Sullivan Mining Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Dec 24, 1952

101 N.L.R.B. 1366 (N.L.R.B. 1952)

1366 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
cordingly, we find that the contract construed in the light of the
practice of the parties did not require any old employees to join
the Union without a 30-day grace period. So viewed, the union-
security clause is valid and the contract constitutes a bar to the petition
ill the instant case .3 For this reason, we find that no question affecting
commerce exists concerning the representation of employees of the
Employer within the meaning of the Act.
Order
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition filed herein be, and it hereby
is, dismissed.
s Charles A . Krause Milling Co., 97 NLRB 536.
SULLIVAN MINING COMPANY (ELECTROLYTIC ZINO PLANT), SUNSHINE
MINING COMPANY, LUCKY FRIDAY SILVER-LEAD MINES COMPANY,
FEDERAL MINING AND SMELTING COMPANY ( MORNING MINE),
BUNKER HILL AND SULLIVAN MINING AND CONCENTRATING COM-
PANY, NABOB SILVER -LEAD COMPANY and MUCKERS , MINERS AND
SMELTERMEN'S UNION, LOCAL INDUSTRIAL UNION #1792, CIO,
PETITIONER
BUNKER HILL AND SULLIVAN MINING AND CONCENTRATING COMPANY,
SULLIVAN MINING COMPANY (ELECTROLYTIC ZINC PLANT ) , SUN-
SHINE MINING COMPANY, FEDERAL MINING AND SMELTING COM-
PANY, AMERICAN SMELTING AND REFINING COMPANY, DAY MINES,
INC., COEUR D'ALENE MINES CORPORATION, SPOKANE-IDAHO MIN-
ING COMPANY, SUNSET MINERALS, INC., JOHN GEORGE LEASE, GOL-
CONDA LEAD MINES, HULL LEASE, GOLD HUNTER MINES, INC.,
SIDNEY MINING COMPANY, HIGHLAND- SURPRISE CONSOLIDATED
MINING COMPANY, MASCOT MINES., INC.,1 NABOB SILVER-LEAD
COMPANY, SUNSET LEASE, HECLA MINING COMPANY, ZANETTI MIN-
ING AND MILLING COMPANY, SILVER DOLLAR MINING COMPANY,
DREDGE FUND and INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS,
AFL, and INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BRIDGE, STRUCTURAL,
ORNAMENTAL AND REINFORCED STEEL WORKERS UNION, LOCAL #14,
AFL and BROTHERHOOD OF PAINTERS , DECORATORS AND PAPER-
HANGERS OF AMERICA, AFL and INTERNATIONAL UNION OF MINE,
MILL & SMELTER WORKERS, INDEPENDENT, AND LOCAL 18, INTER-
NATIONAL UNION OF MINE, MILL AND SMELTER WORKERS, INDEPEND-
ENT and INTERNATIONAL HOD CARRIERS', BUILDING AND COMMON
1 The name of this Employer , formerly the Denver Development Company, appears as
.corrected at the hearing.
101 NLRB No. 201.
SULLIVAN MINING COMPANY 1367
LABORERS UNION OF AMERICA, LOCAL 797, AFL, PETITIONERS. Cases
Nos. 19-RC-1077, 19-RC-1079, 19-RC-1081, 19-RC-10893, 19-RC-
1088, 19-RC-1130, 19RC 1113, 19-RC-11936,19-RC 1131, 19-RC-
11137, and 19-RC-1125. December 24,1952
Decision , Order, and Direction of Elections
Upon petitions duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a consolidated hearing was held before Robert E. Till-
man, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hear-
ing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed 2
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, the Board
has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-
member panel [Members Houston, Styles, and Peterson].
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. As found in Bunker Hill and Sullivan Mining and Concentrat-
ing Company, et al., 89 NLRB 243, decided April 7,1950, herein called
the Bunker Hill case, the Employers herein 3 are engaged in the min-
ing, smelting, and reduction of nonferrous ores and concentrates in the
Coeur d'Alene Mining District, Shoshone County, Idaho, and are en-
gaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act.
2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent certain em-
ployees of the Employers.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of employees of the Employers, within the meaning of Section 9
(c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act 4
4. The Muckers, Miners and Smeltermen's Union, Local Industrial
Union #1792, herein called the CIO, contends that the multiemployer
s The hearing officer granted motions by the following labor organizations to intervene :
Local 9, International Union of Mine, Mill & Smelter Workers , Ind ; Local 73, International
Brotherhood of Electrical Workers , AFL; Bricklayers , Masons and Plasterers International
Union, AFL ; Local 1863, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, AFL ;
and Local 370, International Union of Operating Engineers , AFL. The hearing officer also
granted the motion of the Hod Carriers to withdraw its petition in Case No. 19-RC -1125,
upon disclaiming interest in this proceeding . He likewise granted various motions by the
petitioning unions to amend their petitions to conform to the positions taken by them at
the hearing on the scope and composition of the units , outlined under paragraph numbered
4. He reserved for the Board the motions of the CIO and various Employers to dismiss,
discussed herein.
Employers Sullivan Zinc, Bunker Hill , and Sunshine requested oral argument before
the Board . As the record and the briefs adequately present the issues and the positions
of the parties , the requests are hereby denied.
$ The Dredge Fund, although not specifically named in the Bunker Hill case, is one of
"the 16" operators found on this record to be engaged in multiemployer bargaining. It
to a joint enterprise, financed by operators in the Coeur d 'Alene mining district . It opera
ates a dredge which removes from the Coeur d 'Alene River mill tailings discharged Into
that river by several mills in the district.
' Gold Hunter Mines, Inc., and Sunset Lease are inactive and have no production or main-
tenance employees . Hecla Mining Company , now engared in exploration only , as well as
the Star Mine of Sullivan Mining Company , are not engaged in multlemployer bargaining
and do not have employees sought in single-employer units . We therefore grant their
respective motions to dismiss as to them.
1368 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
bargaining found in the Bunker Hill case has ceased to exist, and seeks
to represent all production and maintenance employees of each of six
of the Employers.5 The petitioning and intervening AFL unions,
herein called IAM (Machinists), Structural Workers, Painters, Car-
penters, Bricklayers, and Operating Engineers, seek to sever their
various crafts from other employees at some of the Employers. The
other AFL union, the IBEW (Electricians), seeks to maintain its
certification as representative of the electricians employed in the dis-
trict 6 The International Union of Mine, Mill & Smelter Workers,
Ind., and its Local 18, herein called Mine-Mill, seeks a multiemployer
unit of all production and maintenance employees, including electri-
cians.' Local 9 of that union, herein called Mine-Mill Local 9, seeks
separate single-employer representation of all production and main-
employees at Luck Friday and Federal's Morning Mine. The Em-
ployers contend that there is no multiemployer bargaining and oppose
craft severance.
Scope of the Units
In 1950, the Board found in the Bunker Hill case that 22 Employers
in the district were engaged in joint bargaining of the type required
for the establishment of a multiple-employer unit. Since then,
"the 16" companies 8 have continued to bargain together, in the interest
of convenience and substantial uniformity in contractual provisions.
They insist, however, that there is lacking an agency relationship
among them and that they do not constitute a true multiemployer unit.
None of them, however, has evinced an intent to pursue a course of
individual action with regard to its labor relations. Instead, their
continued bargaining together manifests a desire to be bound by group
rather than by individual action. We therefore find that as to these
16 operators, a multiemployer unit is still appropriate.9
'Sullivan Mining Company (Electrolytic Zinc Plant ), herein called Sullivan Zinc;
Bunker Hill and Sullivan Mining and Concentrating Company ; Sunshine Mining Company ;
Federal Mining and Smelting Company ( Morning Mine ), herein called Federal's Morning
Mine ; Lucky Friday Silver-Lead Mines Company ; and Nabob Silver-Lead Company (one
of "the 161').
For the sake of brevity, we refer to the companies by the first part of their navies only,
e g , Sunshine , Lucky Friday, unless a longer designation is necessary for clarity.
8 The IBEW was certified May 25, 1950, on a multiemployer basis, following an election
held pursuant to the decision in the Bunker Hill case
The Mine-Mill contracts in the District expired on June 30 , 1952. Local 14 of that
union, formerly a party to some of these contracts , has merged with Local 18.
8 American Smelting, Coeur d'Alene, Day Mines , Dredge Fund, Federal 's Page and
Frisco Mines, Golconda, Highland -Surprise , Hull Lease , John George, Mascot, Nabob,
Sidney, Silver Dollar, Spokane -Idaho, Sunset Minerals , and Zanetti.
9 Furniture Employers ' Council of Southern California, Inc., 96 NLRB 1002.
As the CIO seeks to represent the employees of only one of the companies, Nabob, In
Case No. 19-RC-1130, on a single -employer basis, we find such a unit is inappropriate, and
shall dismiss that petition . The CIO's motion to dismiss Mine -Mill's petition in Case No.
19-RC-1137 on the ground that a multiemployer unit is inappropriate , is denied.
SULLIVAN MINING COMPANY 1369
As to the other Employers in the unit, steps were taken to withdraw
from multiemployer bargaining. On May 16, 1951, Sunshine notified
Mine-Mill by letter that "Sunshine Mining Company has withdrawn
from the group which formerly conducted concurrent negotiations in
this district," and that it declined to meet with representatives of other
companies. Sullivan Zinc and Bunker Hill sent Mine-Mill a similar
notice on May 14, 1951, refusing to engage in bargaining on a broader
basis than for their zinc plant, mine, and smelter.10 Again in 1952,
these three companies took a similar stand and refused to meet with
other companies in the district. In addition, on May 29, 1952-after
the CIO petitions had been filed herein-Sullivan Zinc and Bunker
Hill each sent all the parties in this proceeding registered notices de-
claring that these two companies intended "to continue to pursue an
individual course of action in collective bargaining"; that they thereby
withdrew from any "joint," "concurrent," or "multiemployer" bar-
gaining; and that they would not join in collective bargaining with
any other company in the future. We therefore find that Sullivan
Zinc, Bunker Hill, and Sunshine have clearly and unequivocally
evinced an intention to pursue individual courses of action apart from
that of the multiemployer group.1'
The only other Employer in the original 22 which is now in opera-
tion is Federal's Morning Mine. As to this mine, Federal has entered
into separate negotiations with Mine-Mill Local 9, which no longer
joins with Mine-Mill in bargaining with Employers in the district,
and has thereby effectually severed its Morning Mine employees from
the multi employer unit. We accordingly find that Federal's Morning
Mine 12 has likewise withdrawn from the multiemployer unit, and
that single-employer units there and at Sunshine are appropriate.
As Bunker Hill's mine, mill, and smelter, and the Sullivan Zinc plant
are all integrated, under the same management , we find, in accordance
with the contentions of all interested parties, that the 2 companies are
a single Employer for purposes of collective bargaining and that units
coextensive with these operations are appropriate.
Lucky Friday, the one other operation involved in this proceeding,
was excluded from the multiemployer unit in the Bunker Hill case.
11 In an endeavor to avert a pending strike , these three companies finally agreed to meet
in the same room with other companies on August 24, 1951. However, they did not join
with the other companies in bargaining.
11 We do not agree that the withdrawal of these three large operators from the multi-
employer unit has resulted in a disintegration of joint bargaining , as contended by the CIO,
Mine-Mill , Federal , and other Employers As there still continues multiemployer bargain-
ing on the part of "the 16" operators , the case of Giadding, McBean d Co ., 96 NLRB 823,
cited by Federal , is clearly not in point.
The motions of Sullivan Zinc, Bunker Hill , and Sunshine to dismiss the Mine-Mill peti-
tion , Case No . 19-RC-1137 , as to each of these three companies , because of their inde-
pendence from multiemployer bargaining , are granted.
12 As both the CIO and Mine-Mill have made a sufficient showing of interest , they will be
included with Mine -Mill Local 9 on the Morning Mine ballot.
1370 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
There is no history of collective bargaining at this mine. We find
that the single-employer unit of the Lucky Friday employees pro-
posed by the CIO and Mine-Mill Local 9 is appropriate15
Craft Severance
The Employers, the CIO, and Mine-Mill urge the Board to recon-
sider its decision in the Bunker Hill case, wherein the electricians were
permitted to be severed as a craft, and to reexamine its policy on the
question of craft severance in the nonferrous metals industry. They
contend that there is a high degree of work integration among pro-
duction and maintenance personnel, similar to that in the basic steel,
wet-milling, lumber, and basic aluminum industries,- and a lack of
demarcation along craft lines, particularly in the small operations.
Upon a thorough consideration of the record, in which a large part of
the record in the Bunker Hill case was incorporated by reference, we
do not find any persuasive reason, be it integration or otherwise, for
departing from our earlier decision 15 Moreover, we believe that
where there are readily identifiable craft groups, as we found the
electrician craft to be in the Bunker Hill case, they should be allowed
to bargain separately, if they so desire.16
Machinists: In Case No. 19-RC-1113, the IAM seeks separate units
at Sullivan Zinc and Bunker Hill, Sunshine, and at 3 of "the 16,"
viz, Highland-Surprise, Sidney, and Spokane-Idaho. In the alterna-
tive, it seeks a multiemployer unit comprising machinists and machinist
helpers, as well as welders and blacksmiths who work in the machine
shops, where Employers have the classification "machinists."
At the Sullivan Zinc plant and at the Bunker Hill mine and smelter,
there are well equipped machine shops, staffed by qualified machinists.
Working at one end of the mine machine shop 17 are 8 blacksmiths
and 10 welders who are under the same supervision as the machinists
but little of whose work is incidental to machinist work. There is no
2$ As Lucky Friday has never engaged in multiemployer bargaining , we hereby grant its
motion to dismiss Mine-Mill 's petition in Case No. 19-RC-1137 as to that Employer. As
the CIO, Mine-Mill , and Mine Mill Local 9 each has made a sufficient showing of interest
at Lucky Friday, we shall direct that the names of all three unions be placed on the
ballot at the separate election at this operation.
"National Tube Company, 76 NLRB 1199 ; Corn Products Refining Company, 87 NLRB
187; Weyerhaeuser Timber Company (Springfield Lumber Division ), 87 NLRB 1076; and
The Permanente Metals Corporation, 89 NLRB 804.
'" Cf. Tin Processing Corporation, 96 NLRB 300, 302.
16 As the IBEW is not seeking an election among the employees in the electrician craft
which it currently represents , and as neither the CIO nor Mine-Mill has made a sufficient
showing of interest in units of electricians , we find it unnecessary to hold elections for
members of that craft.
IT One of the machinists in this shop spends only 35 percent of his time doing machinist
work . We find that he regularly works a substantial number of hours in the machinist
unit herein found appropriate , and is eligible to vote therein . The Ocala Star Banner, 97
NLRB 384.
SULLIVAN MINING COMPANY 1371
showing of any interchange between the machinists and these black-
smiths and welders,"8 whom the IAM seeks. As their skills and
functions are dissimilar, we find, contrary to the IAM, that there is
lacking a sufficient community of interest -to warrant their being
included in a single unit.'9 We do find, though, that the machinists 20
employed by Sullivan Zinc and Bunker Hill may constitute a separate,
appropriate unit, if they so desire.-
At Sunshine, however, there is no separate machine shop, as such.
Instead, there is a mechanical maintenance shop, with only 2 persons
doing machinist work, the other 19 doing mechanical, blacksmith,
pipefitting, and welding work. The IAM seeks a mechanical main-
tenance unit. Like the other Employers, Sunshine opposes any
severance; but if there is to be craft severance, Sunshine agrees with
the unit sought by the IAM. Evidently the 2 machinists do not
constitute a substantial nucleus of craftsmen in a homogeneous de-
partment, entitled to be severed where there is a history of bargaining
in a larger unit 22 The IAM does not seek a separate unit of machinists
alone. We therefore find the proposed mechanical maintenance unit
at Sunshine inappropriate for severance as it constitutes a multicraft
unit .23
Neither at Highland-Surpise, nor Sidney, nor Spokane-Idaho does
the record disclose a machine shop, as distinguished from a multicraft
maintenance shop. We find for the reasons noted above that the pro-
posed mechanical maintenance units at these companies are also in-
appropriate, as heterogeneous, multicraft groups of employees.24 We
further find that the IAM's alternative proposal of a multiemployer
unit of machinists, machinist helpers, blacksmiths, and welders is
likewise inappropriate for the same reason25
Riggers: In Case No. 19-RC-1126, the Structural Workers seeks to
sever a unit of riggers at the Bunker Hill smelter. In the absence
of a description in the record of their skills, we see no reason for de-
parting from Board determinations in the past in which riggers were
Is Portland Bolt cE Manufacturing Co., 97 NLRB 1340.
19 The same applies to the two blacksmiths employed in the machine shop and the four
oilers who oil machinery in the production department at smelter.
20 We include the first-class and second -class machinists , and their helpers , as well as
any machinists at the smelter who do skilled machinist work outside the machine shop.
The TAM does not seek to represent the mechanics.
a Sullivan Zinc's and Bunker Hill's motions to dismiss the petition in Case No.
19-RC-1113 as to them , and the CIO 's motion to dismiss , based on the asserted Inappro-
priateness of the unit , are denied.
22 Allis -Chalmers Manufacturing Company , 77 NLRB 719, 725.
19 The motion of Sunshine , as well as the motions of Federal , American , and Day Mines,
to dismiss as to each of them because of the inappropriate units sought , are granted.
'x Tin Processing Corporation, supra, at 303.
5 The TAM did not make a sufficient showing in a multiemployer craft unit of machin-
ists and machinist helpers, as it did at Sullivan Zinc and Bunker Hill . Accordingly, we
shall not direct an election in such a unit.
1372 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
held not to be skilled craftsmen.26 Accordingly, we find such a unit
inappropriate.27
Painters, carpenters, and bricklayers: The Painters in Case No.
19-RC-1131, and the intervening Carpenters and Bricklayers seek
three separate units of painters, carpenters, and bricklayers employed
at Sullivan Zinc and Bunker Hill. The CIO concedes and Mine-Mill
fails to dispute that these employees possess the traditional skills of
their respective crafts, and the two companies agree that some of them
are craftsmen. We find that these painters,"' carpenters'29 and brick-
layers,30 are skilled craftsmen and that each of the three crafts is
entitled to separate representation, if it so desires.31
Hoistmen: The intervening Operating Engineers seeks to represent
the hoistmen at Federal's Morning Mine. Federal, the CIO, and Mine-
Mill all oppose such a severance, contending that the hoistmen are not
skilled craftsmen. The Employer further contends that their work
is an integral part of production. These employees operate the various
hoists inside the mine, lowering and raising personnel, ore, and equip-
ment in the underground shafts. The period of time required to train
a hoistman ranges from a minimum of 2 or 3 days to 40 days, de-
pending on the type of hoist. Previous experience is unnecessary.
From these facts we conclude that the hoistmen are not a skilled craft
group, and that the proposed unit is therefore inappropriate.32
In view of the foregoing, and upon the entire record, we find that
the following groups of employees constitute units appropriate for
collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act:
(1) All production and maintenance employees of American Smelt-
ing and Refining Company, Coeur d'Alene Mines Corporation, Day
Mines, Inc., Dredge Fund, Federal Mining and Smelting Company
20 Continental Can Company , 95 NLRB 165 ; Tin Processing Corporation , supra at 304.
27 The motions of Sullivan Zinc. Bunker Hill, Sunshine , Federal, American , and Day
Mines to dismiss as to each of them because of the inappropriateness of such a unit, or of
a multicraft riggers unit as originally sought, are granted.
23 One employee classified as a painter in the housing division of the construction and
repair department at the mine spends 95 percent of his lime doing nonpainting work : e. g.,
laying linoleum and sanding floors . We find therefore that his interests are elsewhere
than with the painters . We shall not include him in the painters unit found appropriate
herein
29 Although some of the carpenters spend all their time at the trade , others spend from
20 percent to 80 percent of their time doing such work . As all of them have a substantial
interest In the wages and working conditions of the craft , we shall include them, In the
unit and allow them to vote The Ocala Star Banner , supra.
There being no opposition , we shall include In the unit the first- and second -class mill-
wrights and millwright helpers at the smelter.
30 In addition to the bricklayers and bricklayer helpers at the smelter , we shall include
also the bricklayer at the zinc plant who spends only 25 percent of his time at that trade.
Ibid.
81 Sullivan Zinc's and Bunker Hill 's motions to dismiss the Painters ' petition , Case No.
19-RC-1126 , as to each company , and the CIO ' s motion to dismiss , based on the asserted
inappropriateness of the unit , are denied . The motions of Sunshine , Federal , American,
and Day Mines to dismiss as to them are granted.
32 Cf. United States Lime Products Corporation, 91 NLRB 1415.
SULLIVAN MINING COMPANY 1373
(Page and Frisco Mines), Golconda Lead Mines, Highland-Surprise
Consolidated Mining Company, Hull Lease, John George Lease,
Mascot Mines, Inc., Nabob Silver-Lead Company, Sidney Mining
Company, Silver Dollar Mining Company, Spokane-Idaho Mining
Company, Sunset Minerals, Inc., and Zanetti Mining and Milling Com-
pany at their properties in the Coeur d'Alene Mining District in Sho-
shone County, Idaho, excluding all maintenance electricians and elec-
trician helpers, executive, professional, technical, and clerical em-
ployees, guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act.
(2) All production and maintenance employees of the Sunshine
Mining Company at its property in or near Kellogg, Idaho, excluding
all maintenance electricians and electrician helpers, executive, profes-
sional, technical, and clerical employees, guards, and supervisors as
defined in the Act.
(3) All production and maintenance employees of the Lucky Friday
Mining Company in its operations at Mullan, Idaho, excluding all
executive, professional, technical, and clerical employees, guards, and
supervisors as defined in the Act.
(4) All production and maintenance employees of the Federal Min-
ing and Smelting Company at its Morning Mine, Mullan, Idaho,
excluding all maintenance electricians and electrician helpers, execu-
tive, professional, technical, and clerical employees, guards, and super-
visors as defined in the Act.
We find that the following employees of Sullivan Mining Company
(Electrolytic Zinc Plant) and Bunker Hill and Sullivan Mining and
Concentrating Company at their properties in or near Kellogg, Idaho,
may constitute separate units appropriate for collective bargaining:
(5) All production and maintenance employees, excluding all main-
tenance electricians, electrician helpers, and generator men, machin-
ists and machinist helpers, painters, carpenters and carpenter helpers,
bricklayers and bricklayer helpers, executive, professional, technical,
and clerical employees, guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act.
(6) All machinists and machinist helpers, excluding all other em-
ployees and supervisors as defined in the Act.
(7) All painters, excluding all other employees and supervisors as
defined in the Act.
(8) All carpenters and carpenter helpers, excluding all other em-
ployees and supervisors as defined in the Act.
(9) All bricklayers and bricklayer helpers, excluding all other
employees and supervisors as defined in the Act.
If a majority of any of voting groups (6), (7), (8), or (9), vote
for a different union from the one for which a majority vote in voting
group (5), they will be taken to have indicated their desire to constitute
a separate appropriate uinit, and the Regional Director conducting
1374 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
the elections directed herein is instructed to issue a certificate of repre-
sentatives to the winning union for each such voting group described
above, which the Board, under such circumstances, finds to be a unit
appropriate for purposes of collective bargaining. In the event that
a majority of any one or more of voting groups (6), (7), (8), or (9),
vote for the same union as the one for which a majority vote in voting
group (5), the Board finds the inclusion of such employees in the
larger unit to be appropriate, and the Regional Director will issue a
certificate of representatives to the winning union in the larger unit.
Order
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petitions filed in cases numbered 19-
RC-1126 and 1130 be, and they hereby are, dismissed.
[Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication in this
volume.]
LINGERIE , INC. and UNITED TEXTILE WORKERS OF AMERICA, AFL.
Cases Nos. 11-CA-321 and 11-RC-311 ( formerly 34-CA-321 and
34-RC-311). December 09, 1952
Decision and Order
On April 29, 1952, Trial Examiner C. W. Whittemore 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 Inter-
mediate Report attached hereto. Thereafter, the Respondent filed
exceptions and a statement of objections to the Intermediate Report,
and the General Counsel filed a memorandum and brief in support of
the Intermediate Report. The Respondent's request for oral argu-
ment is hereby denied as the record, exceptions, statements, and briefs
before us adequately present the issues and positions of the parties.
The Board 1 has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner and
finds that no prejudicial error was committed. The rulings are hereby
affirmed. The Board has considered the Intermediate Report, the Re-
spondent's exceptions and statement of objections, the General Coun-
sel's memorandum and brief, and the entire record in this case, and
hereby adopts the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the
Trial Examiner, with the following additions and modifications :
1 Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act, the
Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three -member panel
[Chairman Herzog and Members Murdock and Peterson].
101 NLRB No. 221.