Liberty Products Mfg. Co., Inc.

In the Matter of LIBERTY PRODUCTS MFG. CO., INC.,' EMPLOYER and INTERNATIONAL UNION, UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AIRCRAFT AND AGRI- CULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO, PETITIONER Case No. 17-RC-552.-Decided January 23,1950 DECISION AND ORDER Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before Martin Sacks,. hearing officer. 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-member panel [Chairman Herzog and Members Houston and Murdock]. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds : 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Libor Relations Act. 2. The labor organization involved claims to represent employees of the Employer. 3. No question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa- tion of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act, for the following reasons: At the hearing, the Employer moved to dismiss the petition on the ground that it was then converting to a different type of production, and its current work force would not be representative of the con- templated employee complement either in number or in job cate- gories. The Petitioner opposed this motion, contending that, in any event, the future labor force would have to be drawn from the group then employed, because the Employer's plant is located in a small town. During the past 21/2 years, the Employer has been engaged princi- pally in manufacture under Government contracts.2 At the September 1 The name of the Employer appears as amended at the hearing. 2 Such products as coffins , army cots, and arctic shelters have been produced under these contracts. 88 NLRB No. 61. 264 LIBERTY PRODUCTS MFG. CO., INC. 265 hearing, the Employer stated that its current Government contract for the production of arctic shelters would be completed in 2 weeks; that there was no prospect of a further contract for these shelters, or of any Government cantract; and that, when the shelter contract was com- pleted its work force would drop from about 175 to 10 or 12 employees. The Employer added that it was converting to steel fabrication of a type it has not previously engaged in, by enlarging its building, install- ing 12 presses valued at approximately $60,000, an overhead crane, and a railroad siding. The Employer also pointed out that it did not then have any contracts for steel fabrication, and that when it did obtain such contracts, it would need die setters, layout men, punch and drill press operators, and other categories of metal workers, as opposed to the present stafF composed primarily of woodworkers and sewers. Late in November 1949, it appeared that the Employer's production of arctic shelters had ceased; that it was not producing anything; and had only 10 to 12 employees, principally engaged in clerical and maintenance work. It would therefore appear that the Employer is prepared to. do either the kind of work it has been doing in the past, or the steel fabrication to which it has adapted its plant, but that no specific or- ders are in prospect. Because of this uncertainty as to what products will be manufactured, there is considerable doubt not only as to the reemployment of former employees, but also as to the composition of any future work force. Therefore, we do not believe that any useful purpose would be served by directing an election in this proceeding. We shall, accordingly, grant the Employer's motion to dismiss the petition, without prejudice to the filing of a new petition when pro- duction is resumed .3 ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition filed herein be, and it hereby is, dismissed without prejudice. G Cf. Churchward & Company, Incorporated, 87 NLRB 307.