The Standard Register Co.

In the Matter of THE STANDARD REGISTER COMPANY and DAYTON TYPOGRAPHICAL UNION No. 57, A. F. OF L. In the Matter of THE STANDARD REGISTER COMPANY and THE DAYTON PRINTING PRESSMEN AND ASSISTANTS' UNION No. 54, INTERNATIONAL PRINTING PRESSMEN AND ASSISTANTS' UNION OF NORTH AMERICA, A. F. OF L. Cases Nos. 9-R-1944 and 9-R-1954, respectively,Decided April 12, 1946 Messrs. E. H. Turner and W. B. Turner, by Mr. Guy H. Wells, of Dayton, Ohio, for the Company. Messrs. J. C. Fergus and E. K. Rheinhard, of Dayton, Ohio, for the Typos. Mr. J. H. Gulinski, of Dayton, Ohio. and Mr. John S. McLellan, Pressmen's Home, Tenn., for the Pressmen. Mr. K. M. Kirkendall, of Dayton, Ohio, for the C. I. O. Mr. Herbert S. Thatcher, of Washington, D. C., for the A. F. of L. Mr. Oliver Mertz, of Cleveland, Ohio, for the Lithographers. Mr. Harry R. Ehrlich, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS STATEMENT OF THE CASE Upon petitions duly filed by Dayton Typographical Union No. 57, A. F. of L., herein called the Typos, and The Dayton Printing Press- men and Assistants' Union No. 54, International Printing Pressmen end Assistants' Union of North America, A. F. of L., herein called the Pressmen, each alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of The Standard Register Company, Dayton, Ohio, herein called the Company, the National Labor Relations Board consolidated the cases and provided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice before James A. Shaw, Trial Examiner. The hearing was held at Dayton, Ohio, on November 19 and 23, 1945, and January 9-11, 1946. The Company, the Typos, the Pressmen, United Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers of America, 67 N L R. B., No. 44 322 THE STANDARD REGISTER COMPANY 323 Local 768, C. I. 0., herein called the C. I. 0., the American Federation of Labor, herein called the A. F. of L., and the Amalgamated Lithog- raphers of America, herein called the Lithographers,) appeared and participated. All parties were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues. The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hear- ing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. All parties were afforded opportunity to file briefs with the Board. The C. I. O.'s and the Company's requests for oral argument are hereby denied. Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following: FINDINGS Or FACT I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY The Standard Register Company is an Ohio corporation with its offices and principal place of business in Dayton, Ohio. It is engaged in the manufacture of continuous business machine forms and form feeding attachments. Its raw materials consist principally of paper, aluminum, steel, carbon, and materials for making carbon. During the past 12-month period the value of its raw materials was in excess of $5,000,000, of which approximately 75 percent came from points outside the State of Ohio. During the same 12-month period, the value of its finished products was in excess of $10,000,000, of which approximately 90 percent was shipped to points outside the State of Ohio. The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED Dayton Typographical Union No. 57 is a labor organization, affili- ated with the American Federation of Labor, admitting to member- ship employees of the Company. The Dayton Printing Pressmen and Assistants' Union No. 54, In- ternational Printing Pressmen and Assistants' Union of North Amer- ica, is a labor organization, affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, admitting to membership employees of the Company. United Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers of America, Local 768, is a labor organization, affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, admitting to membership employees of the Company. The American Federation of Labor, parent body, is a labor organiza- tion admitting to membership employees of the Company. 'The Lithographers appeared solely to protect its Interest under its contract with the Company and withdrew from the proceedings when it became clear none of the parties claimed to represent any employees currently represented by the Lithographers 324 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD III. THE QUESTIONS CONCERNING REPRESENTATION On September 18, 1945, after notice to the Company that it repre- sented a majority of its employees in the proof and lay-out department, the Typos filed its petition herein. On October 4, 1945, after notify- ing the Company of its claim to majority representation among the employees in the Company's pressroom, the Pressmen filed the instant petition. The Company refused to recognize either the Typos or the Pressmen on the ground that the C. I. O. was the certified bargaining representative of the employees whom the petitioners sought to repre- sent. Pursuant to a consent election on September 30, 1943, the C. I. O. was certified as the bargaining representative of all production and maintenance employees of the Company, excluding employees in the carbon department and employees represented by the Typos 2 and by the Lithographers,3 respectively. On November 21, 1944, the Com- pany and the C. I. O. entered into a contract for 1 year, to remain in effect thereafter from year to year in the absence of 30 days' notice prior to the annual termination date. Neither the Company nor the C. I. O. contends that the foregoing contract constitutes a bar to the petition filed by the Typos, but both contend that such contract bars a present determination of representatives among the employees sought by the Pressmen. In view of the fact that the Pressmen notified the Company of its claim to representation prior to the automatic renewal date of the contract between the Company and the C. 1. 0., we find that it does not operate as a bar to the instant proceeding. A statement of a Board agent, introduced into evidence at the hear- ing, indicates that the Typos and Pressmen represent 'a substantial number of employees in the voting groups hereinafter found appro- priate.' We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the representation of employees of the Company, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT ; THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES The Typos contend that all employees in the proof and lay-out de- partment of the Company, including foremen and assistant foremen, 2 Pursuant to a consent election on February 29, 1940 , the Typos was certified as the bargaining representative of all employees of the Company in its composing room. a Following a consent election on April 12, 1943, the Lithographers was certified as the bargaining representative of all employees in the Company's lithographic division. * The Field Examiner reported that the Typos submitted a signed petition, bearing the names of 20 employees, listed on the Company 's pay roll of September 30, 1945 ; and that the Pressmen submitted a signed petition , bearing the names of 17 employees , listed on the Company 's pay roll of September 30, 1945 . There are approximately 30 employees in the unit sought by the Typos and 54 employees in the unit sought by the Pressmen. The C. I. O. relied on its contract to establish its interest herein. THE STANDARD REGISTER COMPANY 325 constitute a separate appropriate unit. The Company denies the appropriateness of this unit and contends, in any event, that fore- men and assistant foremen should be excluded. The C. I. O. does not oppose separation of these employees from the unit it now repre- sents. Although normally the inclusion of the proof and lay-out employees in the unit of production and maintenance employees represented by the C. I. O. would be accorded considerable weight in determining the appropriateness of the unit sought by the Typos, here, the C. I. O. does not oppose the requested separation of these employees. We are of the opinion, therefore, that the employees in the proof and lay-out department may constitute either a separate unit or remain part of the unit represented by the C. I. O. Under these circumstances, we shall make no present determination of the appropriate unit pending the results of the election hereinafter directed to ascertain the desires of the employees themselves.5 Inasmuch as foremen and assistant foremen traditionally have been included in bargaining units of employees in the printing trades,° we shall include them in the voting group comprising the proof and lay- out employees. The Pressmen contends that all employees in the Company's letter- press department, including all foremen, assistant foremen, instruc- tors, pressmen and apprentice pressmen, but excluding the superin- tendent, part-time workers, and the pressmen now represented by the Lithographers, constitute a separate appropriate unit. The Company and the C. I. O. deny the appropriateness of this unit, and the Com- pany contends that, in any event, foremen and assistant foremen should be excluded. Although the C. I. O. has in the past bargained for the pressmen and secured benefits and handled grievances for them, a substantial number of such employees expressed their dissatisfaction with inclu- sion in a broad unit of production and maintenance employees prior to the certification of the C. I. O. They have for more than a year resisted representation by the C. I. 0., consistently requested the Press- men to represent them, paid initiation fees to the Pressmen, and held meetings, and signed petitions in protest to their inclusion in the unit represented by the C. I. O. These employees constitute a clearly identifiable craft group who, in view of their past dissatisfaction, maintenance of identity, and the short period of representation by the C. I. 0.,7 may, in our opinion, constitute a separate appropriate a See Matter of Scott Paper Company, Out Rite Division, 64 N. L. R. B. 1236. " See Matter of The Maryland Drydock Company , 49 N. L R. B. 733; Matter of W. F. Hall Printing Company, 51 N. L. R. B. 640; Matter of Master Craft Corporation, 60 N. 1. R. B. 56. ee Matter of Columbus Bolt Works Company, 62 N. L. R. B. 978. 1 326 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD unit or remain part of the unit now represented by the C. I. O. We shall, therefore, make no present determination of the appropriate unit pending the results of the election hereinafter directed to ascertain the desires of the employees themselves. Although historically the Pressmen have represented foremen and assistant foremen, the evidence here shows that these employees have supervision over both the offset pressmen now represented by the Lith- ographers and the employees whom the Pressmen seeks to represent. Under these circumstances, we shall exclude foremen and assistant foremen from the voting group of pressmen. As 'indicated above, upon the results of the elections hereinafter directed will depend, in part, our determination of the appropriate units. If the employees in either group select the petitioner therein as their bargaining representative, they shall constitute a separate appropriate unit; otherwise they shall remain part of the production and maintenance unit presently represented by the C. I. O. We shall direct that the questions concerning representation which have arisen be resolved by elections by secret ballot among the employ- ees in the groups set forth below, who were employed during the pay- roll period immediately preceding the date of the Direction of Elec- tions herein, subject to the limitations and additions set forth in the Direction. DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National Labor Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor Rela- tions Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3, as amended, it is hereby DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa- tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with The Standard Register Company, Dayton, Ohio, elections by secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than thirty (30) days from the date of this Direction, under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Ninth Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Article III, Sections 10 and 11, of said Rules and Regulations, among the following employees who were employed by the Company 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, and includ- ing employees in the armed forces of the United States who present themselves in person at the polls, 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 : THE STANDARD REGISTER COMPANY 327 1. All employees of the Company in its proof and lay-out depart- ment, including foremen and assistant foremen, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented by Dayton Typographical Union No. 57, A. F. of L., for the purposes of collective bargaining.' 2. All employees of the Company in its letterpress room, including instructors, pressmen, and apprentice pressmen, but excluding the superintendent, foremen, assistant foremen, part-time workers, and pressmen now represented by the Lithographers, to.determine whether they desire to be represented by The Dayton Printing Pressmen and Assistants' Union No. 54, International Printing Pressmen and Assist- ants' Union of North America, A. F. of L., or by United Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers of America, Local No. 768, C. I. 0., for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by neither. 'The C. I. O. requested that its name be omitted from the ballot in any election con- ducted among the employees in the proof and lay-out department.