Standard Bag Co., Inc.

IN THE MATTER OF STANDARD BAG COMPANY , INC., EMPLOYER and INTERNATIONAL CHEMICAL WORKERS UNION , AFL, PETITIONER Case No. 10-RC-637.-Decided November 30,1949 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held on July 6, 1949, before James W. Mackle, hearing officer of the National Labor Rela- tions Board. On August 18, 1949, the Board issued an Order reopen- ing the record and remanding the proceeding to the Regional Director for further hearing for the purpose of adducing additional evidence. material to the issue involved herein. Pursuant to our Order, further hearing was held before Shally O. Wise, hearing officer of the National Labor Relations Board. The hearing officers' rulings made at the hearings 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-member panel [Chairman Herzog and Members Houston and Murdock]. Upon the entire record in the case, the Board finds : 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. 2. The Petitioner is a labor organization claiming to represent em- ployees of the Employer. 3. The question concerning representation : On July 3, 1947, International Hod Carriers, Building and Common Laborers' Union of America, Local No. 879, AFL, herein called Local No. 879, was, as the result of a consent election held under Board aus- pices, designated by the Regional Director as the exclusive bargaining representative of the Employer 's production and maintenance em- ployees.1 Thereafter, on July 9, 1947, it entered into a collective bar- gaining agreement with the Employer. The agreement was for an initial period of 1 year and was automatically renewable thereafter i Case No. 10-R-2633. 87 NLRB No. 48, 300 STANDARD BAG COMPANY, INC. . 301' in the absence of written notice from either party to the other, 60 days before July 1 of each succeeding year. No written notice of ter- mination or modification was given by either party to the other in 1948 or 1949. On June 1, 1949, the Petitioner requested the Employer to recognize it as the exclusive bargaining agent of the employees in the bargaining unit. The Employer refused to grant this request. On June 6, 1949, the Petitioner filed the petition in this proceeding. The Petitioner concedes that its petition was filed after the auto- matic renewal notice date of the contract, but argues that the contract is no bar to a current election because Local No. 879 is a defunct labor organization. The Employer maintains that Local No. 879 is an actively functioning labor organization and that the contract effectively bars an election. We find merit in the Petitioner's position. The record shows the following : After October 1948, Local No. 879 ceased to meet with the Employer for the purpose of engaging in bargaining negotiations con- cerning wages or other conditions of employment. Late in 1948 and thereafter, employees of the Employer's plant who held official posi- tions in Local No. 879 as officers or plant stewards, resigned or left the employ of the Company. In July 1948, when the contract's second year began, only about 27 of approximately 125 employees in the bar- gaining unit were members of Local No. 879.2 By November of the same year, there were 21 members of Local No. 879 at the Employer's plant. All gave written notice of revocation of check-off authoriza- tions as provided for in the contract, and allowed their memberships to lapse. In the early months of 1949, a union official sent by a sister local endeavored to "reactivate" Local No. 879. However, no new members were acquired among the employees of the Employer and former members continued to refuse to pay dues.3 Temporary mem- bership gains were registered among construction employees in the area, but, by July 1949, these employees were no longer dues-paying members of Local No. 879. At a meeting of Local No. 879 held in June 1949, it was decided by unanimous consent of those present,' to inform the Board that Local No. 879 disclaimed any interest in the instant petition and did not contend that its present agreement with the Employer was a bar to this 2 Local No . 879 included among its membership other employees in the area. at In May 1949 , the Employer advanced to Local No . 879 a sum of money equivalent to 1 month's dues for 16 former union members on the promise of the union representatives to obtain new check-off authorizations from each of the 16 employees . It is admitted that these authorizations were never obtained. 4 No employees of the Employer were present at the meeting . However, the record shows that in 1949, if not earlier, none of the employees involved herein attended meetings of Local No. 879. 302 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD proceeding.5 Local No. 879 did not intervene in this proceeding, al- though served with notice of hearing. However, a representative of the parent organization testified at the hearing and reiterated Local No. 879's complete disclaimer of interest. Finally, at the reopened hearing, a former business agent of Local No. 879 and a representative of the parent organization testified thati in July 1949, the records of Local No. 879 were turned over to the parent body and that, shortly thereafter, Local No. 879 ceased to function. In view of the foregoing, we find that Local No. 879 has ceased to function as the bargaining representative of the employees involved herein and is a defunct labor organization. Accordingly, we conclude that the contract executed on July 9, 1947, does not constitute a bar to this proceeding.6 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 appropriate unit : We find, in substantial agreement with the parties, that all produc- tion and maintenance employees of the Employer at its Augusta, Georgia, plant, excluding office clerical employees, superintendent, assistant superintendent, and all other supervisors as defined in the Act, constitute a unit appropriate for the.purposes of collective bar- gaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act. DIRECTION OF ELECTION As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the pur- poses 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 heard, and subject to Sections 203.61 and 203.62 of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations, 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 This information was thereafter transmitted to the Regional Director of the Board. A copy of the letter from the Board's field examiner to the representative of the Inter national union, dated June 14. 1949, summarizing the conversation with the Regional Director relative to Local No. 879's disclaimer of interest, was received in evidence. ° Rock City Paper Box Company, Inc., 82 NLRB 746; Wilson Athletic Goods Manufac- turing Co., Inc., 79 NLRB 1415. STANDARD BAG COMPANY, INC. 303 -quit or been discharged for cause and have not been rehired or rein- stated 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, for purposes of collective bar- gaining, by International Chemical Workers Union, AFL.