Celanese Corp. of America

In the Matter of CELANESE CORPORATION OF AMERICA, EMPLOYER an 1 TEXTILE WORKERS UNION OF AMERICA, CIO, PETITIONER Case No. 5-RC-241.-Decided April 25,194k9 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before Harold G. Biermann, hearing officer of the National Labor Relations Board. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from preju- dicial 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-member panel [Chairman Herzog and Members Reynolds and Gray]. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds : 1. The Employers engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. 2. The Petitioner and the Intervenor, United Construction Workers affiliated with United Mine Workers of America, are labor organiza- tions claiming to represent employeees of the Employer. 3. At the hearing, the Intervenor moved to dismiss the petition herein upon the ground that an existing contract constitutes a bar to this proceeding. After Board certification of the Intervenor in 1945, the Employer and the Intervenor executed a contract which was re- newed in 1946. In February 1947, this contract, as modified, was further extended to February 22, 1949, with a 30-day automatic re- newal clause. On June 22, 1948, the contract was opened for wage negotiations. With the assistance of a Federal conciliator, an agree- ment on wages was reached. Upon the advice of the conciliator, the Employer and the Intervenor executed a new contract on August 27, 1948, to terminate on February 22, 1950. Thereafter, on December 8, 1948, which was before the "Mill B" 2 date of the February 1947 contract, the Petitioner filed the petition herein. .1 The . Intervenor's motion to dismiss the petition is denied for the reasons stated in paragraph 3, infra. s Matter ,o f Mill B., Inc., 40 N. L. R. B. 346. 83 N. L. R. B., No. 11. _ 103 104 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Under the long-established "premature extension" doctrine,8 the 1948 contract is not a bar to the present petition, which was timely filed with respect to the 1947 agreement whose scheduled termination date was February 22, 1949. The Employer and the Intervenor con- tend, however, that this doctrine should not be applied to this case, because they signed the 1948 agreement in good faith at the suggestion of a Federal conciliator, at a time when they- were unaware of any rival claim to representation and in fact had recent evidence which they believed showed that the contracting union represented an over- whelming majority of employees.4 The purpose of the "premature extension" rule is to insure to employees the right to challenge an incumbent union's representative status at predictable and reasonable intervals. This right is of paramount.importance in, achieving the purposes of the Act. Its preservation must take precedence, we be- lieve, over any hardship that may result to an employer and an in- cumbent union who, even though acting 'in good faith, prematurely extend an existing agreement.5 Accordingly, we find that the 1948 contract is not a bar to this proceeding. We find that a question affecting commerce exists concerning 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. The parties agree, and we find, that all hourly rated employees, including cafeteria employees, at the Employer's Celco plant near Narrows, Virginia, excluding office and clerical employees, watchmen, gatemen, firemen, nurses, all other salaried employees, and supervisors as defined in the Act, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act. DIRECTION OF ELECTION" As *part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining with the Employer, 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 super- vision of the Regional Director for the Region in which this case was 'Matter of Indiana Desk Company , Inc., 82 N. L. R. B. 103; Matter of Teletype Cor- poration, 79 N. L. R. B. 1044. ' The hearing officer refused to permit the Employer to prove that 2 months before the signing of the 1948 agreement , approximately 90 percent of the employees signed cards authorizing the Employer to deduct union dues in the Intervenor's behalf. This ruling was not prejudicial because, as indicated above, this evidence could not affect the appli- cation of the "premature extension" rule. 5 See Matter of Blair Limestone Company; 70 N. L. R. B. 689 ; Matter of Virginia- Lincoln Corporation, 63 N. L. R. B. 590. - eAs the Intervenor is not in compliance with Section 9 (f), (g), and (h) of the Act, it will not be accorded a place on the ballot. . CELANESE CORPORATION OF AMERICA 105 heard, and subject to Sections 203.61 and 203.62 of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-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 of Election, 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 ex- -eluding employees on strike who are not entitled to reinstatement, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented, for purposes of collective bargaining, by Textile Workers Union of America, CIO.