Mid-Continent Coal Corp.

In the Matter Of MID-CONTINENT COAL CORPORATION , EMPLOYER AND PETITIONER and PROGRESSIVE MINE WORKERS OF AMERICA, DISTRICT No. 1 and UNITED MINE WORKERS OF AMERICA, DISTRICT No. 12 Case No. 14-RM-12.-Decided March 22, 1949 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before a hearing officer of the National Labor Relations Board. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. 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-man panel.* Upon the entire record in the case, the Board finds : 1. Mid-Continent Coal Corporation is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. 2. Progressive Mine Workers of America, District No. 1, hereinafter called Progressive, is an unaffiliated labor organization claiming to represent employees of the Employer. United Mine Workers of America, District No. 12, hereinafter called United, is an unaffiliated labor organization claiming to represent employees of the Employer.' 3. The question concerning representation : The Employer's petition, filed January 6, 1949, alleges that a claim for recognition as the representative of its employees has been made both by Progressive and by United. Progressive moved to dismiss the petition, alleging it to be barred by an existing contract between Progressive and the Employer? In support of this contention, Progressive introduced in evidence a con- tract between Progressive and the Coal Producers Association of Illinois, which provides that it shall be effective from July 1, 1948, to June 30, 1949, but that either party may terminate the agreement on an earlier date by giving at least 30 days' written notice to the 'Chairman Herzog and Members Houston and Gray. ' The hearing officer properly rejected the contention of Progressive that United was not entitled to intervene in the instant proceeding because of its non-compliance with Section 9 (f), (g), and (h) of the amended Act. The record shows that on September 30, 1948, the Employer and United executed a contract, which was still in effect at the time of the hearing. Under these circumstances , United was entitled to intervene at the hearing for all purposes. Matter of Lynn Gas and Electric Co., 78 N. L. R. B. 3. 2 This motion was referred to the Board by the hearing officer. 82 N. L. R. B., No. 32. 261 838914-50-vol. 82-18 262 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD other party. The Employer was admitted to membership in the Coal Producers Association of Illinois on August 10, 1948, and considered itself bound by the Association contract at that time. Assuming that the Employer is still bound by this contract, we nevertheless find that, because this contract is terminable at will, it does not bar this proceeding.3 We find, therefore, that a question affecting commerce exists con- cerning the representation of employees of the Employer, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. 4. We find that all employees engaged in mining operations at the Employer's Green Diamond Mine, near Marissa , Illinois, excluding clerical employees and supervisors, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act .4 DIRECTION OF ELECTION As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Mid-Continent Coal Corpora- tion, Marissa, Illinois, an election by secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than 30 days from the date of this Direction, under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Fourteenth Region, and subject to Sections 203.61 and 203.62, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regula- tions-Series 5, as amended, among the employees in the unit found appropriate in paragraph numbered 4, above, who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of this Direction, including employees who did not work during said pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation or temporarily laid off, but excluding those employees who have since quit or been discharged for cause and have not been rehired or reinstated prior to the date of the election, and also excluding employees on strike who are not entitled to reinstatement, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented by Progressive Mine Workers of America, District No. 1,5 for the purposes of collective bargaining. 8 Matter of Potosi Tie & Lumber Co., 73 N L R. B . 590 Moreover, this contract, which was an extension of a previous Association agreement , continued the preferential hiring clause in the prior contract . This is an additional ground for holding the contract in- operative as a bar to the proceeding herein. Matter of C. Hager & Sons Hinge Manu- facturing Company, 80 N. L. R B 163 The contract between United and the Employer, mentioned above , was not urged as a bar. It, too, contained a provision for termination upon 30 days' written notice, and a preferential hiring clause. There was no dispute at the hearing concerning the composition of the unit 8 We will not place United on the ballot because of its non -compliance with Section 9 (f), (g), and ( h) of the amended Act. See Matter of Herman Loewenstein, Inc., 75 N. L. R. B. 377.