The France Stone Co.

In the Matter of THE FRANCE STONE COMPANY and UNITED INDUSTRIAL BUILDING SERVICE EMPLOYEES OF TOLEDO AND VICINITY, LOCAL 35, AFFILIATED WITH UNITED RETAIL, WHOLESALE & DEPARTMENT STORE EMPLOYEES OF AMERICA, (C. I. 0.) Case No. P-5514.-Decided July 0, 1943 Mr. Roland H. Rogers, of Toledo, Ohio, for the Company. Mr. Edwarrd Lamb, by Mr. Lowell Goerlich , of Toledo, Ohio, for the C.I.O. Messrs. William H. Thomas and Arnold M. Edelman, of Cleveland, Ohio, for the Operating Engineers. Mr. William R. Cameron. of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND ORDER STATEMENT OF THE CASE Upon petition duly filed by United, Industrial Building Service Employees of Toledo and Vicinity, Local 35, Affiliated with United Retail, Wholesale & Department Store Employees of America, (C. I. herein called the C. I. 0., alleging that a question affecting com- merce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of The France Stone Company, Toledo, Ohio, herein called the Company, the National Labor Relations Board provided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice before John R. Hill, Trial Examiner. Said hearing was held at Toledo, Ohio, on June 8, 1943. The Company, the C. I. O., and International Union of Operating Engineers, and Local Unions Nos. 18 and 18-C thereof, herein called the Operating Engineers; ap- peared, participated, and 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 hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. All parties were afforded opportunity to file briefs with the Board. Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following : 51 N. L. H. B., No 88 452 THE FRANCE STONE COMPANY 453 FINDINGS OF FACT 1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY The France Stone Company is an Ohio corporation engaged princi- pally in the production of mineral aggregates, consisting of crushed limestone, crushed blast furnace slag, railroad ballast, flux stone for blast furnaces, and agricultural limestone and lime for chemical and structural purposes. The Company operates seven plants in the State of Ohio, and plants also in the States of Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, and Pennsylvania. We are here concerned only with the Company's plant at Toledo, Ohio, herein referred to as the East Toledo slag plant, where the Company is engaged in the manufacture of crushed slag. At the;East• To'ledo• slag plant, which is situated entirely on property of the Interlake Iron Company, slag is dug from the pits adjacent to blast furnaces of the Iron Company, is processed by crushing and screening, and is washed and placed in storage for sale. Although ordinarily no sales of crushed slag are made for shipment to points out- side the State of Ohio, in 1942 15,000 tons of crushed slag were sold to a customer in the State of Michigan to meet emergency needs in con- nection with certain defense construction within that State. The Com- pany's production during the year of 1942 amounted to approximately 254,000 tons, of which a part was used in various construction projects arid by the Wheeling & Lake Erie Railroad for ballast, and the greater portion was delivered to the Walbridge, Ohio, Ordnance Depot for the construction of roads and buildings. The record discloses that con- tinued operation of the East Toledo slag plant is essential to operation of the Interlake Iron Company's blast furnaces at this location, in that failure to dig the slag regularly from the pits will cause the pits to become filled and result in a comparatively short time in the shut-down of the blast furnaces. We have previously found the Interlake Iron Company to be engaged in interstate commerce? We find, contrary to the Company's contention, that it is engaged in Commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED United Industrial Building Service Employees of Toledo and Vicin- ity, Local 35, Affiliated with United Retail, Wholesale & Department Store Employees of America, is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, admitting to membership em- ployees of the Company. International Union of Operating Engineers, and Local Unions Nos. 18 and 18-C thereof, are labor organizations affiliated with the s See Matter of Interlake Iron Corporation, 2 N L R . B 1036. 454 DECSSIO\TS OF NATTO\TAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD American Federation of Labor, admitting to membership employees of the Company. III. THE ALLEGED APPROPRIATE UNIT The C. I. 0. contends that all employees of the Company at its East Toledo slag plant, excluding supervisors and clerical employees, con- stitute an appropriate unit. The Company contends that employees of all the Company's plants constitute the appropriate unit. The Operating Engineers contends that the unit sought,by the C. I. 0. is inappropriate, but did not otherwise state its position as to the unit at the hearing. . The Company operates seven plants in Ohio, the farthest being about 50 miles and the nearest 10 miles from the Toldedo plant. All others than the one at East Toledo are limestone plants and perform identical operations. The operations of the East Toledo slag plant are quite similar, and the same job classifications and wage scales obtain. Transfer of employees is readily possible among all the Company's plants, and there are frequently such transfers among the limestone plants due to the seasonal nature of their operations, though in the case of the slag plant the continual nature of its operation has not occasioned such transfers. During April 1942 the Operating Engineers and the Company entered into a collective bargaining agreement, which vas executed as of April 1, 1942, and was later amended, as to rates of pay, by sup- plemental agreement dated June 30, 1942. This contract was extended by operation of an automatic renewal clause for an additional yearly period beginning April 1, 1943.2 . The contract was negotiated by the Operating Engineers with the Company, and with five affiliated companies engaged in similar busi- ness, on behalf of employees in all the plants of the Company and its affiliates located in the State of Ohio. The Company and affiliates also operate plants in 'the States of Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, and Pennsylvania, and identical contracts were executed as of April 1, 1942, by these companies with the Operating Engineers and its local unions in each of these several States. All of these contracts were likewise ,),mended by identical supplements dated June 30, 1942. The record discloses that the Operating Engineers, during the latter part of 1941, presented cards to the Company to substantiate its claim of representation of the various plants, and commenced, at that time, the bargaining negotiations which led to the contract of April 1, 1942. Cards signed by employees of the East Toledo slag plant were checked O The Operating Engineers and the Company contend that this contract is a bar to an election, and the Operating Engineers moved to dismiss the petition on this ground, which, in view of our decision herein, it is unnecessary to consider THE FRANCE STONE COMPANY 455 by the Company, and the Operating Engineers found to represent a majority, in November 1941. During the progress of negotiations, on April 8, 1942, a meeting was held in Toledo, Ohio, of employees from the various plants in the vicinity of Toledo, to consider the proposed contract, as a result of which the contract was accepted and executed as hereinbefore indicated. The employees of the East Toledo slag plant sent representatives to this meeting. Similar meetings were held at other points for employees of other plants of the Company and its affiliates. The C. I. O. contends that the employees of the East Toledo slag plant never approved or ratified this contract. The record discloses that the employees of the various plants present at the meeting in Toledo above mentioned were at first unwilling to accept the proposed contract because it did not provide for sufficient increase in wages, and the meeting was declared adjourned. Discussion, however, continued among the employees present, and after a short interval, the meeting was reconvened and 85 of the 90 persons present voted to accept the contract, relying upon its provision for renegotiation of wages at any time after 90 days. There is conflict in the testimony as to whether the East Toledo' representatives withdrew from this meeting during the adjournment and hence were not present when action was taken to approve the contract. On the basis of the whole record, however, we find that at least some of the East Toledo representatives remained and participated in the vote resulting in approval. The record dis- closes that, in any event, the contract had been negotiated by the Operating Engineers on a multiple plant basis. It is not shown that its effectiveness was strictly dependent upon separate approval by employees of each plant, although such approval appears to have been obtained. It is also claimed by the C. I. O. that the terms of the contract were not applied to employees of the East Toledo slag plant. In support of this it was shown that dues which had. been checked off, were returned by the Company to the employees at the employees' request, and no dues were checked off or paid since some time on or before July 1942. Also it was indicated that the East Toledo employees had not been given the benefit of certain vacation provisions applied to other plants. It is clear, however, that the East Toledo employees have received the benefits of all other provisions of the contract equally with the em- ployees of the Company's other plants. In view of all the circumstances, including the history of collective bargaining by the Operating Engineers for employees of the plants of the Company and its affiliates on a State-wide basis, the similarity of operations in this plant with operations in Company's other plants and quarries, the centralized management by the Company of its labor relations, and the present identity of job classifications and wage 456 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD scales in the various plants, we find that the unit urged by the C. I. 0., consisting of employees of only the East Toledo slag plant, is inap- propriate for the purposes of collective bargaining. IV. THE ALLEGED QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION Since, as pointed out in Section III, above, the bargaining unit' sought to be established by the petition is inappropriate for the pur- poses of collective bargaining, we find that no question has been raised concerning the representation of employees in an appropriate bar= gaining unit. Accordingly, we shall dismiss the petition. ORDER Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and upon. the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that the petition for investigation and certification of representatives of employees of The France Stone Company, Toledo, Ohio, filed by United Industrial Building Service Employees of Toledo and Vicinity, Local 35, Affiliated with United Retail, Wholesale & Department Store Employees of America (C. I. 0.), be, and it hereby is, dismissed.