Reynolds Metals Co.

In the Matter Of REYNOLDS METALS COMPANY, EMPLOYER and UNITED ALUMINUM & TIN FOIL WORKERS' UNION #19388, A. F. L., PETI- TIONER Case No. 9-R-2450.-Decided April 11, 19417 Messrs. Frank Weikel and S.: W. Royse, of Louisville, Ky., for the Employer. Messrs. E. G. Bartlett and Matthew Davis, of Louisville, Ky., for the Petitioner. Mr. A. C. Stevens, of Louisville, Ky., for the Intervenor. Mr. Martin Sacks, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at Louis- ville, Kentucky, on January 9, 1947, before Clifford L. Hardy, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. At the hearing, the Intervenor moved to dismiss the petition. For reasons stated in Section III, below, the motion is hereby denied. Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations Board makes the following : FINDINGS OF FACT I. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER Reynolds Metals Company, a Delaware corporation, operates plants in several States. It is engaged in the manufacture of cardboard cartons and containers and the printing of labels and wrappers at its Plant No. 10 in Louisville, Kentucky, the only plant involved herein. During the last 3 months of 1946, the Employer purchased for use at this plant paper products valued at approximately $50,000, of which 90 percent represented purchases made outside the State of Kentucky. During the same period the Employer's sales of its fin- ished products from this plant amounted to approximately $40,000, more than 10 percent of which represented shipments to points outside the State. 73 N L. R B., No. 67. 352 REYNOLDS METAL COMPANY 353 The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, claiming to represent employees of the Employer. International Printing Pressmen and Assistants' Union of North America, Paper Handlers Local 26 and Louisville Printing Pressmen and Assistants' Union, Local No. 28, herein jointly called the Inter- venor, are labor organizations affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, claiming to represent employees of the Employer.' M. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION The Petitioner made three successive requests of the Employer on or about June 15, July 2, and October 23, 1946, for recognition as the exclusive bargaining representative of certain of its employees. When the Employer stated, in answer to the Petitioner's last request, that it refused to recognize either the Petitioner or the Intervenor as the bar- gaining representative for its employees until certified by the Board in an appropriate unit, the Petitioner filed the instant petition. At the hearing, the Intervenor moved to dismiss the petition on the grounds, in effect, (1) that its "Memo of Understanding" with the Employer bars an election and (2) that, because the American Federa- tion of Labor has granted jurisdiction to it over the employees in the unit sought by Petitioner herein, Petitioner may not now seek to repre- sent these employees. We find no merit in either ground. With respect to the first ground, the record discloses that the "Memo of Understanding" relied on by the Intervenor as a bar was entered into on June 25, 1946, by the Intervenor and the Employer as part of a series of agreements which commenced in July 1942 with a contract between the Employer's predecessor and the Intervenor's predecessor. The "Memo of Understanding," which, by its terms, is to "continue indefinitely," purports to embody the terms of one of the above series of contracts which had expired on August 3, 1945, at the end of its one year term.2 At the hearing, the Intervenor and the Employer took the position, in effect, that the "Memo of Understanding" was merely an 'Both International Association of Machinists and International Brotherhood of Elec- trical workers, A F L, entered their appearances at the opening of the hearing for the purpose of protecting their interest in the employees within their respective jurisdictions Upon the amendment of the petition herein to exclude such employees, both unions waived any interest in this Proceeding and withdrew 2 The following is the full text of the Memo of Understanding . "Whereas the Company and the Union have agreed to grant the employees three cents (3¢) per hour increase, effective as of July 8, 1946 This memo of understanding is made a part of that contiact effective as of August 3, 1944, expired on August 3, 1945, and was agreed between both parties to continue indefinitely " 354 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD extension agreement, rather than a new contract of indefinite duration, in view of the fact that negotiations for a new contract continued after the execution of the "Memo of Understanding." We agree that the "Memo of Understanding" is an extension agreement. However, be- cause the contract which it purports to extend has been in effect for a period of one year, and because the extension agreement is of indefinite duration, we find that the "Memo of Understanding" does not bar an election at this time.3 As to the second ground, inasmuch as the record discloses that effective resolution of the jurisdictional dispute between these two labor organizations cannot be had without resort to the administra- tive processes of the Act, we shall follow our usual practice in such cases of proceeding with the investigation.' We find therefore that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the representation of employees of the Employer, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT In accordance with the agreement of the parties, we find that all employees at Plant No. 10 of the Employer, excluding machinists, maintenance mechanics, machinists' helpers and apprentices, elec- trical maintenance journeymen and electrical maintenance appren- tices, journeymen and apprentice maintenance carpenters, office cler- icals, foremen, and any and all other supervisory employees with authority to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or effectively recommend such action, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act. DIRECTION OF ELECTION 5 As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Reynolds Metals Company, Louisville, Kentucky an election 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 Sec- tions 203.55 and 203.56, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 4, among the employees in the unit found appropriate in Section IV, above, who were employed during the 3 See Matter of Hytron Radio t Electronics Corporation, 66 N L R 267 "Matter of Crrinnell Company of the Pacific, 71 N. L. R B 1370, and cases cited therein 5 Any participant in the election herein may, upon its prompt request to, and approval thereof by, the Regional Diiector, have its name removed born the ballot REYNOLDS METAL COMPANY 355 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 including employees in the armed forces of the United States who present themselves in person at the polls, but excluding those em- ployees who have since quit or been discharged for cause and have not been rehired or reinstated prior to the date of the election, to determine whether they desire to be represented by United Alumi-' num & Tin Foil Workers' Union No. 19388, A. F. L., or by Inter- national Printing Pressmen and Assistants' Union of North Amer- ica, A. F. L., Paper Handlers Local No. 26, and Louisville Printing Pressmen and Assistants' Union, Local No. 28, for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by neither. CHAIRMAN HERZOG took no part in the consideration of the above Decision and Direction of Election. L