Ronni Parfum, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 18, 1938

8 N.L.R.B. 323 (N.L.R.B. 1938)

In the Matter of RoNNI PARFUM, INC., and EY-TEB SALES CORP. and
UNITED MINE WORKERS OF AMERICA, DISTRICT No. 50, CHEMICAL
DIVISION, SUCCESSOR TO CHEMICAL WORKERS LOCAL INDUSTRIAL
UNION No. 33, AFFILIATED WITH C. I. O.
Case No. C-/35.Decided July 18, 1938
Perfume and Eye Preparations Manufacturing Industry-Interference, Re-
straint, and Coercion : expressed opposition to labor organization , threats of
retaliatory action-Strike: precipitated by refusal to sign contract with major-
ity representative-Company-Dominated Union : domination of and interference
with formation and administration ; financial and other support : participation
and representation of supervisory employees , on committee ; coercion to join, dis-
established , as agency for collective bargaining-Contract: with company-domi-
nated union , invalid ; employer ordered to cease giving effect to-Election:
consent, not true reflection of desires of employees , when affected by employer's
acts of intimidation and persuasion-Discrimination : discharges , for union
activity and opposition to company -dominated committee-Reinstatement
Ordered-Back Pay: awarded.
Mr. Will Maslow, for the Board.
Mr. Abraham B. Hertz, of New. York City, for the respondents.
Mr. Richard Meigs, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
ORDER
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon charges filed by United Mine Workers of America, District
No. 50, Chemical Division, successor to Chemical Workers Local
Industrial Union No. 33, herein called the Union, the National Labor
Relations Board, herein called the Board, by Elinore M. Herrick,
Regional Director for the Second Region (New York City) issued
its complaint dated November 30, 1937, against Ronni Parfum, Inc.,
herein called Ronni, and Ey-Teb Sales Corp., herein called Ey-Teb,
New York City, herein collectively called the respondents. The
complaint alleged that the respondents have engaged in and are
engaging in unfair labor practices affecting commerce within the
meaning of Section 8 (1), (2), and (3) of the National Labor Rela-
tions Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act. On November 30,
8 N. L. R. B., No. 37.
323
117213-39-vol. 8-22
324 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
1937, the complaint and accompanying notice of hearing were duly
served upon the respondents, upon the Union, and upon the company
union, herein called the Company Union,' a labor organization al-
leged in the complaint to have been dominated by the respondents.
No written answer was filed but it was stipulated at the hearing
between counsel for the respondents and counsel for the Board
that all the allegations of the complaint would be deemed to be
denied by the respondents, except the allegations of corporate exist-
ence and those pertaining to the business of the respondents, which
were admitted. Counsel for the Board expressly waived the filing
of a verified answer by the respondents.
Pursuant to notice, a hearing was held in New York City on
December 6 and 7, 1937, before Henry W. Schmidt, the Trial Exam-
iner duly designated by the Board. The Board was represented by
counsel. Counsel for the respondents appeared and later withdrew
from the hearing in the manner hereinafter set forth. Full oppor-
tunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to
introduce evidence bearing upon the issues was afforded all parties.
At the opening of the hearing counsel for the respondents requested
a 3 weeks' adjournment, on the ground that his two principal
witnesses, Morin and Unterman, president and vice president re-
spectively of the respondent corporations, had made arrangements
long prior to the issuance of the complaint in this proceeding to go to
Miami, Florida, the former on a combined business and pleasure trip
and the latter to visit a wife and sick child. Counsel for the respond-
ents informed the Trial Examiner that both men had left for Miami,
Florida, on the night of December 5, 1937, immediately prior to the
hearing in this proceeding. Statements by counsel at the hearing
indicated that the matter of adjournment had been discussed by the
parties prior to the hearing and that the Regional Director had de-
nied the request for adjournment; that the Board's counsel had in-
formed the respondent's counsel that the hearing could be concluded
in 1 day, the respondent's counsel claiming a longer period would be
required; the Board's counsel was willing to consent to the taking of
depositions of the respondents' aforesaid two witnesses, which sug-
gestion the respondents' counsel declined to accept. The application
for adjournment was denied. Counsel for the Board then informed
the respondents' counsel that if, at any time before the conclusion of
the hearing, he wished to proceed in any way with his defense the
Board's counsel would request that he be permitted to do so. This
suggestion was not acceptable to respondents' counsel, who then
stated, If the request for a 3 weeks' adjournment is granted, counsel
' This organization has adopted no name and is designated by the members simply as the
"company union."
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 325
for the respondents will prevail upon his clients to return within 2
weeks, and ask that the matter go down for the 20th of this month."
The motion was denied. \ Counsel for the Board moved that the hear-
ing proceed in the absence of counsel for the respondents. The mo-
tion was granted and counsel for the respondents withdrew from the
hearing which was thereafter conducted in his absence. It is plain
here that there could have been no emergency to justify the absence of
the respondents' principal witnesses since both trips were admittedly
arranged "a long time prior to December 1, 1937." Moreover, ample
notice of the hearing was given to the respondents. In the absence
of an adequate showing of substantial cause, private convenience
must accommodate itself to public necessity. Accordingly, we find
that the respondents' position in the matter is without merit-and the
rulings of the Trial Examiner in connection with the respondents'
request for adjournment are hereby affirmed. During the course of
the hearing the Trial Examiner made several rulings on other mo-
tions and on the admissibility of evidence. The Board has reviewed
the rulings of the Trial Examiner and finds that no prejudicial
errors were committed. The rulings are hereby affirmed.
On February 15, 1938, the Trial Examiner issued his Intermediate
Report in which he found that the respondents had engaged in
unfair labor practices affecting commerce within the meaning of
Section 8 (1), (2), and (3) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act,
and recommended that the respondents cease and desist therefrom
and take certain specified affirmative action. On February 24, 1938,
the respondents filed exceptions to the Intermediate Report. The
Board has reviewed these exceptions and finds them to be without
merit.
By letters dated May 12 and 16, 1937, respectively, the respond-
ents, through their counsel, requested oral argument before the
Board on the understanding that they be afforded an opportunity to
cross-examine the Board's witnesses and proceed with the trial,
de novo. The Board denied the respondents' requests for oral argu-
ment on this basis.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE RESPONDENTS 2
Ronni Parfum, Inc., is engaged in the manufacture and sale of
perfumes. Ey-Teb Sales Corp. is engaged in the manufacture and
sale of eye preparations and kindred products. Both of said com-
2 For the purposes of this proceeding the facts stated in this section were stipulated and
agreed to by counsel for the respondents and counsel for the Board.
326 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
panies have their principal place of business in a single loft in the
City and State of New York. The interests of both of the re-
spondents shall be deemed the same.
The essential raw materials used in the manufacture of the afore-
said products are perfumes, dyes, chemicals, and containers, approxi-
mately 10 per cent of which are shipped to the respondents from
points outside the State of New York. Approximately 50 per cent
of the products manufactured by the respondents are shipped out-
side the State of New York.
H. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
United Mine Workers of America, District No. 50, Chemical Divi-
sion, successor to Chemical Workers Local Industrial Union No. 33,
is a labor organization affiliated with the Committee for Industrial
Organization, herein called the C. I. O. It admits to membership,
among others, all production employees of the respondents, ex-
clusive of supervisors, office workers, and shipping clerks.
The Company Union is an unaffiliated labor organization, admit-
ting to membership all employees of the respondents.
III. THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
A. Interference, restraint, and coercion
Toward the end of June 1937, the Union distributed handbills to
the respondents' employees at the close of the working day, inviting
them to attend an organization meeting to be held on that evening.
A large majority of the respondents' employees, including Anne G.
Koppelman, Sylvia Silverman, Paula Zager, and Bertha Ball, at-
tended this meeting and signed union membership cards. The
Union granted them permission to establish a separate unit at the
respondents' plant. For this purpose a collective bargaining com-
mittee, composed of Anne G. Koppelman as chairman, Bertha Ball
as shop steward, and Adeline Scala, herein called the committee, was
^hosen from among the respondents' employees. In collaboration
with officers of the Union, the committee drew up a proposed con-
tract relative to wages, hours, and working conditions. On the fol-
lowing day the committee informed Unterman, vice president of
Ronni, that it represented a majority of the respondents' employees,
and presented the contract for his consideration. At this conference
Unterman stated that he would have nothing to do with the C. I. O.,
and that he could not sign any contract without consulting his part-
ner, Murray Morin, who was absent in Europe.
On July 2, 1937, Unterman called the committee aside during work-
ing hours and asked them to come to terms.. He stated that he was
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 327
a poor man and unable to meet their demands. As a compromise
he offered a raise of $1 per week for all employees then receiving less
than $12 per week and an additional raise of $1 when business im-
proved. At his suggestion the proposal was immediately submitted
to a vote among the Union's members. When the committee returned
to Unterman's office to inform him that the vote had resulted in a
rejection of his proposition, they were confronted by one Weiss, who
was introduced as an attorney. Weiss attempted to persuade the
committee to abandon their affiliation with the Union, stating that
the C. I. O. was a "racket" and that the plant would be moved if
the girls persisted in remaining C. I. O. members because "the bosses
will never sign up." These statements were made in Unterman's
presence and confirmed by him with such remarks as "I told you
that before. I still mean it." and "If you girls still insist on that,
you are all fired tonight, all who want to stay with C. I. 0." The
committee then returned to the factory and informed the other
Union members of the respondents' refusal to negotiate the contract.
Thereupon, said members sat at their tables and refused to work.
Unterman or Weiss demanded that they work or go home. They
chose to do the latter, and were paid up to 3 p. m., although the
normal workday customarily ended at 5:30 p. m. On July 3, 1937,
the following day, the plant was not opened. July 4 and 5, 1937,
were holidays. From July 6 to July 13, several of the employees,
including the committee members, were on strike and engaged in
picketing the plant.
On July 13, 1937, Koppelman, the chairman of the committee, was
called into the office of Murray- Morin, who had then returned from
Europe. Morin informed her that he would never sign up with the
C. I. 0., "even if he were on his death bed." Promising to give the
girls a raise of $2 per week, he praised Koppelman's intelligence and
asked her to inform the other striking employees of his proposition
and to influence them to return to work. This attempted settlement
was unsuccessful. On the following day, Morin reiterated his prom-
ise of a raise, and in addition offered a 40-hour week during the sum-
mer months, seniority rights, and a contract with his employees em-
bodying these terms. He further promised to pay them for a full
week, without deduction for the portion of that week which had been
spent in picketing, if they would return to work immediately. These
terms were accepted by the strikers, who returned to work on July
14, 1937. Thereupon, Morin invited them all to lunch at his expense.
On the afternoon of the strikers' return to work, Morin called the
employees together and stated that they could have a union of their
own, elect their own officers, and hire a lawyer at his- expense. A
forelady then caused a paper to be circulated and signed by the
328 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
employees during working hours, stating, in substance, that they
desired to have no further connection with the C. I. O.
On July 15, 1937, Morin returned to the plant from a consultation
with representatives of the Board and announced, "I bought your
lunch and don't you make a Patsy out of me. I went down to the
Labor Board and showed them that paper that we don't want any-
thing to do with the C. I. 0., and don't you make a fool of me. I
consented to the election."' He then called Koppelman aside and
told her that the Board had requested him to consent to an election
among the employees and that he was not supposed to speak to the
girls about it. He then asked her to remind the girls that if they
voted for the C. I. O. they would go back, on the picket line, because
he would never sign up with them. He stated that even if the C. I. O.
won the election, it merely meant that they were presenting a sales-
man to sell their goods to him, and he did not have to buy. Koppel-
man, however, advised the girls to vote for the C. I. 0., whereupon
Morin publicly repeated the statements which he had made to Koppel-
man alone. Prior to the election Dorothy Gampietro, a forelady
in the respondents' plant, made a statement to the girls in the ladies'
room to the effect that she had every girl marked down who she
thought would vote for the C. I. O. and that she would report those
who voted for the C. I. O. to Morin, and they would be fired.
Although, prior to the strike, Saturday was the customary pay
day, the girls were paid on Friday, July 16, 1937, for a full week plus
the $2 raise which Morin had promised. Coincidently, Morin chose
this occasion to announce that he expected them to treat him as nicely
as he was treating them.
On July 19, 1937, an election was held under the direction and
supervision of the Board's Regional Director among the respondents'
employees. The teller's report showed the following results :
Total Number Eligible to Vote__ ____________________________ 16
Total Number of Ballots Counted ___________________________ 14
- Total Number of Votes in Favor of Local 33________________ 5
Total Number of Votes Against Local 33____________________ 9
Total Number of Blank Votes______________________________ 0
Total Number of Void Ballots _______________________________ 0
Total Number of Challenged Votes __________________________ 2
We find that the respondents' acts -of intimidation and persuasion
in connection with this election preclude a finding that it truly re-
flects the desires of its participants. We-further find that the re-
spondents, by means of the threats, warnings, and undue persuasion
above set forth, have interfered with, restrained, and coerced their
employees in the exercise of their rights guaranteed in Section 7 of
the Act.
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 329
B. Interference with and domination of the formation of the company
union
On July 20, 1937, Dorothy Gampietro, forelady, suggested that it
was a propitious moment for the employees to form their own union.
During the lunch hour a meeting was held at the plant. Gampietro
was nominated and elected as chairman of the Ey-Teb group, and
Estelle Kushner, a bottler in Ronni, was nominated by one Milton
Salkin, shipping room foreman, and elected as chairman of the
Ronni group. At this meeting no name was chosen for the organiza-
tion and it was subsequently referred to by the employees simply as the
Company Union. There were no provisions made for a constitution,
bylaws, dues, or future meetings. No officers were chosen, other than
the two chairmen. At the meeting, a proposed contract was drawn
up, containing provisions for a 40-hour week, a $2 raise (which was
already in effect), and certain holidays off with pay. A clause con-
cerning seniority rights was also recommended. It was suggested
that the proposed contract be formally prepared by a lawyer who was
to be selected at some future meeting. The matter of choosing a
lawyer, however, was never put up to the members of the Company
Union.
On or about August 9, 1937, a committee composed of Gampietro,
Kushner, and one Adeline Scala, an Ey-Teb employee, sought Morin's
advice on choosing a lawyer. Morin arranged an appointment for
them with Abraham Hertz, the counsel engaged by the respondents in
this proceeding. Hertz drew up a formal contract, embracing sub-
stantially the terms of the proposed contract which had been drafted
at the first meeting of the Company Union, but omitting all men-
tion of seniority rights. The committees did not offer to pay Hertz
for his services because they "understood that Mr. Morin and Mr.
Unterman would take care of that." Shortly thereafter, Gampietro
circulated a "legal-looking paper" among the employees, which
among other things stated the employees had elected, as their bar-
gaining committee, Gampietro, Kushner, and Adeline Scala. Scala
in fact had never been elected. She is the sister of Gampietro, and
at the latter's suggestion it was privately agreed between Gampietro
and Kushner to include her on the committee. Upon learning this,
several employees objected. It was finally agreed that Scala would
be allowed to remain on the committee, and that another member
from Ronni should be elected. A meeting was immediately held for
this purpose. One of the nominees at this election was Koppelman,
who testified that Gampietro publicly advised her that "if I were
wise I would stay out of all activity ; that I was in enough hot water
as it was." It is pertinent here to mention a similar remark which
was made at the previous meeting, on which occasion Bertha Ball
330 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
attempted to make various suggestions and was instructed by Gam-
pietro to "keep your mouth shut and stay out of this, because you
have been in enough trouble. You have been on a committee (C.
I. 0.), and the bosses have enough against you."
On or about August 9, 1937, during working hours Gampietro read
aloud to the girls a contract, presumably the one which had been
drawn up by Lawyer Hertz, which, in substance, provided for a
40-hour week during summer months, a 421/2-hour week during
winter months, and a $2 raise in weekly salaries. It also provided
for the classification of the girls into groups. Under his classifica-
tion no girl was to be laid off from any one group unless the entire
group was laid off. Koppelman, Zager, Ball, and Silverman were
included in one group with a new girl employed subsequent to the
date of the strike. The contract was signed by all the employees
except the four girls, who demurred on the ground that unless sen-
iority rights were included, they would probably be discharged for
their past C. I. O. activities.
There can be no doubt that the Company Union, originated and
functioned at the respondents' behest. After President Morin's an-
nouncement at the conclusion of the strike on July 14, 1937, to the
effect that the girls could have a union of their own and seek the
advice of a lawyer at his expense, Gampietro, the forelady, launched
the organization at a propitious time a week later. The supervisory
staff participated in the first meeting. Thereafter, the lawyer was
furnished, as promised. The membership was obtained under the
compulsion of the respondents' officials and supervisory employees.
The organization remained amorphous, without name, constitution, or
bylaws. Its sole purpose was to crush the outside union movement
and deprive the employees of the free exercise of their right to self-
organization. We find that the respondents have dominated and
interfered with the formation and administration of the Company
Union, and contributed financial and other support thereto, and have
thereby interfered with, restrained, and coerced their employees in
the exercise of their rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act.
C. The discharges
On August 12, 1937, Morin entered the factory and announced
that a majority of the employees had signed the contract, and that
it would work to the disadvantage of the four girls if they persisted
in refusing to sign. He accused these four girls of taking his money
and voting against him at the election.
On August 13, 1937, the four girls signed the contract upon Kush-
ner's promise to "take it up with the bosses" if they were fired un-
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 331
fairly. The Company Union has held no meetings and transacted
no business since the signatures to the contract were successfully
obtained.
By its terms the contract provided that during slack business
periods the work would be divided equally among the employees.
This provision was not followed by the respondents. On August 13,
1937, at the close of the working day, Gertrude Crystal, forelady,
read aloud to the employees a list of the names of approximately
10 employees, including Koppelman, Zager, Ball and Silverman,
who were to be laid off because "business was slow."
Anne G. Koppelman was discharged on August 13, 1937. Koppel-
man had been employed by the respondents for approximately 3 years,
and during the last 2 years of her employment she had worked
steadily, without lay-offs. Prior to her C. I. O. activities, as chair-
man of the committee at the respondents' plant, she had been con-
sidered an efficient and steady worker, and on one occasion Unterman
informed her that her job with Ronni was a steady one. Only two
employees in the respondents' plant have greater seniority.
At the time of her discharge she was earning $14 per week, and
she has been unable to secure employment elsewhere since. August
13, 1937.
Paula Zager was discharged on August 13, 1937. Zager has been
employed by Ronni for approximately 2 years. She is one of the
group of four girls whose ardent and positive sentiments for an out-
side union were well-known to the respondents. Forelady Kushner
testified that prior to her C. I. O. activities she was considered a steady
and efficient worker by the respondents. At the time of her discharge
.the respondents retained several employees who had less seniority.
Zager was earning $12 per week at the time of her discharge on
August 13, 1937. Since then she has had only 3 days of temporary
work for which she was paid a total of approximately $6.
Bertha Ball was discharged on August 13, 1937. Ball was first
employed by Ronni in July 1935, and has worked steadily, without
lay-offs, during the year and a half immediately preceding her dis-
charge. Her work for the respondents had always been considered
satisfactory prior to her activities as shop steward and member of the
C. I. O. On one occasion Morin stated that she was working steadily
because she was one of his best workers. Several of the girls retained
by the respondents at the time of her discharge had less seniority.
At the time of her discharge she was earning $12 per week, and
during the time she has been laid off she has worked only 10 days
at $6 per week.
Sylvia Silverman was discharged on August 13, 1937. Silverman
was first employed by the respondents in July 1935. She had worked
332 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
steadily during the year and a half immediately preceding her.dis-
charge, and was considered by the respondents to be a steady and
efficient workman prior to her conspicuous activities in the C. I. 0.
Her seniority was greater than several of the employees retained by
the respondents . She has worked only 2 days since her discharge,
receiving $2.80 per day.
There is nothing in the record to raise a doubt as to the authenticity
of the reason given by the respondents for the reduction in force.
However , among the 10 girls who were retained , several had less
seniority than the four girls, and at least two had been hired subse- -
quent to July 2, 1937 , the date of the strike . The respondents' busy
season is the period from September through December . Subsequent
to August 13, 1937, Morin informed the committee of the Company
Union that business was improving and suggested rehiring Kopple-
man, Ball , Zager, and Silverman . The committee advised him
against it because they had "caused so much trouble before," and the
respondents therefore refused to reemploy the four girls , although
they have recalled several other girls , junior in service with the
respondents , who were laid off at the same time and in addition have
hired several new girls. We find that the respondents discharged
Anne G. Koppelman , Paula Zager, Bertha Ball, and Sylvia Silver-
man because they joined and assisted the Union and thereby inter-
fered with , restrained , and coerced their employees in the exercise
of their rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act.
IV. THE EFFECT OF TIIE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES UPON COMMERCE
The activities of the respondents 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 and have led to labor disputes burdening and
obstructing commerce and the free flow of commerce.
THE REMEDY
The respondents fostered the organization of the Company Union
and encouraged its employees to become members of it in an at-
tempt to circumvent the duties imposed upon them by the Act and
to deny them their rights as guaranteed by Section 7 of the Act.
We shall therefore order the respondents to withdraw all recogni-
tion from the Company Union as an organization representing its
employees for the purpose of dealing with the respondents, and to
give no effect to the agreement negotiated with the Company Union
as bargaining agent of ' its employees.
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 333
We have found that the respondents discharged Anne G. Koppel-
man, Paula Zager, Bertha Ball, and Sylvia Silverman, for the rea-
son that they had joined and assisted the Union and had otherwise
exercised the rights guaranteed to them by Section 7 of the Act.
We shall therefore order the respondents to offer to reinstate them to
their former positions and to pay to each of them a sum of money
equal to that which she would normally have earned as wages dur-
ing the period from the date of her discharge to the date of such
offer of reinstatement, less the amount, if any, which she has earned
during said period.
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and upon the
entire record in the proceeding, the Board makes the following :
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. United Mine Workers of America, District No. 50, Chemical
Division, successor to Chemical Workers Local Industrial Union
No. 33, affiliated with C. I. 0., and the Company Union are labor
organizations, within the meaning of Section 2 (5) of the Act.
2. By discriminating in regard to the hire and tenure of employ-
ment of Anne G. Koppelman, Paula Zager, Bertha Ball, and Sylvia
Silverman and thereby discouraging membership in Chemical Work-
ers Local Industrial Union No. 33, the respondents have engaged
in and are engaging in unfair labor practices, within the meaning
of Section 8 (3) of the Act.
3. By dominating and interfering with the formation and admin-
istration of the Company Union and by contributing support to
said organization, the respondents have engaged in and are engaging
in unfair labor practices, within the meaning of Section 8 (2) of the
Act.
4. By interfering with, restraining, and coercing their employees
in the exercise of their rights guaranteed by Section 7 of the Act,
the respondents have engaged in and are engaging in unfair labor
practices, within the meaning of Section 8 (1) of the Act.
5. The contract negotiated by the employees and the Company
Union is invalid and of no effect.
6. The aforesaid labor practices are unfair labor practices affect-
ing commerce, within the meaning of Section 2 (6) and (7) of the
Act.
ORDER
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions
of law and pursuant to Section 10 (c) of the National Labor Rela-
tions Act, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that
334 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
the respondents, Ronni Parfum, Inc., and Ey-Teb Sales Corp., New
York City, and their officers, agents, successors, and assigns shall:
1. Cease and desist from:
(a) Discouraging membership in United Mine Workers of Amer-
ica, District No. 50, Chemical Division, successor to Chemical Work-
ers Local Industrial Union No. 33, affiliated with C. I. 0., or any
other labor organization of its employees at their plant in New
York City, by discrimination in regard to hire or tenure of employ-
ment or any terms or conditions of employment ;
(b) Dominating or interfering with the administration of the
Company Union or with the formation or administration of any
other labor organization of their employees and from contributing
financial or other support to the Company Union or any other labor
organization of their employees;
(c) Recognizing the Company Union as a representative of any
of their employees for the purpose of collective bargaining con-
cerning grievances, labor disputes, wages, rates of pay, hours of
employment, or other conditions of work;
(d) Giving effect to their agreement negotiated with the Company
Union ;
(e) In any other manner interfering with, restraining, or coerc-
ing their employees in the exercise of their rights to self-organization,
to form, join, or assist labor organizations, 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 Board finds
will effectuate the policies of the Act :
(a) Offer to Anne G. Koppelman, Paula Zager, Bertha Ball, and
Sylvia Silverman immediate and full reinstatement to their former
positions without prejudice to their seniority and other rights and
privileges;
(b) Make whole Anne G. Koppelman, Paula Zager, Bertha Ball,
and Sylvia Silverman for any loss of pay they have suffered by
reason of their discharge, by paying to each of them a sum of money
equal to that which she would normally have earned from August
13, 1937, the date of her discharge, to the date of such offer of rein-
statement, less the amount, if any, which she has earned during said
period ; I
(c) Withdraw all recognition from the Company Union as a rep-
resentative of its employees for the purpose of dealing with the
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 335
respondents concerning grievances, labor disputes, wages, rates of
pay, hours of employment, or other conditions of work, and com-
pletely disestablish the Company Union as such representative;
(d) Immediately post notices in conspicuous places throughout
their plant and maintain such notices for a period of at least thirty
(30) consecutive days from the date of posting, stating (1) that the
respondents will cease and desist as aforesaid; (2) that the respond-
ents withdraw all recognition of the Company Union as a represen-
tative of their employees and completely disestablish it as such
representative;
(e) Notify the Regional Director for the Second Region in writing
-Within ten (10) days from the date of this order what steps the
respondents have taken to comply therewith.