Stevens Coal Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jan 5, 1940

19 N.L.R.B. 98 (N.L.R.B. 1940)

In the Matter of STEVENS COAL COMPANY and PROGRESSIVE MINE
WORKERS OF AMERICA, INTERNATIONAL UNION
In the Matter of ALDEN COAL COMPANY and PROGRESSIVE MINE
WORKERS OF AMERICA, INTERNATIONAL UNION
Cases Nos. R-1536 to R-1539, inclusive.Decided January 5,1940
Coal Mining Industry-Employer: anthracite operators functioning through
conferences , committees and Board of Conciliation ; formal organization lack-
ing; operators bound by custom-Investigation of Representatives : controversy
concerning representation of employees : controversy concerning appropriate
unit ; rival organizations ; petition for, dismissed , where no question concerning
representation has arisen in a unit which is appropriate for the purposes of
collective bargaining-Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : laxity by
union in enforcement of its contracts does not affect question of appropriate
unit ; determination of relative efficiency of bona fide labor organizations not
within ' province of Board; comparison of history of bargaining on region-wide
basis with prior history of bargaining on less comprehensive basis; employees
of single operator which acts with group of operators not a unit appropriate
for purposes of collective bargaining. -
Mr. Jack Davis, for the Board.
Mr. Charles B. Waller, of Wilkes-Barre, Pa., for Stevens Coal
Company and Alden Coal Company.
Mr. John C. Haddock and Mr. Lawrence B. Jones, of Wilkes-Barre,
Pa., for Alden Coal Company.
Mr. Herbert S. Thatcher and Mr. Joseph A. Padway, of Washing-
ton, D. C., for the Progressive.
Mr. Lee Pressman, Mr. Joseph Kovner, and Mr. Anthony W. Smith,
of Washington, D. C., for the United.
Miss Fannie M. Boyls, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
ORDER
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On April 24, 1939, Progressive Mine Workers of America, Inter-
national Union, herein called the Progressive, filed with the Regional.
Director for the Fourth Region (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania) four
19 N. L. R. B., No. 14. -
98
STEVENS COAL COMPANY 99
petitions alleging that questions affecting commerce had arisen con-
cerning the representation of employees of Stevens Coal Company
at its Cameron Colliery, Shamokin, Pennsylvania; its Trevorton
Washery, Trevorton, Pennsylvania; and its Trout Run Washery,
Tharptown, Pennsylvania; and of employees of the Alden Coal Com-
pany, Alden Station, Pennsylvania, and requesting an investigation
and certification of representatives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the
National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act.
On June 21, 1939, the National Labor Relations Board, herein called
the Board, acting pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the Act and Article
III, Section 3, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regu-
lations-Series 1, as amended, ordered an investigation and author-
ized the Regional Director to conduct it and to provide for an ap-
propriate hearing upon due notice.
On July 21, 1939, the Regional Director issued notices of a hear-
ing, copies of which were duly served upon the Stevens Coal Com-
pany, the Alden Coal Company, the Progressive, and United Mine
Workers of America, herein called the United, a labor organization
claiming to represent employees directly affected by the investiga-
tion. Upon motion filed by the United, the Regional Director, on
July 24, 1939, permitted the United to intervene.
Pursuant to notice, a hearing was held from September 7 to and
including September 15, 1939, at Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, before
Howard Myers, the Trial Examiner duly designated by the Board.
At the commencement of the hearing the Progressive moved to dis-
miss the petitions involving the Trevorton Washery and the Trout
Run Washery of Stevens Coal Company, and the United moved to
consolidate the cases involving the Stevens Coal Company and the
Alden Coal Company. The Trial Examiner ruled that he was with-
out authority to grant either of these motions. The motion to con-
solidate was granted by the Board on September 13, 1939, nuns pro
tune as of September 7, 1939.1, The motion to dismiss is disposed
of in the Board's findings and order below. During the course of the
hearing the Trial Examiner made rulings on other motions and on
objections to the admission of evidence: At the conclusion of the
hearing Stevens Coal Company moved to dismiss the petitions in-
volving it on the ground that it was not engaged in interstate com-
merce within the meaning of the Act. The Trial Examiner denied
this motion. The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Exam-
iner and finds that no prejudicial errors were committed. The
rulings are hereby affirmed.
1 It was stipulated by all parties at the hearing that "a single record may be made and
considered by the Board in the respective cases with the same force and effect as though
separate records were made in each of the cases; and the evidence in both may be con-
sidered in each so far as the same is material to the separate cases." .
100 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL, LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Subsequent to the hearing, the Progressive and the United. filed
briefs which the Board has considered. Pursuant to notice, a hear-
ing was held before the Board in Washington, D. C., on November
16, 1939, for the purposes of oral argument. The Progressive and
the United appeared by counsel and participated in the argument.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANIES
A. Stevens Coal Company
Stevens Coal Company is a corporation organized and existing
under the laws of Pennsylvania since 1924. It is engaged in the
operation of a coal colliery, known as the Cameron Colliery, at
Shamokin, Pennsylvania; a washery, known as the Trout Run Wash-
ery, at Tharptown, Pennsylvania; and a washery, known as the
Trevorton Washery, at Trevorton, Pennsylvania. It commenced
operating the Trout Run Washery in 1929, the Cameron Colliery in
1932, and the Trevorton Washery in July 1938. The Trevorton
Washery is located about 7 or 8 miles, and the Trout Run Washery
about a half mile, from the Cameron Colliery. The waslieries are
engaged solely in reclaiming coal from surface banks. The Cameron
Colliery employs about 650 men, the Trevorton Washery about 40,
and the Trout Run Washery about 110.
During the year 1938 there were produced at the°-Cameron Col-
liery and the Trout Run Washery 310,659 and 303,1.25 tons respec-
tively of anthracite coal, and during the 10-month period from
October 1, 1938, to July 31, 1939, there were produced at the Trevor-
ton Washery approximately 117,640 tons of anthracite coal. The
price obtained for the coal produced at the Cameron Colliery was
approximately $1,345,153, for that produced at the Trout Run Wash-
ery approximately $997,281, and for that produced at the Trevorton
Washery approximately $263,513.
During 1938 the Stevens Coal Company sold directly to the United
States Government.20,000 tons of coal valued at $100,000, and to the.
State of New Jersey 12,500 tons, valued at $49,000, all of which coal
was shipped to points outside Pennsylvania. The remainder of the
coal produced was sold by the Stevens Coal Company to the Stevens
Coal Sales Company, Inc., which in turn sold and delivered outside
Pennsylvania 60 per cent of the coal produced at the Cameron Col-
liery, 95 per cent of the coal produced at the Trevorton Washery,
and 90 per cent of the coal produced at the Trout Run Washery.
Explosives, electrical equipment, and other operating supplies
purchased by the Stevens Coal Company in 1938 were valued at
STEVENS' COAL COMPANY 101
approximately $200,000. About 5 per cent of this amount represents
the value of supplies obtained from points outside Pennsylvania.
. The above figures and percentages for the year 1938 are representa-
tive of the purchases and sales of the Stevens Coal Company in other
years.
B. Alden Coal -Company
Alden Coal Company is a corporation organized and existing
under the laws of Pennsylvania since 1883. It operates a coal col-
liery at Alden Station, Pennsylvania, at which it employs about
500 men.
During the year 1938 the Alden Coal Company produced approxi-
mately 163,976 tons of anthracite coal, having an approximate whole-
sale value of $640,000. All the coal was sold to two sales agents,
Weston, Dodson and Company, and Whiteley and Buckalew, who
in turn sold and delivered approximately 50 per cent of the coal
outside Pennsylvania.
In 1938 the Alden Coal Company purchased approximately $60,000
worth of capital supplies and $10,000 worth of operating supplies,
70 per cent of each of which was obtained from points outside
Pennsylvania:
The facts above stated relative to the sales and purchases of the
Alden Coal Company are typical of each year for the past 20 years.
II. THE LABOR ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
Progressive. Mine Workers of America, International Union, is It
labor organization affiliated with the American Federation of Labor.
It admits to membership all employees in and around coal mines,
coal washeries, and coke ovens, except salaried clerks and supervisory
employees.
United Mine Workers of America is a labor organization affiliated
with the Congress of Industrial Organizations. It admits to mem-
bership all employees in and around coal mines, coal washeries, coal-
processing plants, and coke ovens, except salaried clerks and super-
visory employees.
III. HISTORY OF COLLECTIVE BARGAINING IN ANTHRACITE
REGION
Almost all the anthracite coal in the United States is produced in
Pennsylvania in what is known as the anthracite region, an area
about 120 miles long and not more than about 50 miles wide at its
widest points. - This region divides itself naturally into three dis-
tricts, the northern or Wyoming district, where work is flat ; the
east and central or Lehigh district, where work is both flat and pitch;
283030-41-vol. 19-8
• 102 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
and the southern or Schuylkill district, where work is almost entirely
pitch. The United has organized the region into Districts 1, 7, and_
9, which correspond respectively to the three above-named districts.
Labor organizations attempted to organize this field as early as
the middle of the nineteenth century. None of them, however, suc-
ceeded in organizing the entire field until about 1900, when the
United Mine Workers of America called a strike to which about
two-thirds of the mine workers in the region responded. Between
1850 and 1902 wages, hours, and working conditions in the anthracite
mines were notoriously bad. Strikes called at one mine or in one
district for the betterment of these conditions were rendered ineffec-
tive by a failure of employees at other mines or in other districts to
cooperate. Frequently a strike. in one district in protest against
working conditions would result in increased production at mines in
the other districts and an influx of the striking miners to obtain
jobs in the non-striking districts. Strikes were frequent and were
often accompanied by riots and bloodshed.
In 1902 the United called a strike which closed practically all the
mines in the region. The strike lasted over 5 months and was called
off only after intervention by President Theodore Roosevelt and the
appointment by him of the Anthracite Coal Strike Commission. The
Commission in 1903 made a final report and award, which was
accepted by the operators and the miners. By the terms of the award
all wage rates then in existence were adopted or "frozen" 2 and a
10-per cent increase over the "frozen" rates was granted the miners,
daily hours of work were reduced from 10 to 9, and certain- other
provisions were made, the most important of which was for the
establishment of an Anthracite Board of Conciliation, herein called
the Board of Conciliation, composed of three representatives of the
operators and three representatives of the miners. The function of
the Board of Conciliation was to settle disputes arising out of the
award or out of the employee-employer relationship. The award
was by its term's to remain in force until April 1, 1906.
One of the principal demands of the miners during the strike of
1 902 was for recognition of the United. This right was not granted
them in the award of 1903, and it was not until 1920 that the United
was formally recognized as a party to contracts between the operators
and miners. Representatives of the United, however, participated in
negotiating all contracts made between the operators and miners after
1903.
For about 12 years after 1900 the Temple Iron Company, a holding
company for the interests of a number of large railroad companies
2 The wage-rate differences existing in the anthracite region at the time of the award
still exist . All Increases In wages have been effected by granting percentage increases
over the "frozen" rates.
STEVENS COAL COMPANY 103
operating in Pennsylvania, through • its ownership or control of the
railroads as well as the largest mines in the region, effectively dom-
inated the anthracite operators. During this period a system of col-
lective bargaining on a regional basis was developed between the
anthracite operators and the coal miners. In 1906 the operators, under
the leadership of George F. Baer, president of the Temple Iron Com-
pany, and the miners, under the leadership of John Mitchell, president
of the United, negotiated a contract in which the provisions of the
award of 1903 were adopted and continued. The contract was signed
by seven operators and six miners, the representative capacities of the
signatories not appearing upon the contract. In 1909 and in subse-
quent years many other contracts have been negotiated on a region-
wide basis, each adopting the provisions of the award of 1903. From
1909 to 1930 the contracts were signed by a committee of operators
varying in number from 4 to 10 "On behalf of the Anthracite Opera-
tors." In 1930 and subsequently the contracts have been signed by the
committee of operators and also by the individual operators of the
region. On behalf of the miners the contracts since 1909 have been
variously signed, "On behalf of the Representatives of the Anthracite
Mine Workers," "On behalf of the Anthracite Mine Workers' Organ-
ization," and since 1920, "On behalf of the United Mine Workers of
America" or a similar designation. The 1930 and 1936 contracts pro-
vided for a check-off by the operators of dues of United members.
The 1939 contract granted the United a closed shop. The United has,
since about 1912, represented a majority of the miners in the region.
Although domination of the operators by the Temple Iron Company
was ended about 1912 as the result of the prosecutions under the Fed-
eral anti-trust laws,3 the anthracite mine operators have continued to
act as an integral body for the purposes of collective bargaining.
This situation apparently results from the fact that most of the coal in
the region is obtained from mines which are owned by a few large
operators, by the fact that many of the coal-mining companies have
interlocking directorates, and by the further fact that the custom of
region-wide bargaining has become firmly established in the anthra-
cite region.
IV. PRESENT COLLECTIVE BARGAINING PROCEDURE IN THE REGION
. Shortly prior to the expiration date of a United contract, represent-
atives from each district in Pennsylvania gather together at what is
known as the Tri-District Convention for the purpose of discussing
the provisions of a new contract and selecting a scale committee to
negotiate with the operators. Operators in the region are informed
8 See Temple Iron Company v. United States, 226 U. S. 224. See also United States v.
Lehigh Valley Railroad Company at al., 254 U. S. 255.
104 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
by newspaper reports of the matters discussed at this convention and
by the time the convention adjourns have a fair knowledge of what
demands will be made by the United in negotiating a new contract.
At the request of United representatives the operators call a conference
of operators for the purpose of discussing terms of a proposed contract
and selecting or approving members of a negotiating committee.. The
chairman of the last negotiating committee , which is a standing com-
mittee, often referred to as the labor committee ; usually requests the
director of the Anthracite Institute , a research and information bureau
of which most of the operators are members , to notify all operators.
The Institute sends notices to all operators who are listed by the Penn-
sylvania Department of Mines.4
The negotiating committee of the operators meets with the scale com-
mittee of the United in what is known as the Joint Conference. When
an agreement is reached by the Joint Conference, it is initialed by a
representative of each committee . The United then ratifies the agree-
ment either at a convention called for that purpose or by a referendum
vote. In 1939 the operators ratified the agreement at a meeting called
for that purpose just after the contract was agreed upon at the Joint
Conference. This practice , though, has not always been followed.
After the agreement is ratified , the members of the Joint Conference
and as many operators as desire to do so meet for the purpose of signing
the agreement . The agreement is signed on behalf of the United by
the scale committee and "For the Anthracite Operators " by the mem-
bers of the labor committee , and individually by the operators who are
present at the meeting. The contract, of which there were 16 duplicate
original copies in 1939, is then mailed by the Board , of Conciliation to
operators who were not present at the conference at which the contract
was signed for the purpose of obtaining their signatures . Apparently
no operator has ever refused to sign. While the companies involved
in this proceeding have not yet signed the 1939 agreement , 'they have,
expressed their desire to do so if not dissuaded from signing by the
decision of the Board in this proceeding. The 1939 agreement is dated
May 26, 1939, the date on which the Joint Conference concluded the
agreement , and it -has been considered by all parties as effective on that
date, although it was not actually signed by the scale committee and
labor committee until June 26.
The operators ' expenses incurred in negotiating the contracts are
paid from an Operators' Fund for which there is a treasurer ap-
pointed by the chairman of the Board of Conciliation. The expenses
are assessed against each operator based upon its tonnage production
for the preceding year, as reported by the Pennsylvania Department
* The facilities of the Institute are used by the operators solely as a matter of couven-
ience. Its functions are in no way connected with' collective bargaining.'
STEVENS COAL COMPAN Y 105
of Mines. The treasurer also bills each operator monthly for its
share of the current expenses of the Board of Conciliation. The
current expenses are shared equally by the United and the operators.
In their contracts the operators and the United have set up a
comprehensive machinery for the settlement of grievances and dis-
putes. At each mine the miners select a pit committee which takes
.up with the mine superintendent or other representative of the
operators all grievances which cannot be adjusted by the aggrieved
miner and his foreman . About 95 per cent of the grievances are
settled in this way. If the grievance cannot be settled locally, either
the pit committee or the operator may'appeal to the Board of Con-
ciliation . Often the district representatives on the. Board of Concil-
iation settle the grievance without the necessity of a hearing before
the whole Board. If, after a hearing, the Board of Conciliation can-
not settle the matter , it is referred to an umpire who is appointed
either by the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Third
Circuit or by the Board of Conciliation.
The United contracts since 1930 have provided for a Committee
of Twelve to be composed of six operators and six members of the
United, the United members to consist of the three International
officers and the presidents of District 1, 7, and 9. It is the function
of this Committee to consider all matters arising under the contracts,
and especially to bring before the Board of Conciliation grievances
or conditions affecting the general interests of the miners or operators
where no individual grievance has been filed.
V. THE PRESENT CONTROVERSY
In May 1938, Local 160 of the United , whose members were em-
ployees of the. Cameron Colliery of Stevens Coal Company, surren-
dered its charter. In October 1938, some of the employees applied for
and received a charter as Local . 601 of the Progressive. In November
1938 the Progressive, claiming as members almost all the employees
at the Cameron Colliery , requested that the Stevens Coal Company
recognize it as the exclusive representative of employees at the col-
liery and check off dues for the Progressive from its members. The
Stevens Coal Company refused to accede to this request, claiming
that it would recognize the Progressive as the representative of its
members only until properly advised of the collective bargaining
agency which it should recognize.
A representative of the Stevens Coal Company was present at a
convention of the operators on March 24 , 1939, at which a negotiating
committee was approved to meet with the scale committee of the United
for the purpose of negotiating a new contract to take the place of
the United contract which was. to expire on April 30, 1939. The
106 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Stevens Coal Company did not sign the contract, which became effec-
tive on May 26, 1939, however, because of the pendency of this pro-
ceeding before the Board. As a result of such refusal to sign the
contract, the United in July called a strike at the Cameron Colliery
as well as at the two washeries of the Stevens Coal Company. About
50 of the approximately 650 employees at the Cameron Colliery
walked out on strike on the day the strike was called and about 8
or 10 were still on strike at the time of the hearing.
Although the Progressive claims that 79 employees at the two
washeries have signed applications for membership in the Progres-
sive, it apparently did not claim to represent a majority at either
washery at the date of the hearing and moved to dismiss the petitions
filed in behalf of the employees at each washery.5 Both washeries
were closed at the time of the hearing as a result of the United strike.
About March 2, 1939, Local 846 of the United, whose members were
employees of Alden Coal Company, voted to withdraw from the
United and affiliate with the Progressive. The employees were char-
tered as Local 701 of the Progressive on March 11, 1939. For business
reasons the Alden Coal Company closed its colliery on March 29. It
had not resumed operations at the date of the hearing. After the
shut-down, the Progressive, claiming to represent a majority of the
employees at the colliery, requested recognition as the exclusive repre-
sentative of such employees. The Alden Coal Company thereupon
announced that it would not recognize either the Progressive or
United until the Board certified one of them.
The Alden Coal Company sent a representative to the operators'
conference on March 24, 1939, at which the labor committee was
selected to negotiate the 1939 contract with the United; however,
it did not sign the contract because of the pendency of these proceed-
ings, although it has expressed its desire to do so.
At the time of the hearing the Alden Coal Company had paid its
share of expenses of the Board of Conciliation through July 31, 1939,
and had paid its share of the expense of negotiating the 1939 contract.
The Stevens Coal Company had paid its share of expenses of the
Board of Conciliation through May 31, but had not paid its share
of the negotiating expenses.
VI. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Progressive contends that the employees of each mine in the
anthracite region constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of
collective bargaining. The United contends that the employees of all
mines in the anthracite region constitute an appropriate unit.
We dismiss the petitions in our Order, infra.
STEVENS COAL COMPANY 107
In support of its contention for the appropriateness of a region-
wide unit, the United showed that for about a half century prior
to the organization of the anthracite region by the United, working con-
ditions were chaotic and stability in the anthracite coal-mining indus-
try was unknown; that during most of such period the miners of the
region were either unorganized or were organized on less than a region-
wide basis; that since 1902 when bargaining has been conducted on a
region-wide basis, the basic workday has been reduced from 10 to 7
hours, several increases, and no decreases, in wages have been given the
miners, and a number of other improvements in working conditions
have been achieved. It contends that the operators, as well as the
miners, have benefited from the fact that working conditions have
become stabilized; that strikes are less frequent and less violent than
those which occurred prior to 1903; and that the operators are no
longer subjected to the cut-throat competition among themselves which
prevailed prior to 1903.
In support of its contention for the appropriateness of the single
mine unit, the Progressive points out that about 95 per cent of all
problems of the miners have been settled locally without assistance
from the district or International officers of the United, that the
enforcement of contracts and the maintenance of favorable conditions
have depended largely upon the militancy of the miners of each
local, and that at many of the mines which do not have militant
locals, wage-slashing and other undesirable working conditions are
prevalent.
The Progressive does not deny that during the approximately 40
years of bargaining on a region-wide basis in the anthracite field
important minimum standards have been achieved by the United.
It, claims, however, that these achievements occurred before there was
a split in the labor movement and that they were accomplished largely
through the strength of the labor organization. It contends that a
small unit, the single mine unit, with a strong national or inter-
national organization behind it, can accomplish more than a large
unit, the regional unit, whose strength has been dissipated by laxity
in the enforcement of its contracts. The Progressive introduced
much evidence of laxity by the United in the enforcement of its
contracts and of wage-slashing on a large scale, in some instances
the miners receiving less than half of the minimum wage required
to be paid them under the United contracts. It introduced evidence
tending to show that the largest operator in the region, the Glen
Alden Coal Company, whose president, Major W. W. Inglis, is
chairman of the Board of Conciliation, and of the labor committee,
requires an excess topping of 12 to 18 inches on each car of coal
without paying its employees for such excess topping, thereby pre-
108 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
venting the employees from earning the basic minimum wage; and
that many operators avoid the payment of the minimum wage by
the issuance of scrip or bonds in lieu of cash in payment of 30 to 40
per cent of the regular wages.
Even if all the testimony of the Progressive witnesses concerning
wage-slashing and other undesirable working conditions at the mines
is true, such facts do not establish the appropriateness of a mine or
plant unit. Moreover, it is not within the province of the Board to
decide whether one bona fide labor organization is more efficient or
more diligent in the enforcement of its contracts than another. We
are convinced from the record before us that the evils complained of
by the Progressive would not be less prevalent, but might be more
prevalent, if each mine were considered an appropriate bargaining
unit. The history of bargaining in the anthracite region prior to
1900 supports this conclusion.
The Progressive does not deny the desirability of uniformity in
minimum requirements concerning wages and certain working con-
ditions at the mines or the desirability of an adjustment or arbitra-
tion machinery for the entire region, such as the Board of Conciliation
and its umpire." It has expressed its willingness to cooperate with
the United to that end and desires to use the facilities of the Board
of Conciliation. The Board of Conciliation as established by the
award of the Anthracite Coal Strike Commission in 1903 was not
a part of the United machinery but was expressly set up for the
benefit of the operators and all the miners, regardless of their union
affiliation , if any. The award was efectivd only until April 1, 1906,
however, and its provisions, including the provision for a Board of
Conciliation, were adopted and carried forward in the contracts
thereafter negotiated between the operators and the United repre-
sentatives . The Board of Conciliation thereby became a part of
the machinery of the contracting parties; and its use by persons not
covered by the contract must necessarily be only with the permission
of the contracting parties.7 By its very offer of cooperation with
e The Progressive , since its organization in 1932, has been bargaining on an association-
wide basis in Illinois where about 160 mines are covered by one contract negotiated be-
tween District 1 of the Progressive and the Coal Producers Association of Illinois. See
Matter o f Alston Coal Company and Progressive Mine Workers of America. International
Union, alpliated with American Federation of Labor, 13 N. L. R. B. 683.
7 Upon one occasioon the Board of Conciliation took jurisdiction over an application of
a new operator , the Novatine and Allen Coal Company, which had not signed the United
contract or paid its share of the operators ' expenses , for relief from its striking employees.
Upon another occasion members of the United who were working for a contract mine
operator who was not required to sign the contract, requested and received the aid of the
Board of Conciliation in maintaining the rates which were regularly paid them. In the
first of these cases the operator promised to sign the contract and pay its share of the
operators' expenses as soon as its mine resumed operations , and in the last case the
United members were held entitled to the benefits of the contract even though the operator
was not a party to the contract.
STEVENS COAL COMPANY 109
the United in standardizing certain working conditions within the
region and in using the facilities of the Board of Conciliation, the
Progressive has recognized the desirability of operating to at least
a limited extent on a region-wide basis.
• It is a further contention of the Progressive that the Board is
without power under the Act to decide that a bargaining unit co-
extensive with the operators which consider themselves bound by
the contracts negotiated by the labor committee is appropriate, that
the operators have not formed an association to which they have
delegated any essential employer functions, and that no operator is
under any antecedent legal obligation to be bound by the contract
negotiated by the United and the labor committee.
We have before us an anomalous situation. 'To be sure, the an-
thracite operators have not formally organized themselves into an
association. However, by custom, and usage they have acted in unison
in matters concerning collective bargaining for so long a period that
in reality they are as closely, if not more closely, bound together than
they would be had their obligations and conduct been governed solely
by formal legal ties. Through their conventions, their labor com-
mittee, the Committee of Twelve, and the Board of Conciliation they
function as an association without need of a constitution or bylaws.
Although there are approximately 202 operators in the anthracite
region, not one claims that it is not, or does not desire to be, bound
by the contracts entered into by the operators with the United. It is
true that neither the Stevens Coal Company nor the Alden Coal Com-
pany has yet signed the 1939 contract. However, each sent a repre-
sentative to the operators' conference at which terms of the proposed
contract were discussed and the labor committee was selected, and each
has expressed its desire to sign the contract if not dissuaded from
signing by the decision of this Board in this proceeding. Under the
circumstances, every operator in the region who does not expressly
renounce or deny the authority of the anthracite operators as a group
to act for it is presumed to be bound by the acts of that group 8
The present method of negotiating contracts, with slight modifica-
tions from time to time, has been followed by the anthracite operators
for almost 40 years. It is immaterial whether the operators sign
only by a committee, as they did prior to 1930, or whether they ratify
the contract negotiated by the committee and add their individual
signatures to those of the committee members as they now do. Their
8Cf. United States Daily Pub. Corporation v. Nichols, 32 F. (2d ) 834 (C. A., D. C.),
wherein a custom among publishers employing union labor to adjust and pay wages in a
manner set forth in contracts between the Union and an association of publishers was
found to be "so old, notorious , definite, and , uniform as to be binding upon those within
its purview," and wherein a publisher , who, with knowledge of the custom, employed union
labor but was not a member of the publishers ' association and did not make a contract
with the Union , was found to be within the purview of this custom.
110 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
established custom, by which they have considered themselves bound
for so long a period, needs no antecedent legal obligation to govern
their responsibility under the contracts.9 However, even if we should
consider an antecedent legal obligation on the part of the operators
to be bound by whatever collective bargaining contract the labor
committee might negotiate with the United necessary to constitute
the anthracite operator group an employer within the meaning of. the
Act, we should find that all operators who attend the conference at
which terms of the proposed contract are discussed and at which the
labor committee is selected are bound by the acts of the committee
to the extent that a principal is generally bound by the acts of its
agent. The Act includes within the definition of "employer," "any
person acting in the interest of an employer, directly or indirectly,"
and includes within the definition of "person," "one or more in-
dividuals, partnerships, associations, [or] corporations." We find
that the anthracite operators, including the Stevens Coal Company
and the Alden Coal Company, acting together through their confer-
ences, their labor committee, the Board of Conciliation, and the Com-
mittee of Twelve, constitute an employer within the meaning of the
Act.10
We are convinced that the full benefit of their right to self-
organization and to' collective bargaining cannot be insured to the
employees by breaking up the collective bargaining unit which has
been established by a long history of contractual relations between
the operators and miners of the anthracite region. We find that the
single mine unit urged by the Progressive is not appropriate for the
purposes of collective bargaining. We shall therefore dismiss the
petitions of the Progressive.
° Other cases in which we have discussed such antecedent legal obligation are distin-
guishable by their facts. Cf. Matter of Aluminum Line, et at. and International Long-
shoremen and Warehousemen's Union, 8 N. L. R. B. 1325; Matter of F. E. Booth &
Company, et at. and Monterey Bay Area Fish Workers Union No. 23, 10 N. L. R. B. 1491;
Matter of Trawler Marts Stella, Inc. and' American Communications Association (C. 1. 0.),
et at .. 12 N. L. It. B. 415; Matter of Federated Fishing Boats of New England and New
York, Inc. and American Communications Association, Marine Division, affiliated with the
C. I. 0., 15 N. L. R. B. 1080. In none of these cases have there existed a long history of
actual bargaining and contracting on a multiple-employer basis and adequate machinery
for that purpose. ^
10 See Matter of C. A. Lund Company and Novelty Workers Union, Local 1866 (A. F.
of L.) successor, 6 N. L. It. B. 423, affirmed on this point, National Labor Relations Board
v. Christian A. Lund, doing business as C. A. Lund Company and Northland Ski Manufac-
turing Company, 1.03 F. (2d) 815 (C. C. A. 8) ; Matter of Shipowners' Association of the
Pacific Coast, et at. and International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union, District
No. 1, et at., 7 N. L. It. B. 1002, review denied, A. F. of L., et at., v. National Labor Rela-
tions Board, 103 F. (2d) 933 (C. A., D. C.), aff'd., Sup. Ct., January 2, 1940; Matter of
Mobile Steamship Association, et at. and International Longshoremen's and Warehouse-
m.en's Union, 8 N. L. It. B. 1297; Matter of Alston Coal Company and Progressive Mine
Workers of America, International Union, affiliated with American Federation of Labor,
13 N. L. R. B. 683; Matter of Admiar Rubber Company and American Federation of
Labor on behalf of Employees of Company, 9 N. L. It. B. 407; Matter of Monon Stone com-
pany, et at. and Quarry Workers' International Union of North America, 10 N. L. It. B..64.
STEVENS COAL COMPANY 111
VII. THE QUESTIONS CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
Since, as stated in Section VI, above, we are unable to find an ap-
propriate unit within the scope of the petitions filed in this case, we
find that no questions have been raised concerning the representation
of employees of the Stevens Coal Company or of the Alden Coal
Company in an appropriate unit.
Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and the entire record
in the case, the Board makes the following :
CONCLUSION OF LAW
No questions concerning representation of employees of Stevens
Coal Company at its Cameron Colliery, Shamokin, Pennsylvania ; its
Trevorton Washery, Trevorton, Pennsylvania; and its Trout Run
Washery, Tharptown, Pennsylvania; or of Alden Coal Company,
Alden Station, Pennsylvania, in a unit which is appropriate for the
purposes of collective bargaining have arisen, within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act.
ORDER
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and conclusion of
law, the National Labor Relations Board hereby dismisses the peti-
tions for investigation and certification filed by Progressive Mine
Workers of America, International Union.