The Wilson H. Lee Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jan 22, 1940

19 N.L.R.B. 750 (N.L.R.B. 1940)

In the Matter of THE WILSON H. LEE COMPANY and INTERNATIONAL
PRINTING PRESSMEN AND ASSISTANTS'. UNION OF NORTH AMERIOA,
A. F. OF L.
Case No. R-1399.-Decided January 22, 1940
Printing and Bookbinding Industry-Investigation of Representatives: con-
troversy concerning representation of employees : refusal to recognize union ;
majority status disputes by Company ; consent election , no bar to , where finding
by Trial Examiner of interference with respect to not excepted by Company
and more than year has elapsed since holding of-Unit Appropriate for Col-
lective Bargaining: pressmen , feeders, and operators of employer , excluding
all its other employees ; stipulation as to-Representatives : proof of choice:
membership cards, dated prior to consent election ; employer contests designa-
tion by majority-Election. Ordered
Mr. Christopher Hoey and Mr. George Rose, for the Board.
Mr. Herbert L. Emanuelson, of New Haven, Conn., for the
Company.
Mr. Anthony J. De Andrade, of Boston, Mass., for the Union.
Mr. William Strong, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OFD THE CASE
On October 6, 1938, International Printing Pressmen and Assist-
ants' Union of North America, A. F. of L., herein called the Union,
filed with the Regional Director for the Second Region (New York
City) a petition alleging that a question affecting commerce had
arisen concerning the representation of employees of The Wilson
H. Lee Company,' Orange, Connecticut, herein called the Company,
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 October 21, 1938, the Regional Director for the Second Region,
acting pursuant to an agreement between the Union and the Com-
1 The Petition , Notice of Hearing , and other papers designate the Company as "Wil-
son H . Lee Company ." The name was corrected by stipulation between the Board and
the Company.
19 N. L. R. B., No. 80.
750
THE WILSON H. LEE 00•11PA\Y 751
pany, conducted an election by secret ballot among all pressmen,
feeders, and operators of the Company,' to determine whether or
,not they desired to be represented by the Union for purposes of col-
lective bargaining. A majority of the eligible employees partici-
pating in this election voted against representation by the Union.
On November 9, 1938, the Union filed charges, and thereafter filed
a supplemental charge and an amended charge with the Regional
Director.
On April 10, 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
Regulations-Series 1, as amended, ordered an investigation and
authorized the Regional Director to conduct it, and, acting pursuant
-to Article III, Section 10 (c) (2), and Article III, Section 37 (b),
of the said Rules and Regulations, directed that the unfair labor
practice and representation proceedings be consolidated. On May
8, 1939, the Board, by the Regional Director for the Second Region,
upon the charges and supplemental and amended charges, issued
its complaint, and also issued notices of hearing, alleging that the
Company had engaged in unfair labor practices affecting commerce
within the meaning of Section 8 (1) and (3) and Section 2 (6) and
(7) of the Act. Copies of the complaint, accompanied by notice
,of hearing, were duly served on the Company and the Union. The
Company filed an answer denying that it had engaged in the alleged
unfair labor practices.
Pursuant to notice, a hearing was held on May 18, 19, 23, 24, 31, and
June 1 and 2, 1939; at New Haven, Connecticut, before E. G. Smith,
the Trial Examiner duly designated by the Board. The Board and
the Company were represented by counsel, and the Union by a repre-
sentative; all participated in the hearing. Full opportunity to be
heard, to' examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evi-
dence bearing on the issues was afforded all parties. During the hear-
ing, the Trial Examiner made several rulings on motions and on
objections to the admission 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 October 5, 1939, the Trial Examiner issued his Intermediate
Report in the complaint case, wherein he found that the Company
had engaged in unfair labor practices affecting commerce within the
meaning of Section 8 (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act, during
the period preceding the consent election, and with reference to the
election, and recommended that the Company cease and desist from its
2 The Union and the Company had agreed that these employees constitute an appro-
priate unit.
752 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
unfair labor practices and take certain affirmative action remedial,
of their effect. The Trial Examiner also recommended dismissal of
the complaint in so far as it alleges that the Company had engaged in
unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8 (3) of the Act.
No exceptions to the Intermediate Report were filed by either the
Company or the Union.
On October 21, 1939, the Company filed with the Regional Director
a "Report of Compliance with Intermediate Report," showing that
it had complied with the Intermediate Report by taking 'the affirma-
tive action recommended by the Trial Examiner. On January 2, 1940).
the Board, acting pursuant to Article II, Section 36 (d), and Article
III, Section 10 (c) (4), of National Labor Relations Board Rules and
Regulations-Series 2, issued its order directing severance of the
complaint and representation cases. This decision deals solely with
the representation proceeding.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
The Wilson H. Lee Company is a Connecticut corporation, engaged
at Orange, Connecticut, in printing, bookbinding, and manufacture of
books, magazines, catalogs, railroad timetables, and other material.
During 1938 the Company purchased various materials valued at
more than $70,000, of which approximately 44 per cent were from
sources outside the State of Connecticut. In addition, more than 75
per cent of other materials, purchased and owned by customers of
the Company but delivered to and used by the Company to produce
finished products for these customers, were obtained from outside the
State of Connecticut. During this same period, the Company sent,
either directly or indirectly, more than 50 per cent of its finished
products, valued at about $180,000, to points outside the State of
Connecticut. The Company employs about 150 persons.
H. THE LABOR ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
International Printing Pressmen and Assistants' Union of North
America is a labor organization affiliated with the American Feder-
ation of Labor. It admits to membership all pressmen, feeders, and
operators of the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
In September and October 1938 the Union informed the Company
that it represented a majority of all pressmen , feeders, and operators
employed by the latter , and requested the Company to enter into col-
THE WILSON H. LEE OOMPANY 753
lective • bargaining negotiations with it. The Company disputed the
majority representation claim, and did not negotiate with the Union.
As stated above, the Regional Director for the Second Region , acting
pursuant to an agreement between the Union and the Company, con-
ducted an election by secret ballot among all pressmen , feeders, and
operators of the Company, to determine whether or not they desired
to be represented by the Union for purposes of collective bargaining.
A. majority of the eligible employees participating in this election
voted against representation by the Union . . The Trial Examiner found
that the Company had engaged in interference , restraint , and co-
ercion with respect to this election , and the Company did not take
exception thereto. Moreover , more than a year has elapsed since the
holding of this consent election. Under these circumstances we find
that the consent election does not constitute a bar to the present
proceeding.
After the consent election, the Company continued to refuse to
recognize the Union . At the hearing the Company indicated that it
still disputes the Union 's claim to representation of, a majority, and
refuses to bargain with it.
We find that a question has arisen concerning the representation
of employees of the Company.
IV. THE EFFECT OF THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION UPON
COMMERCE
We find that the question concerning representation which has
arisen, occurring in connection with the operations of the Company,
described in Section I above, has a close, intimate , and substantial
relation to trade, traffic, and commerce among the several States, and
tends to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce
and the free flow of commerce.
V. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The consent election agreement between the Company and the
Union provided that an appropriate unit among employees of the
Company consists of all pressmen , feeders, and operators. At the
hearing the parties stipulated that an appropriate unit consists of all
pressmen, feeders , and operators of the Company, excluding all other
employees of the Company.
We find that all pressmen , feeders, and operators of the Company,
excluding all other employees of the Company, constitute a unit appro-
priate for the purposes of collective bargaining , and that said unit will
insure to employees of the Company the full benefit of their right to
self-organization and to collective bargaining and otherwise effectuate
the policies of the Act.
754 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR REI ATIONS BOARD
VI. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
Pay rolls of the Company revealed that on September 30, 1938,
29 employees were within the appropriate unit; that on October 5,
1938, 35 employees were within the appropriate unit; and that there-
after the number of employees within the appropriate unit was more
than 29.
At the hearing, the Union claimed to represent a majority of the
employees within the appropriate unit, and, in support of its claim,
introduced in evidence one "certificate of membership" and 14 appli-
cations for membership, which, it claimed, had been signed by em-
ployees within the appropriate unit. All of these cards were dated
prior to the consent election of October 21, 1938. As stated above,
the Company claims that the Union has not been designated by a
majority. Under these circumstances we shall direct an election to
resolve the question concerning representation.3 The pay roll for the
period immediately preceding the date of this Decision and Direction
of Election is the appropriate one for the purpose of determining
eligibility to participate in the election.
We shall accordingly direct that employees of the Company within
the appropriate unit whose names appear on the pay roll for the
period immediately preceding the date of this Decision and Direction
of Election, including employees who did not work during such pay-
roll period because they were ill or on vacation, and employees who
during that pay-roll period were or have since been temporarily laid
off, and excluding employees who have since quit or been discharged
for cause, shall be eligible to vote in the election.
Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and the entire record
in the case, the Board makes the following :
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. A question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the repre-
sentation of employees of The Wilson H. Lee Company, Orange,
Connecticut, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6)
and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act.
2. All pressmen, feeders, and operators of the Company, excluding
all other employees of the Company, constitute a unit appropriate for
the purposes of collective bargaining, within the meaning of Section
9 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act.
8 See Matter of The Cudahy Packing Company and United Packinghouse Workers of
America, Local No. 21, of the Packinghouse Workers Organizing Committee, 13 N. L.
R. B. 526; and Matter of Armour & Company and United Packinghouse Workers, Local
Industrial Union, No. 13, of Packinghouse Organizing Committee, Affiliated with 0. L 0.,
13 N. L. R. B. 567.
THE WILSON H. LEE COMPANY
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
755
By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National
Labor Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 8, of National
Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation ordered by the Board
to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining
with The Wilson H. Lee Company, Orange, Connecticut, an election
by secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later
than, thirty (30) days from the date of this Direction of Election,
under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the
Second Region, acting in the matter as agent for the National Labor
Relations Board and subject to Article III, Section 9, of said Rules'
and Regulations, among all pressmen, feeders, and operators of The'
Wilson H. Lee Company, Orange, Connecticut, who were employed.
during the period immediately preceding the date of this Direction of
Election, including employees who were not employed during the.
pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation, and employees
who were or have since been temporarily laid off, and excluding em-
ployees who have since quit or been discharged for cause, and,
further, excluding all other employees of the Company, to determine
whether or not they desire to be represented by International Print-
ing Pressmen and Assistants' Union of North America, American
Federation of Labor, for the purposes of collective bargaining.