Reynolds Metals Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Feb 28, 1947

72 N.L.R.B. 991 (N.L.R.B. 1947)

In the Matter of REYNOLDS METALS COMPANY, EMPLOYER and UNITED
STEELWORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO, PETITIONER
Case No. 19-R-2062 .Decided, February 28,1947
Mr. John T. Kilpatrick , of Richmond , Va., and Mr. Arthur F.
Johnson , of Longview , Wash., for the Employer.
Messrs. Harry George and James Menzie , of Portland , Oreg., for
the Petitioner.
Messrs . P. H. Le Riviere and Ward Gregg, of Longview , Wash.,
for the Intervenor.
Miss Muriel J. Levor , of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND -
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon an amended petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held:
at Longview, Washington, on December 19, 1946, before Patrick H.
Walker, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the-
hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.'
Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations
Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
Reynolds Metals Company, a Delaware corporation, with its prin-
cipal place of business at Richmond, Virginia, is engaged in the pro-
duction and fabrication of aluminum sheets, rods, tubes, coils, extru-
sions, aluminum alloys, and aluminum foils at plants located at
Louisville, Kentucky; Chicago, Illinois; Richmond, Virginia; Har-
rison, New York; San Francisco, California; Listerville, Alabama;
and Longview, Washington.
The Employer is engaged in the production of aluminum at the
Longview plant, the sole plant involved in this proceeding, where
more than 60,000,000 pounds of aluminum are produced annually.
' The petition and other formal papers were amended at the hearing to disclose the cor-
icdt name of the Employee
72 N L R B, No 167.
991
7 31 2 42-47-vol 72--64
992 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Substantially all raw materials used at the Longview plant are
shipped from points outside the State of Washington . More than 95
percent of the products finished at the Longview plant is shipped to
points outside the State of Washington.
The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
H. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated, with the Congress
,of Industrial Organizations , claiming to represent employees of the
Employer.
Longview Federated Aluminum Council, herein called the Inter-
venor, is a labor organization affiliated with the American Federa-
tion of Labor, claiming to represent employees of the Employer.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Employer refuses to recognize the Petitioner as the exclusive
bargaining representative of employees of the Employer unless the
Petitioner has been certified by the Board in an appropriate unit. At
the hearing, the Intervenor took the position that the present pro-
ceeding was barred because of existing contractual relations between
the Intervenor and the Employer.2
The Employer and the Intervenor have maintained collective bar-
gaining relations since September 18, 1941. On that date, they en-
tered into a collective bargaining agreement effective for 1 year, and
renewable thereafter from year to year in the absence of 30 days'
notice prior to the expiration date of a desire to cancel the contract.
This contract was renewed from year to year with some alterations.
On August 16, 1946, a few days before the operative date of the
.automatic renewal clause, the Intervenor wrote the Employer request-
ing that negotiations be commenced concerning adjustments in wages
and other provisions of the contract , which by its terms expired Sep-
tember 18, 1946, unless automatically renewed. On August 21, the
Employer acknowledged receipt of this letter. Beginning August 26,
a series of meetings were held by the Employer and the negotiating
zcommittee of the Intervenor, at which proposed changes were dis-
cussed and agreed upon. On October 16, the proposed contract was
sent to the local unions of the Intervenor representing the employees
involved . On October 29, the Intervenor called a special a meeting
to approve the proposed contract . The agreement was approved by
the Intervenor on October 30.
2 The Employer took no position on the issue.
REYNOLDS METALS COMPANY 993
On the same day, October 30, 1946, the Petitioner filed the instant
petition and sent the Employer a registered letter setting forth its
claim to represent a majority of the employees involved. On the
following day, October 31, the Petitioner telephoned the Employer at
sometime before 2 p. m., and, when upon inquiry the Petitioner
learned that the letter had not as yet been received,3 the Petitioner
told the Employer of the claim made therein. Later the same day,
October 31, at about 6: 30 p. in., the contract was signed by the
Employer and the Intervenor.
It is clear that the formal notice for contract changes and negotia-
tions given by the Intervenor shortly before the automatic renewal
clause would become effective, precluded the automatic extension of
the old contract for another .4 The new agreement embodying the
negotiated changes, signed October 31, 1946, constitutes no bar to this
proceeding, inasmuch as that new agreement was executed 5 not only
after the Employer had received notice of Petitioner's representation
claim,' but more particularly after the petition herein had been filed.7
We conclude, therefore, that the contractual relationship between the
Intervenor and the Employer does not preclude the holding of an
election at this time.
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning
the representation of employees of the Employer, within the meaning
of Section 9 (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
employees at the Employer's Longview, Washington, plant, exclud-
ing machinists, office employees, guards, and all 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 Act.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the
purposes of collective bargaining with Reynolds Metals Company,
Longview, Washington, an election by secret ballot shall be conducted
O The letter, being registered, was held at the post office until called for the next day.
4 Matter of Olin Industries, Inc (Western Cartridge Division, East Alton, Illinois), 67
N. L. R. B. 1043
s Matter of Eicor, Inc, 46 N L R. B. 1035
e Matter of American Norit Company, Inc, 66 N L R B 1308
Matter of Ste Genevieve Lime & Qaa;ry Company, 70 N L. R B 1259
e After the hearing the parties entered into a stipulation, herewith made part of the
record in the proceeding, excluding machinists from the unit agreed upon at the hearing.
994 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
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 Nineteenth 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 Regula-
tions-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 per-
son 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 they desire to,
be, represented by United Steelworkers of America, CIO, or by Long-
view Federated Aluminum Council, AFL, for the purposes of col-
lective bargaining, or by neither.
MR. JAMES J. REYNOLDS, JR., took no part in the consideration of
the above Decision and Direction of Election.