptive of the respondent's
personnel policy . Whatever else might be said of It, the use of such verbiage
as "Republic Plan" and "Trustees," does and cannot constitute "Republic
Plan" a labor organization.
Nor does the fact that the respondent , through Brogan and Reinhart,
addressed employees repeatedly and at length on the subject of the Union
and union organization , constitute, In the circumstances of this case, inter-
ference , restraint, and coercion . These addresses refrained from attacking or
disparaging the Union . On the contrary , the Union is repeatedly praised for
its accomplishments on behalf of its members in other plants , and Its adherents
are assured that allegiance to it will not result in discrimination against them.
In these addresses the speakers , admittedly , attempted to meet the arguments
set forth in the Union's handbills. In doing so, however, they refrained from
inferring that the organizers for the Union were motivated by selfish or ulterior
motives. In this respect Brogan's and Reinhart's remarks were in marked
contrast to those made by the employer 's representatives In the American Tube
Bending case," held by the Court not to be violative of the Act when unaccom-
panied by acts of coercion.
The undersigned finds, however, that the polls taken in June 1943, and June
1944, constituted interference and restraint . It is evident from the record,
and admitted by Brogan, that these polls were conducted in response to requests
that the employees be given a chance to vote on the question of a union. The
phrasing of the ballot used in the 1943 poll clearly, and the ballot used in
the 1944 poll somewhat less clearly, cast the Union in the role of a competitor
with the respondent's officers for the loyalty of the employees . The question is
made one of "either, or." Either the respondent 's officers, on the one hand,
25 The Act , Section 2 (5), defines a labor organization as "any organization of any
kind , or any agency * * * or plan , in which employees participate and which exists
for the purpose, in whole or In part , of dealing with employers concerning grievances,
labor disputes , wages, rates of pay, hours of employment, or conditions of work."
le N. L. R. B. v. American Tube Bending Co., 134 F . ( 2d) 993 ( C. C. A. 2), 12 L. it. It
285, J-707, setting aside 44 N , L, R. R. 121 ( C-2259 ), 320 U , S, 768 , cert . denied,
REPUBLIC DRILL & TOOL COMPANY 971
or the Union on the other, may look after the Interests of the employees, but
not both . The issue thus created is a false one which makes no allowance for
the co-existence of the respondent's officers and the Union, each within their
own proper sphere with relation to the welfare of the employees. Moreover,
It is open to the construction that if the employees choose the Union the
respondent will go out of business, thus depriving the employees of their
livelihood.
The undersigned finds that the respondent, by conducting polls in June 1943
and July 1944, as above described, interfered with, restrained, and coerced its
employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act.
The House Committees, which the respondent set up in the plant and which
admittedly handled complaints and grievances of employees pertaining to their
working conditions, are similar to other plant committees which the Board,
in other cases," has held to be labor organizations existing in violation of
Section 8 (2) of the Act. For reasons which are hereinafter set forth in the
section entitled "The remedy," the undersigned makes no finding In this case
that the respondent, by forming and supporting the House Committees, com-
imtted or did not commit an unfair labor practice
IV. THE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES UPON COMMERCE
The activities of the respondent set forth in Section III, above, occurring in
connection with the operations of the respondent described 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
Having found that the respondent has engaged in certain unfair labor prac-
tices, the undersigned will recommend that it cease and desist therefrom and
take certain affirmative action which the undersigned finds will effectuate the
policies of the Act.
The undersigned has found that "Republic Plan" was not a general scheme
or plan in which employees participate and which, in the language of the
complaint, "exists for the purpose, in whole or in part, of dealing with the
respondent concerning grievances, labor disputes, wages, rates of pay, hours
of employment, or conditions of employment variously known and referred to
as the Trustees, House Committee, Counsellors, General Assembly and Republic
Plan."
Although the evidence tends to show that the House Committees are labor
organizations existing in violation of Section 8 (2), of the Act, the undersigned
is unable to make findings of fact and conclusions of law to that effect because
of the lack of service upon those organizations.
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact, and upon the entire record
in the case, the undersigned makes the following:
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. United Electrical , Radio & Machine Workers of America , Local 1114,
17 See Matter of J. W. Greer Company, 52 N. L. R. B. 1341 ; Julius Kayser ct Co,
29 N. L. R. B. 1025.
972 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
C. I. 0., is a labor organization within the meaning of Section 2 (5) of the
Act.
2. By interfering with, restraining, and coercing its employees in the exercise
of their rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act, the respondent has engaged
in and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section
8 (1) of the Act.
3. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair labor practices affecting
commerce within the meaning of Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The respondent has not engaged in any unfair labor practices by having
in effect a general scheme or plan known as "Republic Plan."
RECOMMENDATIONS
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, the
undersigned recommends that Republic Drill and Tool Company, Chicago,
Illinois, its officers, agents, successors, and assigns , shall:
1. Cease and desist from :
(a) Interfering with, restiainuig, and coercing its employees in the exercise
of the right to self-organization, to form labor organizations, to join or assist
United Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers of America, Local 1114, C. I. 0.,
or any other labor organization, to bargain collectively through representatives
of their own choosing, and to engage in concerted activities for the purpose
of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection, as guaranteed In
Section 7 of the Act.
2. Take the following affirmative action which the undersigned finds will
effectuate the policies of the Act:
(a) Post immediately in its plant in Chicago, Illinois, copies of the notice
attached hereto and marked "Appendix A." Copies of said notice, to be
furnished by the Regional Director for the Thirteenth Region, shall, after being
duly signed by the respondent's representatives, be posted by the respondent
immediately upon receipt thereof, and maintained by it for sixty ( 60) consecu-
tive days thereafter, in conspicuous places, including all places where notices
to employees are customarily posted Reasonable steps shall be taken by the
respondent to insure that said notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by
any other material;
(b) File with the Regional Director for the Thirteenth Region on or before
ten (10) days from the receipt of this Intermediate Report, a report in writing
setting forth in detail the manner and form in which the respondent has com-
plied with the foregoing recommendations.
It is further recounnended that unless on or before ten (10) days from the
receipt of this Intermediate Report, the respondent notifies the Regional Direc-
tor in writing that it will comply with the foregoing recommendations, the
National Labor Relations Board issue an order requiring the respondent to
take the action aforesaid
It is further recommended that the complaint be dismissed insofar as it
alleges that the respondent formed and dominated a labor organization which
"exists for the purpose, in whole or in part, of dealing with the respondent
concerning grievances, labor disputes, wages, rates of pay, hours of employ-
ment, or conditions of employment variously known and referred to as the
Trustees, House Committee, Counsellors, General Assembly and Republic Plan,
herein referred to in the aggregate as the Republic Plan."
As provided in Section 33 of Article II, of the Rules and Regulations of the
National Labor Relations Board, Series 3, as amended , effective July 12, 1944,
REPUBLIC DRILL & TOOL COMPANY 973
any party or counsel for the Board may, within fifteen (15) days from the
date of the entry of the order transferring the case to the Board , pursuant to
Section 32 of Article II of said Rules and Regulations, file with the Board,
Rochambeau Building, Washington 25, D. C, an original and four copies of
a statement in writing setting forth such exceptions to the Intermediate Report
or to any other part of the record or proceeding (including rulings upon all
motions or objections) as he relies upon, together with the original and four
copies of a brief in support thereof. Immediately upon the filing of such
statement of exceptions and/or brief, the party or counsel for the Board filing
the same shall serve a copy thereof upon each of the other parties and shall
tile a copy with the Regional Director. As provided in said Section 33, should
any party desire permission to argue orally before the Board request therefor
must be made in writing to the Board within ten (10) days from the date of
the order transferring the case to the Board.
HORACE A. RucI EL,
Trial Examiner.
Dated August 9, 1945.
"APPENDIX"
NorICE To ALL EMPLOYEES PURSUANT TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS 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 in any manner interfere with, restrain, or coerce our employees
in the exercise of their right to self-organization, to form labor organiza-
tions, to join or assist United Electrical Radio & Machine Workers of
America, Local 1114, C. I. 0., or any other labor organization , to bargain
collectively through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage
in concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other
mutual aid or protection. All our employees are free to become or remain
members of this union, or any other labor organization.
REPUBLIC DRILL & TOOL COMPANY,
Employer.
Dated ..... By ... ..... ... ............................
(Representative) (Title)
This notice must remain posted for 60 days from the date hereof , and must
not be altered, defaced, or covered by any other material.