The Carborundum Co.

192 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD and Aubrey Gulledge, thereby discouraging membership in United Rubber, Cork, Linoleum & Plastic Workers of America, CIO, the Respondent has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8 (a) (3) and (1) of the Act. 3. By interfering with, restraining, and coercing the employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act, the Respondent has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8 (a) (1) of the Act. 4. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair labor practices affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. 5. The Respondent committed no unfair labor practice as regards Ruth Hiett Clark. [Recommendations omitted from publication.] APPENDIX A NOTICE TO ALL EMPLOYEES Pursuant to the recommendations of a Trial Examiner of the National Labor Relations Board, and in order to effectuate the policies of the National Labor Relations Act, we hereby notify our employees that: WE WILL NOT in any manner interfere with, restrain, or coerce our employees in the exercise of their right to self -organization, to form labor organizations, to join or assist United Rubber , Cork, Linoleum & Plastic Workers of America , CIO, or any other labor organization , to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection. WE WILL offer to the employees named helow immediate and full reinstatement to their former or substantially equivalent positions restoring all seniority or other rights and privileges previously enjoyed , and make them whole for any loss of pay suffered as a result of the discrimination Mildred Richmond Clayton Nosbusch Flora Perry - Gilbert Baggett Magga Lee Doty Daniel McElroy Glendon Appleton Buford Appleton Isabel Harrell Aubrey Gulledge All our employees are free to become or remain members of the above-named union or any other labor organization. We will not discriminate in regard to hire or tenure of employ- ment or any term or condition of employment against any employee because of membership in or activity on behalf of any such labor organization. Acme Boot Manufacturing Company, Inc., Employer. Dated ................ By.............................................................................................. (Representative) (Title) This notice must remain posted for 60 days from the date hereof, and must not be altered, defaced, or covered by any other material. THE CARBORUNDUM COMPANY and DISTRICT LODGE 76, LODGE 689, INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MA- CHINISTS, AFL, Petitioner. Case No. 3-RC-1141. May 29, 1953 DECISION AND ORDER Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before William J. Cavers, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made 105 NLRB No 16. THE CARBORUNDUM COMPANY 193 at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.'. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member panel [Members Houston, Styles , and Peter- son]. Upon the entire record in this case , the Board finds: 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the mean- ing of the Act. 2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent employees of the Employer. 3. No question affecting commerce exists concerning the representation of employees of the Employer within the mean- ing of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act, for the following reasons: The Petitioner seeks primarily to represent various craft groups at the Employer ' s Niagara Falls, town of Niagara, and Wheatfield , New York , plants . The Employer and the Intervenor contend among other things that their agreement executed September 18, 1950, and expiring July 19, 1955, which covers all the production and maintenance employees at the Em- ployer's Niagara Falls, town of Niagara , and Wheatfield plants, including the employees sought by the Petitioner , constitutes a bar to this proceeding . The Petitioner claims that this con- tract is one of unreasonable duration which has been in effect for more than 2 years and ther efore cannot constitute a bar. The Employer is the largest producer of abrasive products in the United States, manufacturing approximately 58 percent of the total output.2 It employs a total of about 4 , 360 employees in its plants in the United States and Canada. Of these em- ployees, approximately 3,980, or 91 percent , are covered by 5-year contracts ,3 The entire abrasive products industry in the United States employs about 6,740 organized employees, of whom approximately 4,370, or approximately 65 percent, are covered by 5-year collective -bargaining contracts. It is clear from the foregoing that a substantial portion of the abrasive products industry is covered by contracts having a 5-year term. We therefore do not consider the 5-year con- 'At the hearing the Intervenor, Local 12058, United Chemical Workers of America, C.I.O„ moved to dismiss the petition on the grounds of contract bar and inappropriateness of the requested unit. For the reasons set forth below, this motion is granted 2The principal customers for the Employer's products are automobile manufacturers, a substantial number of which have 5-year collective-bargaining contracts. See General Motors, Detroit Transmission Division, 102 NLRB 1140 The Employer also sells its products to farm equipment manufacturers , a substantial number of which also have 5-year collective- bargaining contracts. Allis Chalmers Manufacturing Company (West Allis Plant), 102 NLRB 1135 3 The plants so covered consist of approximately 3,350 production and maintenance em- ployees at the 3 plants involved in this proceeding and the approximately 630 employees at the Perth Amboy, New Jersey, and Niagara Falls, Ontario, Canada, plants . The Employer's 5 other installations , consisting of 4 other plants and 1 warehouse and employing approxi- mately 380 employees, are covered by 1-, 2-, or 3-year collective -bargaining contracts. 194 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD tract of September 18, 1950 , between the Intervenor and the Employer one of unreasonable duration . 4 Accordingly , we shall dismiss the petition which was filed more than 2 years before the expiration date of the existing contract.5 [The Board dismissed the petition.] 4General Motors (Milwaukee Plant), A. C. Spark Plug Division, 102 NLRB 1139; Allis Chalmers Manufacturing Company (West Allis Plant), 102 NLRB 1135; and General Motors Corporation, Detroit Transmission Division, 102 NLRB 1140. 5In view of this disposition of the case , we need not pass upon the appropriateness of the unit request of the Petitioner. HAMMERMILL PAPER COMPANY, INC. and REGINALD C. PERRY, Petitioner and INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF PAPERMAKERS, AFL. Case No. 6-RD-86. May 29, 1953 DECISION AND ORDER Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Elmer E. Hope, 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 Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three - member panel [Members Houston, Styles, and Peterson]. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds: 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the mean- ing of the Act. 2. The Petitioner, an employee of the Employer, asserts that the Union, which is being currently recognized by the Employer as the bargaining representative of the employees designated in the petition , is no longer the representative as defined in Section 9 (a) of the Act. 3. The Union contends that the petition herein should be dismissed because the Petitioner is acting as a "front" for District 50, United Mine Workers of America, hereinafter referred to as UMW, a noncomplying labor organization. Local Union No. 12,560 of the UMW had been the bargaining representative of the Employer's employees until the Union won a Board election and was certified as the bargaining representative of these employees on April 26, 1951.2 The Employer and the Union have a contract that expires on June 1, 1953. tAt the hearing, the Union moved to dismiss the petition on the ground that no showing had been ntadebythePetitioner that asubstantial number of employees desired decertification. Showing of interest in a decertification case, as in a certification case, is an administrative matter not litigable by the parties. This motion is therefore denied . Suburban Propane Gas , Corporation (Shorgas Division), 86 NLRB 1232.. 2Case No. 6-RC-714, not reported in printed volumes of Board decisions. 105 NLRB No. 36.