Geilich Tanning Co.

GEILICH TANNING COMPANY 501 Geilich Tanning Company and Amalgamated Meat Cutters and Butcher Workmen of North America, AFL-CIO and Taunton Leather Workers Union, Party to the Contract. Case No. 1-CA-2365. August 8, 1960 SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND ORDER On January 27, 1959, the Board issued its Decision and Order I herein, finding that the Respondent had not engaged in the unfair labor practices as alleged in the complaint and dismissing the com- plaint in its entirety. In its Decision the Board, inter alia, assumed, without deciding, that nine working foremen 2 were supervisors within the meaning of the Act, but concluded that their participation in the affairs of the Union 3 was not violative of the Act because they were union members who were included in the bargaining unit. On March 22, 1960, the Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, while largely affirming the Board's findings and conclusions, remanded this case to the Board for consideration of the status of these nine working foremen and of any violation of the Act resulting from their par- ticipation in union activities after June 21, 1957-a matter which the Board had not specifically considered-and for the entry of an appro- priate order.4 The court noted that on that date the Respondent and the Union executed a new contract which specifically excluded super- visors, as defined in the Act, from the recognized unit. In addition, the court noted that certain union activities of William Delaney and Hebert constituted prima facie evidence of interference if these in- dividuals were in fact supervisors. Accordingly in conformance with the court opinion and order of remand, the Board has considered the question of the status of these nine working foremen and their par- ticipation in union activities after June 21, 1957. With respect to the supervisory status of these nine working fore- men, the record 5 establishes that each is in charge of and directs a group of employees, ranging in most cases from 7 to 15, and that all, except Silvia and Cote, have authority to discipline and reprimand employees. On these facts and the entire record we find, in agreement 1 Geilich Tanning Company, 122 NLRB 1119. ' William Delaney, John Delaney, Jeff Hebert, Ludger Benoit, Robert King Harold Priest, John Fernandez , John Silvia , and Charles Cote. 8 The Union referred to throughout this Decision Is the Taunton Leather Workers Union, an independent union. 4 Amalgamated Meat Cutters and Butcher Workmen, etc v. N L R B , 276 F 2d 34 (C.A. 1). In making our findings herein, we rely on the affirmative testimony credited by the Trial Examiner and the affidavit of Plant Superintendent Peterson, who is admittedly a supervisor ; although Peterson sought to repudiate his affidavit, his testimony in this respect was not credited We do not, however, rely in making our findings on the repudi- ated affidavits of any of the working foremen whose status is here in issue. 128 NLRB No. 61. 577684-61-vol. 128-33 502 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD with the Trial Examiner, that these nine working foremen are super- visors within the meaning of the Act as they responsibly direct the work of employees in a manner requiring the exercise of independent judgment, or possess and exercise other statutory indicia of super- visory authority. With respect to their union activities, the evidence establishes that six of them' actively participated in union affairs after June 21, 1957. The minutes of a union meeting held on January 7, 1958, disclose that Lee was nominated and seconded for the office of union president by William Delaney and Hebert, respectively, two of the individuals we have found to be supervisors. Hebert also seconded a nomination of another individual for the office of treasurer. At a subsequent union meeting on February 4, 1958, Supervisors John Delaney, William Delaney, Benoit, King, and Priest voted in the election of union officers. In accord with prior decisions,' we find that the participation after June 21, 1957, in union activities by supervisors who are union mem- bers but who are not in the bargaining unit, is a violation of the Act. We conclude, therefore, that by such conduct the Respondent has interfered in the internal administration of the Union, in violation of Section 8(a) (2) and (1) of the Act. THE REMEDY As we have found that the Respondent unlawfully interfered with the administration of the Union, we shall order that it cease and desist from participating in union activities through its supervisors or otherwise participating in the internal administration of the Union. We shall not, however, order the Respondent to withdraw and with- hold recognition from the Independent. There is no probative evi- dence that this Union is not the freely chosen majority representative of the employees concerned. Nor does the record establish that these supervisors were acting in other than their individual capacities as union members, or that the Respondent instigated such participation. In such a context, we deem a cease and desist order sufficient to remedy the unfair labor practices found.' ORDER Upon the entire record in this case, and pursuant to Section 10(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that the Respondent, Geilich Tanning 0 There is no evidence of participation in union affairs by Fernandez , Silvia, or Cote. 7 Nassau and Suffolk Contractors' Association, Inc, and its members, 118 NLRB 174 at 184; Detroit Association of Plumbing Contractors, 126 NLRB 1381 ; Bottfield- Refractories Co , et al , 127 NLRB 188 ; cf. Anchorage Businessmen's Association, Drug- store Unit, etc, 124 NLRB 662 8 Bottfield-Refractories Co , sups a; Detroit Association of Plumbing Contractors , supra. GEILICH TANNING COMPANY 503 Company, Taunton, Massachusetts, its officers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall : 1. Cease and desist from interfering with the Taunton Leather Workers Union by participating through its supervisors in the nomi- nation and election of union officers, or by participating otherwise in the internal administration of said labor organization. 2. Take the following affirmative action which the Board finds will effectuate the policies of the Act : (a) Post at its Taunton, Massachusetts, plant, copies of the notice attached hereto marked "Appendix." 9 Copies of such notice, to be furnished by the Regional Director for the First Region, shall, after being duly signed by representatives of the Respondent Company, be posted immediately upon receipt thereof, and be maintained by it for 60 consecutive days thereafter, in conspicuous places, including all places where notices to employees are customarily posted. Reason- able steps shall be taken by the Respondent to insure that said notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by any other material. (b) Notify the Regional Director for the First Region, in writing, within 10 days from the date of this Order, what steps the Respondent has taken to comply herewith. MEMBERS BEAN and FANNING took no part in the consideration of the above Supplemental Decision and Order. IIn the event that this Order is enforced by a decree of a United States Court of Appeals, there shall be substituted for the words "Pursuant to a Decision and Order" the words "Pursuant to a Decree of the United States Court of Appeals, Enforcing an Order." APPENDIX NOTICE TO ALL EMPLOYEES Pursuant to a Decision and Order of the National Labor Relations Board and in order to effectuate the policies of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, we hereby notify our employees that: WE WILL NOT interfere with the administration of the Taunton Leather Workers Union by participating through our supervisors in the nomination or election of union officers or by otherwise participating in the internal administration of the said labor organization. GEILICH TANNING COMPANY, 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.