International Paper Co.

764 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD reinstate the complainants as union members or to accept their applications for new membership, constituted violations of Section 8 (b) (2) or 8 (b) (1) (A) of the Act. The complaints should therefore be dismissed. Recommendations Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and legal conclusions, and upon the entire record in the case, I recommend that the complaint be dismissed in its entirety. INTERNATIONAL PAPER COMPANY, TONAWANDA MILL and UNITED PAPERwoRKERS or AMERICA, CIO, PETITIONER. Case No. 3-KC-723. December 28,1951 Decision and Order Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before John C. McRee, 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 this case,' the Board finds : 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. 2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent employees of the Employer. 3. No question affecting commerce exists concerning the represen- tation of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act, for the reasons indicated below. The Petitioner seeks a single-plant production and maintenance unit limited to the Employer's Tonawanda mill, North Tonawanda, New York. The Employer and Joint Intervenor, however, contend that such a unit is inappropriate because only a multiplant unit of all the plants in the northern division, including the Tonawanda Mill, is appropriate. General Operations The Employer is a New York corporation engaged in the manufac- ture of paper, pulp board, and paper bags. Its principal office is located in New York City and it has branch offices, mills, and plants in various parts of the United States and Canada. It has several dis- tinct, autonomous divisions, one of which is the northern division, n The request of the Employer and the Joint Intervenor (International Brotherhood of Paper Makers, AFL, herein called Paper Makers, International Brotherhood of Pulp, Sulphite & Paper Mill Workers, AFL, herein called Pulp Workers, and International Brotherhood of Firemen and Oilers, AFL, herein called Firemen) for oral argument iS denied inasmuch as the record and the briefs , in our opinion , adequately and fully present the issues and positions of the parties. 97 NLRB No. 106. INTERNATIONAL PAPER COMPANY 765 including the Tonawanda mill with which we are presently concerned. The northern division, with principal offices in New York City and Glens Falls, New York, now- operates some six or seven plants in three States.2 Three of these plants, including the Tonawanda Mill, produce book and bond paper usually used for writing; the remaining plants produce ground wood or specialty papers, such as wallpaper and rotogravure paper. In full charge of all the plants is a manager of manufacturing and his staff, who also determine all questions of policy. Division headquarters schedules the work for the various mills, makes major purchases, handles sales, allocates orders and raw materials be- tween the plants, manages the woodlands, and handles personnel and labor relations matters. Personnel policies and mill rules are uniform at all mills. Bargaining History Between 1902 and 1921, the Employer had multiplant agreements with the Paper Makers and Pulp Workers. However, following a strike in 1921, there were no collective bargaining contracts until July 1937, when the Paper Makers was recognized as the bargaining repre- sentative for all the employees at the Tonawanda mill, and a contract covering them was executed with the Employer by the Paper Makers and its local. In October 1937, the Paper Makers and the Pulp Workers received recognition as the bargaining representative for the employees at four other mills in the northern division; such recognition was em- bodied in an agreement signed with the Employer by the Paper Makers, the Pulp Workers, and their various locals. This agreement, like the Tonawanda mill contract, provided that the Employer recog- nized the Paper Makers and the Pulp Workers as the "agencies repre- senting their memberships for the purpose of collective bargaining," and that all permanent employees "shall be expected to maintain" their memberships in the appropriate local union. This agreement also contained a "coverage" clause providing that employees who come under this agreement and are entitled to membership in the International Brotherhood of Paper Makers, and the Interna- tional Brotherhood of Pulp, Sulphite and Paper Workers, include all those employed inside and outside the plant... . On May 24, 1938, the parties executed a single contract covering the aforesaid five mills. Like the earlier multiplant agreement, the contract was jointly executed by the Paper Makers, the Pulp Workers, and their various locals, and also by the Firemen and its various locals. The contract provisions were identical with those in the 2 The plants are located at North Tonawanda, Niagara Falls, Ticonderoga, and Palmer, New York ; Livermore Falls and Chisholm, Maine ; and York Haven, Pennsylvania. 766 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD earlier agreements,, except that the recognition clause included the Firemen and the union-security clause contained a provision to the effect that "new employees shall become members of their respective Unions within thirty (30) days. ..." Thereafter and until June 1945, as new plants in the northern division we're organized by the constituent unions of the Joint Inter- venor or as old plants were shut down by the Employer, the parties modified the scope of their contracts to reflect such changes. in June 1945, the parties executed a single contract covering all the employees in the six mills presently constituting the northern division. Since that time, the parties have annually executed single agreements covering all such plants. These agreements remained substantially the same as the earlier contracts with respect to the recognition, "coverage," and union-security clauses hereinabove set forth. In March 1948, each of the constituent Internationals of the Joint Intervenor filed a petition for a union-shop election among the em- ployees it claimed to represent at the plants in the northern divisions Consent elections were then entered into, and the elections were held in April 1948. A majority of all the employes in the northern division voted for the Joint Intervenor .4 Since October 1937, all contract negotiations have been conducted at Glens Falls substantially in the following manner: Representatives of the internationals and their local unions 5 gathered there and formulated a single united program or agenda to be presented to the Employer by a duly elected spokesman. Each local had only one vote, and the vote of the majority bound all. The Employer and Joint Intervenor then engaged in collective bargaining and, upon reaching agreement, prepared a single contract, which was jointly executed by the presidents of each of the internationals and the locals. The con- tract terms and conditions have been uniformly applied to all six plants.° Thus, the Joint Intervenor has acted as a single amalgamated labor organization representing and bargaining for all the employees in the northern division, and the Employer has so recognized and bargained with it. However, such matters as grievances and union security were handled by each union for the employees it represented. 3 The Paper Makers represented employees at all six mills, the Pulp workers at five of the mills (except Tonawanda), and the Firemen at three of the mills (including Tona- wanda). Separate petitions were filed rather than a single petition because, according to the Joint Intervenor, "The Board insisted that we have it set up in three groups." 4 There were over 4,300 employees in the northern division. (rhe Joint Intervenor received a total of 3,532 votes, divided as follows : 1,112 for the Paper Makers at 6 plants ; 2,238 for the Pulp workers at 5 plants ; and 182 for the Firemen at 3 plants. Since June 1945, there have been 14 locals at the various plants. Except for a small wage differential at the Tonawanda and Niagara Falls mills, instituted in 1933 or 1934 and increased during the past war by the war Labor Board. - 'INTERNATIONAL. PAPER COMPANY 767 In support of their contention that the only appropriate unit is composed of all the plants in the northern division, the Employer and Joint Intervenor urge that the long-sustained bargaining history on this basis makes inappropriate a single-plant unit of the Tona- wanda mill, and precludes its severance from the northern division unit. The Petitioner, on the other hand, contends that such bargain- ing history is, not controlling, primarily because it has been on a "members-only" basis. We are convinced that the contracts in this case establish a con- trolling history of division-wide collective bargaining, because in fact they grant an exclusive, rather than merely a "members-only," type of recognition to the Joint Intervenor. We are impelled to this conclusion by the substantive provisions of the contracts, including the "coverage" clause, all of which clearly evince an intention to grant exclusive recognition for all employees of the plants in the northern division, and negative any contrary inference that might arise from a too literal emphasis on the word "membership" in the recognition clause. Further, the practice of the parties supports this view. The Joint Intervenor claims to represent all the employees of the northern division as a single unit, and not merely union members. The Employer so recognizes, and bargains with, the Joint Intervenor. The Joint Intervenor acts jointly as a single amalgamated labor or- ganization in negotiating and executing the collective bargaining contracts. These contracts were interpreted by the parties as grant- ing exclusive recognition and were uniformly applied to all the em- ployees of the northern division. The fact that the grievance and union-security provisions were separately administered by the con- stituent unions of the Joint Intervenor does not, in our opinion, sup- port the Petitioner's contention that the representation should be regarded as on a "members-only" basis.7 Thus, the substantive pro- visions of the contracts and the practice of the parties with respect thereto are more consistent with the view that the parties intended to cover the single division-wide unit on an exclusive basis rather than on a "members-only" basis. In these circumstances, we are convinced that the long history of collective bargaining based on such contracts has been on an exclusive basis, encompassing the entire 'northern division, and is therefore entitled to controlling weight. We have frequently held that where, as here, there has been a long-continued bargaining history on a multi- ' Cf. International Harvester Company, West Pullman Works , 89 NLRB 413, and cases cited therein , where the Board reiterated the propriety of two or more labor organizations acting jointly as a bargaining representative for a single group of employees. In deciding that two or more labor organizations might appear jointly on the ballot and that they might be certified jointly if they should win, the Board held : "The Employer may insist that [ such labor organizations ] do, in fact, bargain jointly for such employees as a single unit." However, the Board made no requirement respecting the administration of the collective bargaining agreement resulting from the joint bargaining. 768 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD plant basis, a unit limited to the employees at one of the plants is not appropriate for purposes of collective bargaining and should not be severed from the broader appropriate units Accordingly, we find that the requested unit, limited as it is to the employees at the Tona- wanda mill, is not appropriate and is not severable from the northern division unit .9 We shall therefore dismiss the petition herein.'0 Order Upon the basis of the entire record in this proceeding, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that the petition in the instant matter be, and it hereby is, dismissed. Hanover Chemical and Manufacturing Company, 90 NLRB 650 ; Manhattan Sponging Works, 90 NLRB 13; Bethlehem-Fairfield Shipyard, Incorporated, 58 NLRB 579. 'As the determination of this issue is dispositive of this proceeding , it is unnecessary for us to pass upon the' Employer 's Joint Intervenor 's alternative contention "that their current contract constitutes a bar. 10 In support of its position , the Petitioner urged that the Board follow its decision in International Paper Company , Southern Kraft Division, 94 NLRB 483 . To the extent that that case is inconsistent with the decision herein in finding that the contracts through 1947 were "members only " rather than exclusive , it is hereby overruled. DAMASCUS TANNING COMPANY and AMALGAMATED MEAT CUTTERS AND BUTCHER WORKMEN OF NORPH AMERICA, AFL, PETITIONER. Case No. 6-RC-872. December 9'8, 1951 Decision and Order On August 22, 1951, pursuant to a stipulation for certification upon consent election executed by the Employer and the petitioner, an election by secret ballot was conducted under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Sixth Region among the employees in the unit agreed upon by the parties. Upon the con- elusion of the election, a tally of ballots was furnished the parties in accordance with the Rules and Regulations of the Board. The tally shows that of the approximately 122 eligible voters, 118 cast valid ballots, of which 52 were for the Petitioner and 66 were against the Petitioner. No ballots were challenged. On August 27, 1951, the Petitioner filed objections to conduct af- fecting the results of the election. After having duly investigated the issues raised by such objections, the Regional Director, on October 30, 1951, issued and duly served upon the parties his report on objet, tions, in which he found that the objections did raise substantial and material issues with respect to the election and recommended that the election of August 22, 1951, be set aside and a new election directed. On November 7, 1951, the Employer filed exceptions to the Regional Director's report on objections. No exceptions were filed by the Petitioner. 97 NLRB No. 100.