The Quaker Maid Co., Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Dec 4, 1946

71 N.L.R.B. 915 (N.L.R.B. 1946)

In the Matter of THE QUAKER MAID COMPANY, INCORPORATED,
EMPLOYER and UNITED STEELWORKERS OF AMERICA, C. I. O.,
PETITIONER
Case No. 11-R-1089.-Decided December 4, 1946
Mr. Frederic D. Anderson, of Indianapolis, Ind., for the Employer.
Mr. Robert D. Malarney, of Indianapolis, Ind., for the Steelworkers.
Messrs. Floyd E. Dix and David E. Rosenfeld, of Terre Haute, Ind.,
for the Independent.
Mr. Harold Moon, of Columbus, Ohio, for District #50.
Miss Irene R. Shriber. of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
ORDER
Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at Terre
Haute, Indiana, on August 1, 1946, before Clifford L. Hardy, hearing
officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free
from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.' At the hearing, both
the Employer and the Independent moved for dismissal of the peti-
tion on the ground that, an existing collective bargaining agreement
is a bar to this proceeding. The hearing officer referred these motions
to the Board for determination. For reasons set forth in Section III,
infra, the motions are hereby granted.
Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations
Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
The Quaker Maid Company, Incorporated, a New York corporation
with a plant in Terre Haute, Indiana, is engaged in the business of
processing and packaging food products. Annually, the Employer
purchases over $1,000,000 worth of raw materials, of which a con-
siderable portion is obtained from points outside the State of Indiana.
1 District #50, United Mine Workers of America, was not served with notice and did
not appear at the hearing After the hearing, District #50 moved to intervene in this
proceeding. Inasmuch as we are dismissing the petition herein, the motion is hereby
denied.
71 N'. L. R. B., No. 147.
915
916 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS -BOARD
The Employer's sales have an annual value of more than $1,000,000,
of which a large portion represents sales to out-of-State purchasers.
The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
United Steelworkers of America, herein called the Steelworkers,
is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Or-
ganizations, claiming to represent employees of the Employer.
Food Industrial Union of Quaker Maid Company, Inc., herein
called the Independent, is an unaffiliated labor organization, claiming
to represent employees of the Employer.
District #50, United Mine Workers of America, affiliated with the
American Federation of Labor, herein called District #50, is a labor
organization, claiming to represent employees of the Employer.
III. TILE ALLEGED QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On June 19, 1945, pursuant to a consent election agreement, the
Board conducted an election among the production employees of the
Employer. The Independent won the election and on July 3, 1945,
was designated by the Regional Director as exclusive bargaining rep-
resentative of the employees in the stipulated unit. On July 30, 1945,
subsequent to the designation, the Employer and the Independent
signed a collective bargaining agreement to be in effect for 1 year from
July 30, 1945, subject to automatic renewal from year to year there-
after unless either party served notice of a desire to change the con-
tract at least 30 days before July 30 of any year. Included among the
provisions of the agreement was a clause permitting the signatories to
change any of its terms at any time upon mutual agreement so long
as they reduced the changes to writing.
During February 1946, 7 months after its designation, the Inde-
pendent commenced to negotiate with the Employer regarding a
change in wage rates. On May 13, 1946, having reached an agreement,
they incorporated the new schedule of wages into a contract which they
entitled First Supplement. The supplemental agreement also con-
tained a clause which ratified the agreement of July 30, 1945, extended
its terminal date to July 30, 1947, and repeated the self-renewing
provision.
On May 6, 1946, the Employer received a letter from the Steelworkers
requesting that the Employer recognize the Steelworkers as the exclu-
sive bargaining representative of the Employer's employees. The Em-
ployer refused the request on the ground that it was bound by its con-
tract with the Independent. On June 20, 1946, the Steelworkers filed
the petition herein.
THE QUAKER MAID COMPANY, INCORPORATED 917
In support of their motions to dismiss the petition, both the Em-
ployer and the Independent contend that the supplemental agreement
of May 13, 1946, is a bar to this proceeding. The Petitioner takes
the position that the supplemental agreement is nothing more than
a premature extension of the July 30, 1945, contract and hence cannot
be deemed to constitute a bar.2
Recently, in a series of cases, we laid down the rule that a collective
bargaining agreement for a reasonable term entered into within
the year following certification of the contracting union is a bar
during its term to a petition filed by a rival union, notwithstanding
the fact that the agreement is tantamount to a premature extension
of a previously existing contract.3 We held that, during this 1-year
period following certification, the premature extension doctrine does
not apply. , It is true that in these cases the original contract to which
we refused to apply the premature extension principle was executed
before the certification, whereas in this case the original agreement
was signed after the designation. The reason for the rule is, however,
the same in both situations. The rule rests on the principle that,
during the 1-year period following certification, the employer has
the duty of bargaining in good faith with the certified union and
that it would be entirely inconsistent for the Board to require an
employer to negotiate with the certified union concerning an agree-
ment while withholding power from the parties to make an agree-
ment for a reasonable period effective against the claim of a rival
union.' Inasmuch as the 1946 supplemental agreement was signed
within 1 year of the Independent's designation and will not terminate
until July 30, 1947, we find that it is a b5r to a present determination
of representatives. Accordingly, we shall dismiss the petition herein.
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for investigation and certi-
fication of representatives of employees of The Quaker Maid Com-
pany, Incorporated, Terre Haute, Indiana, filed by the United Steel-
workers of America, C. I. 0., be, and it hereby is, dismissed.
'See Matter of Memphis Furniture Manufacturing Company, 51 N. L. R. B. 1447;
Matter of Wichita Union Stockyards Company, 40 N. L. R. B. 369.
3 Matter of Omaha Packing Company, 67 N. L. R . B. 304; Matter of Swift & Company,
66 N. L. R. B. 1288.
4 Matter of Con P Curran Printing Company, 67 N. L. R. B. 1419.