Semon Bache & Co.

In the Matter of SEMON BACIIE & COMPANY, EMPLOYER and GLASS BEVELERS , MIRROR WORKERS, CUTTERS & MITRE CUTTERS UNION, LOCAL 528, AFL and GLASS WAREHOUSE WORKERS & PAINT HAN- DLERS UNION, LOCAL 206, AFL, PETITIONERS Case No. 2-R-718G.-Decided February 11, 19/17 ullr. L. L. Balleisen, of New York City, for the Employer. Mr. John D. Masso, of New York City, for the Petitioners. Mr. Max Erlich, of Brooklyn, N. Y., for the Intervenor. ulliss Muriel J. Levor, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon a joint amended petition duly. filed, hearing in this case was held at New York City, on December 18, 1946, before Richard J. Hickey, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations Board makes the following : FINDINGS OF FACT I. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER Semon Bache & Company, a New York corporation, has its principal office and plant at New York City, where it is engaged in the manu- facture, sale, and distribution of mirrors, glass, and related products. During the year ending November 30, 1946, the Employer purchased raw materials, consisting chiefly of glass and nitrate of silver, valued in excess of $500,000, approximately 66 percent of which was shipped to the plant from points outside the State of New York. During the same period, the sales of products made at the plant exceeded $1,000,- 000 in value, of which approximately 50 percent represented shipments to customers outside the State of New York. We find that the Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. 72 N L R. B., No 99 531 532 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD H. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED The Petitioners are labor organizations affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, claiming to represent employees of the Em- ployer. Semon Bache Employees Association, herein called the Intervenor, is a labor organization, claiming to represent employees of the Employer. III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION The Employer refuses to recognize the Petitioner as the exclusive bargaining representative of employees of the Employer until the Petitioner has been certified by the Board in an appropriate unit." We find 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 We find, in accordance with the agreement of the parties, that all production, maintenance, and distribution employees of the Employer, including working foremen,2 but excluding salesmen, watchmen, clerical employees, and all 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 As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Semon Bache & Company, New York City, an election by secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than thirty (30) days from the date of this I During the course of the hearing the Intervenor attempted to "file" a document pur- porting to be a verified denial that the Petitioner had made a substantial showing of representation . The hearing officer rejected the document . The Intervenor thereupon offered to prove its contention by showing that it had secured authorization cards signed by over 85 percent of the employees concerned , all of which were dated subsequent to the Petitioner's cards . The hearing officer properly rejected this offer of proof . As we have held in Matter of Jefferson Island Salt Mining Company , 67 N. L. R. B . 1282 , such evidence cannot vitiate the Petitioner's prima facie showing that a representation question exists, nor could it justify the Board 's denying the employees concerned the opportunity to choose their bargaining representative by secret ballot. 2 The Employer's working foremen are not supervisory employees within our definition of that term 8 The unit herein found appropriate is approximately the same as that found appropriate in an earlier representation proceeding , involving the same employees Matter of Semon Bache & Company, 39 N L . R. B. 1216. SEMON BACHE & COMPANY 533 Direction, under the direction and supervision of the Regional Direc- tor for the Second Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Sections 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 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 employees who have since quit or been dis- charged 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 Glass Bevelers, Mirror Workers, Cutters & Mitre Cutters Union, Local 528, AFL, and Glass Warehouse Workers & Paint Handlers Union, Local 206, AFL, or by Semon Bache Employees Association, for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by neither.