Harrison Steel Castings Co.

In the, Matter of HARRISON STEEL, CASTINGS, COMPANY, and UNITED CONSTRUCTION WORKERS, DISTRICT `501 UNITED MINE WORKER' OF AMERICA Case No. 13-R-2088.=Deeided July 21, 1914 DECISION AND ORDER On October 6, 1943, United Construction Workers, District 50, United Mine, Workers of America, herein called the Union, filed with the Regional Director for the `Thirteenth Region (Chicago, Illinois), herein called the Regional Director, a petition alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of Harrison Steel Castings Company, Attica, Indiana, herein called the Company, and requesting an investigation and certi- fication of representatives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act. Thereafter, the Company and the Union entered into a "Stipulation for' Certifi- cation upon Consent Election," approved by the Regional Director on October 26, 1943. Pursuant to the stipulation, an election by secret ballot was conducted on November 3, 1943, under the direction and ,supervision of the Regional Director, among the employees in the stipulated unit, to determine whether or not they desired to be repre- sented by the Union for the purposes of collective bargaining. On November 4, 1943, the Regional Director issued and duly served upon the parties a Report on Election. As to the balloting and its results, the Regional Director reported as follows : Appropriate number of eligible voters____________________ 783 Total ballots cast________________________________________ - 746 Total ballots challenged__________________________________ 1 Total void ballots________________________________________ 5 Total valid votes counted__________________________________ 740 Votes cast for Union______________________________________ 231 Votes cast against Union -------------------- --------------- 509 On November 8, 1943, the Union filed Objections to the election, alleging in substance that the Company had engaged in certain con- duct preventing a free choice of representatives. On January 1, 1944, 57 N. L. R. B., No. 92. 510 5 - I 1i HARRISON STEEL CASTINGS COMPANY 511 the Regional Director, having investigated the Objections, issued and duly served upon the parties a Report on Objections in'which he found that the Objections raised substantial and material issues with respect to the- election and- recommended that the Board direct. 'a hearing 'thereon. On January 12, 1944, the Board, having duly considered the matter . and determined that the Objections did raise substantial and material issues with respect to the election, issued an,Order directing a hearing thereon and referring the case to the Regional Director for the -purpose of conducting the hearing. Said hearing on Objections was held at - Attica, Indiana, on April 18, 1944, before Earl S. Bellman, Trial Ex- aminer. , The Board, the Company, and the Union appeared and.par- ticipated. The parties were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, to introduce evidence bearing om the-issues, and to file briefs with the Board. The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the -hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. Upon the, entire record in the case, the Board makes the following : FINDINGS OF FACT 1. BACKGROUND The town of Attica, Indiana, has a population of approximately' 3,780, and the Company, with a 'complement of 980 persons, is the principal employer. The next largest company in the community' employs only 50 persons, while an organization which formerly em- ployed "well over a hundred" is no longer in business in Attica. The nearest city which has any employer as large or larger than the Com- pany, is Lafayette, Indiana, 25 miles away. ' During the,period immediately preceding the election, United Mine Workers of America, the national labor organization with ivhicl the' - Union was then and is now affiliated, was conspicuously in the news' ili connection with 'the current labor dispute in the anthracite coal mines. Thus, on October 29, November 2, and November 3,1 the local news paper of general circulation, the Attica Ledger-Tribune, carried prominent front-page news stories concerning the role of the United Mine Workers of America in the mine strike, and the effect of the strike-on the production of steel and other war material. II. 'THE EVENTS LEADING UP TO THE ELECTION About 1 month prior to the. election, employee Charles Kingen and several other employees were engaged at the plant in conversation ' The election was conducted ,on November 3. 512' DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD ' - with Foreman- Russell Kirby, Sr.' Kirby expressed the opinion. that, less than half of the employees were members of the Union, and that, in 6 weeks, there would be no union in the plant. Kingen asked Kirby what he was going to-do with his men who belonged to the Union, if he was going to fire them. Kirby replied, "Well, they asked for it, didn't - they?'" 2 About the same time, employee Harold Von Carlson `had several conversations' with his foreman, Floyd Mortimore. Morti- more indicated that if the Union were successful in organizing the plant, 'they would "be, having strikes all the time and the Union would -do no good.". • Mortimore told Carlson that 'so long as he con-, tinUed. to wear his' union button, he 'would get nowhere with the Company3' , , . ' . During the lunch hour oil November 2, the day before the election, a union leaflet bearing, printed material concerning the election was posted on the bulletin board in the electrical•department of the ma- chine' shop with the following material written in hand upon it: "$25.00 initiation fees, and $5.00 a week dues, and no more bonuses." This bulletin board was customarily used 'only for job order slips placed on it by foremen and had never previously contained any-such leaflet. The posted leaflet with its inscription was in full view of the approximately 50 employees in the machine shop when-they checked in, and it remained posted 'through the election. The inscription was written on 'the leaflet by employee Frieda Lynch, who consulted with, the machine shop foreman, Ralph Fugate, as to what, to Write.- Fugate,. approved the inscription, saying, "Go ahead and put that down there," and gave'Lynch the thumb tacks for posting. Their dis- cussion took place, in part, in the presence of employee Pauline Koe- kenberg, and the leaflet was posted, in the 'presence of. several em- ployees. Koekenberg testified that she did not remove the leaflet from the bulletin board because she "didn't know you were supposed to take any signs, down that the bosses had anything to do with." Under these circumstances, we find that the leaflet was inscribed and posted by Lynch, with the assistance and approval of Foreman Fugate, in such a manner that the employees who saw it could reasonably believe that it expressed an intention on the part of the'Company to cease its customary bonus payments in the event of a,union victory in the election.' a The above findings are based on the credible and uncontroverted testimony of Kingen. Foreman Kirby was not called to testify. P The above findings are based on the credible and uncontroverted testimony of Carlson: Mortimore was-not called as a witness. 4 The above findings are based on the credible testimony of Koekenberg and admissions of Lynch Foreman Fugate was not called as a witness . While Lynch claimed entire ' responsibility for the posting, she admitted that she wrote the inscription on the leaflet in Fugate's presence ; that she showed him what she had written ; that he stood by but did not object when she posted the leaflet . She further admitted that the bulletin board HARRISON STEEL CASTINGS COMPANY" 513' 'The election was conducted ,on November 3. On November 1; all \of the employees received through the mail ,at their homes the follow- ing two-page ''letter dated October 30,.1943 , on the official letterhad of the'Company: THE HARRISON STEEL CASTINGS CO. - ATTICA, INDIANA J. W. HARRISON' President ,' October 30, 1943 To Oun EMPLOYEES : A labor organization, United Construction Workers, District No. 50, United Mine Workers of America, filed a petition with' the National Labor Relations Board asking. to' be recognized as' the exclusive bargaining agent for our production and maintenance employees. A representative of -the Board came to Attica and met with representatives of the Company and of the United Mine Workers-to see if an election.could be-arranged. Our-meeting with the representatives of the United Mine Workers should not be construed by you as an indication that- we want you to vote in favor of being represented by a labor union. That is a matter for you to decide. We agreed to an elec- tion because we think our employees are entitled to express their wishes 'by secret ballot and we wanted them to have this oppor- tunity as soon as possible. Your Company has been very successful in operating as an independent concern. • During the' thirty-seven years that we have been working together with our employees in Attica, we have not lost a single day's time on account of labor trouble., We have no- financial or corporate connections with any 'other con- cerns and our record shows, we have been able to operate better than most of our competitors (especially in times of poor busi- ness) because of our complete independence of action. We have had several offers'to sell the plant and to merge with large chains of foundries. We have refused these offers as we thought it would not be fair to our employees because then the plant would was only for job orders, and that she asked Fugate if she would get herself in trouble by posting the 'notice. According to Lynch, Fugate 'replied : "This is still a free country." As to other matters, Lynch's memory was hazy. She could not remember the day of the posting, nor could she remember the text of the inscription, although she admitted author- ship. She was likewise unable to recall, whether or not Fugate had supplied;the 'tacks for the posting Koekenberg's testimony, on the other hand, was clear and direct on these, points. As to these matters, on which the testimony of the two employees is in conflict, we therefore credit the testimony of Koekenberg. 601248-45-vol. 57-34 1 514 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD have operated only when business was good and your employ- ment would have been interrupted during bad times. It is our thought that this plant, operating as it-does in 'a small city where our freight rates on both in-bound and out-bound products are, higher than.thoseof most of our cp npetitors,located in, the larger centers, will be much better off if we can maintain complete in- dependence of action, and that this will be better as far as,you are concerned. As you all know a large part of our tonnage has gone to the Caterpillar Tractor Company for the past twenty-five years. We believe that we can depend on this tonnage after the war is over. The Caterpillar people have built an iron foundry because they were not always able to obtain this material as required. They have talked of building a steel foundry but have told us that they do not want to do .this if we can assure them an-un= interrupted supplyof, steel castings. We want you to be sure to vote on Wednesday, because we think that the results of the election should represent the real wishes of all our employees. Unless you yourself tell someone about it, no one can know how you vote. Also remember, this being a secret ballot, you are not bound' by any action you may have taken in the past in regard to signing 'application or pledge to join or not to join a labor organization. You have the right to cast your secret ballot in this election in accordance with your own desires regardless of whether or not you belong to any group, or whether or not you have signed any application card or pledge or any- thing else. ' This election, which will be held on Wednesday, is an important one for you and for,us. Instead, of passing this letter out in the form of a circular we decided to send it to your homes, because the election is vitally important to your families also. We want you to vote for what you (consider to be your own best interests and those of your family. We want you to look at our record because we believe it will show that we have consistently tried to be fair to our employees. During,the years,we have been in operation, we have paid wage rates as high as we could, pay and still bring in orders for all to work on. Wages are always reflected in the price we are able to' receive for our products, in a competitive market. We have been limited recently in our actions by the wage freeze order of October, 1942. We have already taken preliminary steps to secure author- ity for an adjustment of present wage rates. When the financial position of the Company warranted same, we have paid bonuses, to our workers, which has resulted in an increased rate of,pay. HARRISON STEEL CASTINGS COMPANY 515. We have made,group insurance, possible and are paying a consider- able part of its cost. Our relationship has been a pleasant one rind we hope it always will be. We have all felt the stress of war and because the armed forces. have'ni de`1very heavy demands:forsour-products, we have been running our plant about 60% over capacity. You would not want us to do less. This makes crowded, unsatisfactory working conditions in many jobs and has made a great deal of night work necessary. We realize that this has been none too pleasant for you but we know that you have cheerfully gone ahead and done your part because you realized that you were backing up the boys on the fighting front. In determining how you vote on Wednesday, you will doubt- less take into consideration a number of questions: What will the effect be on your family and yourself if you are represented by the United -Mine Workers of America.? What effect will it have upon the'--future operations of the Company? ' Will it make for uninterrupted work for you? What is the record of the United Mine Workers in respect to work stoppages? What will be best for the boys who are fighting throughout the world and to whom the things you are producing are vital? DON'T FAIL TO VOTE ON WEDNESDAY! Sincerely yours, THE HARRISON STEEL CASTINGS CO. - /s/ J. W. HARRISON, President. OnNovember 2,' the day follow-ing,the receipt of the letter by the employees, the-local newspaper carried-the letter in full on its, front page under the-heading, two columns wide, "President of Harrison Steel Writes Personal Letter To His Employees." Alongside the letter was a two-column account of the mine strike. On the same day, the day before the election, the Company's general superintend- ent., G. C. Dickey, was accompanied through the plant by three men from Caterpillar Tractor Company, the firm mentioned in paragraph 4 of the letter, and a fourth man who was from a steel company in St. Louis. They looked at pattern equipment, went to the foundry to observe methods of molding, and to the cleaning department to see the castings finished. During the tour they-were observed by a num- ber of. employees. • " ' • About half an hour before the four men accompanied Dickey through the plant, George Talbert, who had been openly active in behalf of the Union since he-had:been elected president about the first 516, DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD of September, saw employee "Daniel Hancock talking'with their fore- man, Howard'Hushaw . As soon as Hushaw left, Hancock came to Talbert and said he had "a good one" for him ; 'that some men from Caterpillar - and' a foundry in St . Louis were coming through. the plant pretty soon; that they .were going, to look over castings to see-, which ones could be made the easiest ; that, if the , Union got in, 50 percent of the Company's business would ' be given to the St. Louis concern ; and that he had just secured the information from Hushaw Later the four men accompanied by Dickey came by the place where Talbert was-working., After they had gone, 'Hancock remarked' to Talbert, "Well, that was them." 5 • , Whatever might be our view as to the propriety-of the letter if it stood- alone, we find that the letter, when appraised, as it must be, in connection, with the totality of the Company's conduct during' the period in question, and particularly the visit-to the plant, 'described above, not only constituted to the employees an expression of, the writer's views, but carried with it an intimation,of economic reprisal ' should the employees fail to heed their employer's obvious wishes. This'prospect of economic reprisal was particularly- poignant -for the- employees, in view of the Company's position as the dominant -em- ployer in a small community which had lost, its second largest em- ployer, and the tension engendered by the current mine, strike in which the Union's 'parent body was a prominent participant. Employee Talbert testified that, because of the emphasis in the letter upon the desire of Caterpillar to have an uninterrupted supply, he understood the letter to mean that,, if the Union got in, Caterpillar would build its own steel mill, thereby, causing the Company to lose a substantial percentage of its business. Employee Brown testified that the letter "threw a scare into him," discouraged, him, and kept him from voting for the Union; and that he understood the letter to mean that, if the Union got in and they had -labor trouble, Caterpillar was going to,' build their own foundry and take away part of the Company's work. Superintendent Dickey, although stating that there was, no intended connection between the letter and the visit to the plant, admitted that, after the election, he received the-impression that some of the employees had thought that there had been an implied threat in the visit. It is. significant that only 12 employees attended the regular, union meeting ' The above findings are based upon the credible testimony of Talbert. Foreman Hushaw was not called upon to testify, although there was no showing that he was unavailable. Hancock, part of whose testimony was in conflict with that of Talbert, was not a credible witness. His responses were not direct or clear, and his recollection was, indistinct. He could not remember the above-described visit to the plant. Then, asked whether he had a conversation with Foreman Hushaw regarding the four men who visited the plant on November 2, be replied "If I did, I don't remember." On the other hand, Talbert's memory of the incident was clear and his responses were direct and consistent. tinder these circumstances, we credit the testimony, of Talbert. HARRISON STEEL CASTINGS COMPANY 517 on the night of November 2, whereas the previous average attendance 'had beenbetween 45 and 60. We find that the Company's above-described course of conduct dur- ing the period preceding the election prevented an expression by the employees therein of their free and uncoerced wishes as to representa- tion. We shalla`therefore set the election aside. We shall direct a new election at such time as the Regional Director advises us that circumstances permitting a free choice among the employees have - been I ORDER It is hereby ordered that the election held on November 3, 1943, among the employees "of Harrison Steel Castings Company, Attica, Indiana, be, and it hereby is, set aside. MR. GERARD D. REILLY took no part in the consideration of the above Decision and Order. [See infra,'57'N. L. R. B. 1682 for Supplemental Decision and Direc- tion of Second Election.] - 61 1