Wallace Press, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 30, 1964

146 N.L.R.B. 1236 (N.L.R.B. 1964)

1236 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
rector for the Twenty -fifth Region , shall, after being duly signed by a representa-
tive of the Respondent , be posted by it immediately upon receipt thereof and be
maintained by it for 60 consecutive days thereafter in conspicuous places, including
all places where notices to employees are customarily posted . Reasonable steps
'shall be taken by Respondent to insure that said notices are not altered , defaced,
or covered by other material.
(d) Notify said Regional Director , in writing, within 20 days from the date of
this ' Decision and Recommended Order , what steps the Respondent has taken to
comply herewith 27
It is further recommended that the complaint be dismissed as to all all'egations'not
specifically found herein to have been in violation of the Act.
n In the event that this Recommended Order be adopted by the Board , this provision
shall be modified to read : "Notify said Regional Director , In writing, within 10 days from
the date of this Order , what steps the Respondent has taken to comply herewith."
APPENDIX
NOTICE TO ALL EMPLOYEES
Pursuant to the Recommended Order of a Trial Examiner of the National Labor
Relations Board , and in order to effectuate the policies of the National Labor
Relations Act, as amended , we hereby notify you that:
WE WILL NOT interfere with, restrain , or coerce our employees in the exercise
of the rights guaranteed by Section 7 of the Act.
WE WILL NOT discourage membership in the United Steelworkers of America,
AFL-CIO, or any other labor organization , by discharging or otherwise discrimi-
nating against any employee in regard to his hire or tenure of employment be-
cause he joined the United Steelworkers of America , AFL-CIO, or any other
labor organization.
WE WILL make whole James Rains and William E . Crist III for any loss of
pay suffered by them and we will offer full and immediate reinstatement to James
Rains and William E. Crist III.
THE LAu BLOWER COMPANY,
Employer.
Dated---------------- --- By-------------------------------------------
(Representative ) ( Title)
NOTE.-We will notify the above -named employees if presently serving in the
Armed Forces of the United States of their right to full reinstatement upon ap-
plication in accordance with the Selective Service Act and the Universal Military
Training and Service Act 'of 1948, as amended , after discharge from the Armed
Forces.
This notice must remain posted for 60 consecutive days from the date of posting,
and must not be altered , defaced , or covered by any other material.
Employees may communicate directly with the Board 's Regional Office, 614 ISTA
Center, 150 West Market Street , Indianapolis , Indiana, Telephone ' No. Melrose
3-8921 , if they have any questions concerning this notice or compliance with its
provisions.
Wallace Press , Inc. and District No. 123, International Associa-
tion of Machinists , AFL-CIO. Case No. 13-CA-5779. April 30,
196.
DECISION AND ORDER
Upon the filing of a charge and amended charges by District No.
123, International Association of Machinists, AFL-CIO, herein called
the Union, the General Counsel of the National Labor Relations
Board, by the Regional Director for the 'Thirteenth Region, issued a
complaint on September 30, 1963, alleging that Wallace Press, Inc.,
146 NLRB No. 154.
WALLACE PRESS, INC. 1237
herein called the Respondent, had engaged in and was engaging in un-
fair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8(a) (1) and Sec-
tion 2(6) and (7) of the Act. Thereafter, the Respondent filed an
answer, admitting certain jurisdictional and factual allegations, but
denying the commission of any unfair labor practices.
On November 22, 1963, the parties to this proceeding filed with the
Board a stipulation of facts and a joint motion, executed on Novem-
ber 19, 19.63, requesting.that this case be transferred directly to the
Board for the issuance of findings of fact, conclusions of law, and a
Decision and Order. The parties waived their rights to a hearing
before a Trial Examiner, the making of findings of fact and conclu-
sions of law by a Trial Examiner, and the issuance of a Trial Ex-
aminer's Decision. The parties agreed that the formal documents,
including the stipulation of facts, shall constitute the entire record in
the case.
On November 27, 1963, the Board issued an Order approving the
stipulation and transferring the case to the Board. Thereafter, briefs
were filed by the Respondent and the General Counsel.
Upon the basis of the stipulation of facts, the briefs, and the entire
record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDNGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE RESPONDENT
The Respondent, an. Illinois corporation with its principal office
and place of business in Chicago, Illinois, maintains various plants,
including one at Clinton, Illinois, and is engaged in the printing, sale,
and distribution of business forms. During the year 1962 the Re-
spondent shipped goods valued in excess of $50,000 from its Clinton
plant to points outside the State of Illinois.
We find that the Respondent is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act, and that it will effectuate
the policies of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein.
U. THE LABOR ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
The Union is a labor organization within the meaning of Section
2 (5) of the Act.
M. THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
The complaint alleges that the Respondent has interfered with, re-
strained, and coerced its employees in violation of Section 8(a) (1) of
the'^Act by its hiring practices.,
Since July 1963, the Respondent has employed the services of The
Associated Credit Bureau of America, herein called the Bureau, to sub-
1238 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
mit to the Respondent investigate reports on persons who apply for
work at its Clinton, Illinois plant. The Bureau's function is to in-
vestigate and determine the financial and credit standing of an ap-
plicant; whether the applicant has been a member of a labor orgaluza.-
tion; and if he was, the extent of his participation and the nature of
his relationship with said labor organization. This investigation sup-
plements the customary application form and interview utilized by the
Respondent to determine whether applicants for employment are quali-
fied. The stipulation states that on at least four occasions when such
investigations were made the Respondent employed the applicants
involved and, further, that the Respondent has never refused employ-
ment to any job applicant by reason of information received from the
Bureau. The stipulation does not state whether any investigation ever
revealed a union background of an applicant. The Respondent does
not inform any applicant that he is being investigated by the Bureau,
nor does it inform the applicant of any information submitted by the
Bureau. The information obtained from the Bureau is included in
the permanent employment records of the applicant, which are main-
tained by the Respondent.
The General Counsel contends that the Respondent's conduct herein
constitutes a form of unlawful surveillance and/or interrogation of
employees proscribed by Section 8 (a) (1) of the Act. The Respondent
argues that its screening of new applicants concerning their past union
activity is merely part of a program to hire qualified employees 1 and,
particularly in the absence of any background of antiunion hostility,
is lawful.
Few propositions are more firmly embedded in the law of labor
relations than that an employer who spies upon the union activities of
his employees engages in a flagrant violation of the rights guaranteed
by Section 7 of the Act 2 Such conduct has been condemned by the
Board and the courts since the early days of the Act,' for experience
has shown that employers resort to labor espionage or surveillance for
the purpose of obstructing and destroying employees' self-organiza-
tional rights and activities.' If such first steps leading to discrimina-
2 The desirability of an applicant could be indicated, the Respondent asserts, by dis-
closures of whether the applicant conformed or rebelled against union discipline, was
constantly at odds with union leadership, or was consistently a "dissenter" rather than
a "conformer."
2 The Respondent does not dispute that applicants for employment are employees within
the meanine of the Act and entitled to Its protection. See Phelps Dodge Corp. v. N.L.R.B.,
313 U.S. 177, 183.
B Consolidated Edison Co. v. N.L.R.B., 305 U.S. 197, 230, enfg. In this respect 4 NLRB
71: Virginia Electric and Power Co. v. N.L.R.B., 319 U.S. 533, enfg. 44 NLRB 404, 427;
N.L.R.B. v. Grower-Shipper Vegetable Association, 122 F. 2d 368, 376 (C.A. 9), enfg. In
this respect 15 NLRB 322; N.L.R.B. v. Baldwin Locomotive Works, 128 F. 2d 39, 50•
(C.A. 3), enfg. 20 NLRB 1100; N.L.R.B. v. Collins cL Ailcman Corp., 146 F. 2d 454
(C.A. 4) ; Harvey Aluminum, et al., 139 NLRB 151.
4 The conclusions of the LaFollette committee concerning industrial espionage fully
confirm the Board's experience. S. Rept. 46, part 3, 75th Cong., 2d seas, pp. 8-9.
WALLACE PRESS, INC. 1239
tory practices are outlawed, the commission of other unfair labor
practices may be thwarted.
On the basis of the foregoing,- we think that the Respondent's con-
duct must be held to have violated the Act. Its use of the Bureau
to obtain information concerning the union membership of applicants
and the extent and nature of their participation in labor organizations
is akin to the conduct of employers in the above-cited cases who en-
-gaged in labor espionage or in the surveillance of their employees'
union activities. And in the light of the aforementioned experience
in this area, we believe it reasonable to infer, absent a satisfactory ex-
planation to the contrary, that surreptitious investigations of the type
initiated by Respondent into job seekers' union membership and ac-
tivity are without a legitimate purpose and, as such, are sufficient to
establish a violation of Section 8(a) (1) of the Act. As noted, the
reason asserted by this Respondent for its invasion of an area which is
the private concern of employees is that the information sought per-
tained to the applicant's qualifications for employment. But in the
circumstances of the case, particularly considering the nature of the
information desired by Respondent, as well as the method resorted
to for securing it, we are not satisfied that the information in question
was meant to serve a legitimate function in the hiring process if, in-
deed, it could.5 It thus follows that the General Counsel's prima facie
case has not been overcome, and we accordingly find that the Respond-
ent's use of the Bureau to secure information as to the union member-
ship or activities of employment applicants was an interference with
rights guaranteed employees by the Act in violation of Section
8(a)(1) of the Acts
IV. THE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES UPON COMMERCE
The activities of the Respondent set forth in section III, occurring
in connection with its operations as described in section I, have a close,
5 We regard it as immaterial that Respondent may have hired applicants who were union
adherents . We assume that Respondent does, as it contends , give weight to the Informa-
tion concerning the nature of an applicant ' s union activity . Indeed, there would be no
purpose in obtaining such information if this were not so. However , the Act does not
permit an employer to hire employees on the basis of their membership or lack of member-
ship in a union . No more does it permit him to make such decision on the basis of the
type of union member an employee may be. While our experience convinces us that most
employers who go to this length to discover employee attitudes toward unions do so for
the purpose of obstructing and destroying employees ' self- organizational rights and
activities, unremitting hostility to the principle of self -organization is not a necessary
condition for a finding that a discriminatory hiring policy such as the one the Respondent
pursues is unlawful under the Act. Nor is employee knowledge of the existence of such
a policy a necessary condition for finding that it constitutes unlawful interference in em-
ployees' exercises of rights guaranteed by Section 7, and is thus violative of Section
8(a) (1). See N.L .R.B. v. Grower -Shipper Vegetable Association, supra; N .L.R.B. v.
Baldwin Locomotive Works, supra.
See Harvey Aluminum, supra.
We find it unnecessary to consider the General Counsel's contention that the Respond-
ent's conduct was also tantamount to a form of unlawful interrogation.
1240 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
intimate, and substantial relation to trade, traffic, and commerce among
the several States, and tend to,lead to labor disputes burdening and
obstructing the free flow of commerce.
V. THE REMEDY
Having found that the Respondent has engaged in certain unfair
labor practices, we shall order it to cease and desist therefrom and take
certain affirmative action to. effectuate the policies of the Act.
0
CONCLUSIONS or LAw
1. District No. 123, International Association of Machinists, AFL-
CIO, is a labor organization as defined in Section 2(5) of the Act.
2. Wallace Press, Inc., is an employer within the meaning of Sec-
tion 2 (2) of the Act.
3. By engaging in labor espionage, the Respondent has interfered
with, restrained, and coerced its employees in the exercise of the rights
guaranteed by Section 7 of the Act, and has thereby committed unfair
labor practices within the meaning of Section 8 (a) (1) of the Act.
4. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair labor practices
within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
ORDER
Upon the entire record in this case, and pursuant to Section 10 (c)
of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor
Relations Board hereby orders that the Respondent, Wallace Press,.
Inc., Clinton, Illinois, its officers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall:
1. Cease and desist from :
(a) Directly or indirectly engaging in espionage or surveillance
of its employees or applicants for employment for the purpose of
ascertaining their membership in or activity on behalf of any labor
organization.
(b) In any like or related manner interfering with, restraining,:
or coercing its employees or applicants for employment in the exercise
of the right to self-organization, to form, join, or assist any labor
organization, to bargain collectively through representatives of their
own choosing, and to engage in other concerted activities for the pur-
pose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection, or to
refrain from any or all such activities.
2. Take the following affirmative action which the Board finds will
effectuate the policies of the Act :
(a) Post at its place of. business in Clinton, Illinois, copies of the.
attached notice marked "Appendix." 4 Copies of said notice, to be
7In the event that this Order Is enforced by a decree of a United States Court of
Appeals, there shall be substituted for the words "A Decision and Order" the words "A
Decree of the United States Court of Appeals , Enforcing an Order."
WALLACE PRESS, INC. 1241
furnished by the Regional Director for the Thirteenth Region, shall,
after being signed by the Respondent's representative, he posted by
the Respondent immediately upon receipt thereof, and be maintained
by it for 60 consecutive days thereafter, in conspicuous places, includ-•
ing all places where notices to its employees are customarily posted.
Reasonable steps shall be taken by Respondent to insure that said
notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by any other material.
(b) Notify the aforesaid Regional Director, in writing, within 10
days from the date of this Order, what steps the Respondent has taken
to comply herewith.
MEMBER LEEDOM took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Order.
APPENDIX
NOTICE TO ALL EMPLOYEES
Pursuant to a Decision and Order of the National Labor Relations
Board, and in order to effectuate the policies of the National Labor
Relations Act, as amended, we hereby notify our employees that :
WE WILL NOT directly or indirectly engage in espionage or sur-
veillance of our employees or applicants for employment for the
purpose of ascertaining their membership in or activity on behalf
of any labor organization.
WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner interfere with,
restrain, or coerce our employees or applicants for employment
in the exercise of their right to self-organization, to form, join,
or assist any labor organization, to bargain collectively through
representatives of their own choosing and to engage in other con-
certed activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other
mutual aid or protection, or to refrain from any or all such
activities.
WALLACE PRESS, INC.,
Employer.
Dated---------------- By-------------------------------------
(Representative ) (Title)
This notice must remain posted for 60 days from the date of posting,
and must not be altered, defaced, or covered by any other material.
Employees may communicate directly with the Board's Regional
Office, Midland Building, 176 West Adams Street, Chicago, Illinois,
Telephone No. Central 6-9660, if they have any questions concerning
this notice or compliance with its provisions.