Boyle's Famous Corned Beef Co.

BOYLE'S FAMOUS CORNED BEEF CO. 299 Boyle's Famous Corned Beef Co. and Amalgamated Meat Cutters & Butcher Workmen of North Amer- ica, Local Union 576 and Independent Meat Cut- ters Union , Party of Interest. Case 17-CA-3038 November 17, 1967 DECISION AND ORDER By CHAIRMAN MCCULLOCH AND MEMBERS BROWN ANDJENKINS On May 15, 1967, Trial Examiner Thomas S. Wilson issued his Decision in the above-entitled proceeding, finding that the Respondent had en- gaged in and was engaging in certain unfair labor practices and recommending that it cease and desist therefrom and take certain affirmative action, as set forth in the attached Trial Examiner's Decision. Thereafter, the Charging Party and the Respondent filed exceptions to the Trial Examiner's Decision, and Respondent filed a supporting brief. t Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the Na- tional Labor Relations Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three- member panel. The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner made at the hearing and finds that no prejudicial error was committed. The rulings are hereby affirmed. The Board has considered the Trial Examiner's Decision, the exceptions 2 the briefs, and the- entire record in the case, and hereby adopts the findings,3 conclusions, and recommenda- tions of the Trial Examiner, except as modified herein. AMENDED REMEDY Delete the second indented paragraph of the Remedy section of the Trial Examiner's Decision and substitute therefor the following: "It has been found further that Respondent inter- fered with, and assisted in the formation of, the In- dependent Meat Cutters Union. Accordingly, we shall order Respondent to cease and desist from such conduct." AMENDED CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Delete the first numbered paragraph of the sec- tion of the Trial Examiner's Decision entitled "Conclusions of Law" and substitute therefor the following: "I. By interfering with and assisting in the for- mation of the Independent Meat Cutters Union and by contributing other support to it, Respondent'has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices' within the meaning of Section 8(a)(2) and ( 1) of the Act." ORDER Pursuant to Section 10(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor Relations Board adopts as its Order the Recom- mended Order of the Trial Examiner and hereby or- ders that the Respondent, Boyle's Famous Corned Beef Co., Kansas City, Missouri, its officers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall take the ac- tion set forth in the Trial Examiner's Recom- mended Order, as herein modified: 1. Delete paragraph 1(a) of the Trial Examiner's Recommended Order and substitute therefor the following: "(a) Interfering with and assisting in the forma- tion or administration of Independent Meat Cutters Union, or any other labor organization, by con- tributing financial or other support thereto." 2. Delete paragraph 2(a) of the Trial Examiner's Recommended Order and substitute therefor the following: "(a) Withdraw and withhold recognition from Independent Meat Cutters Union as the exclusive representative of any of its employees for the pur- poses of collective bargaining, unless and until the said labor organization has been duly certified by the National Labor Relations Board as the exclu- sive representative of such employees." 3. Delete from paragraph 2(c) of the Trial Ex- aminer's Recommended Order that part thereof which reads "to be furnished" and substitute therefor "on forms provided. . . 4. Delete the first indented paragraph of the Ap- pendix attached to the Trial Examiner's Decision and substitute therefor the following: WE WILL NOT recognize Independent'Meat Cutters Union as the exclusive representative of our employees for the purposes of collective bargaining unless and until the said labor or- ganization is duly certified` by the National Labor Relations Board as the exclusive representative of our employees. ' The General Counsel and the Charging Party also moved to con- solidate the instant case with Heart of America Meat Dealers Associa- tion, et al, a consolidated unfair labor practice proceeding bearing Cases 17-CA-2965 and 17-CA-2992 We hereby deny these motions since the record in each proceeding reveals that the cases are sufficiently distinct to warrant separate consideration and disposition 2 The Charging Party has filed exceptions to the Trial Examiner's failure to award special monetary damages for Respondent 's violations of Section 8 (a)(2) and (5) of the Act. The Charging Party argues that the Board should remedy these violations by ordering Respondent to make the same contract offer to it as Respondent made to the Independent, and by ordering Respondent to reimburse the Charging Party for the expenses it incurred as a result of Respondent's unlawful refusal to bargain We deem it inappropriate in this case to depart from our existing policy with respect to remedial orders in cases involving violations of Section 8(a)(5), and therefore we deny the Charging Party's request See Monroe Auto Equipment Company, 164 NLRB 1051 3 We agree with the Trial Examiner's finding that Respondent violated Section 8(a)(2) of the Act However, we find that Respondent's illegal conduct in this respect constituted assistance only to the Independent and did not reach the level of domination Cf Tuscarora Plastics Co , 167 NLRB No 154, Hydraulic Accessories Company, 165 NLRB 864, K & M Machine Company, Inc , 162 NLRB 83 168 NLRB No. 46 300 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD TRIAL EXAMINER'S DECISION STATEMENT OF THE CASE THOMAS S. WILSON, Trial Examiner: Upon a charge duly filed on October 12, 1966, by Amalgamated Meat Cutters & Butcher Workmen of North America, Local Union 576, hereinafter referred to as the Union or Local 576, the General Counsel of the National Labor Rela- tions Board, herein referred to as the General Counsel' and the Board, respectively, by the Regional Director for Region 17, Kansas City, Missouri, issued its complaint dated January 13, 1967, against Boyle's Famous Corned Beef Co., hereinafter referred to as the Respondent. The complaint alleged that Respondent had engaged in and was engaging in unfair labor practices affecting com- merce within the meaning of Section 8(a)(1), (2), and (5) and Section 2(6) and (7) of the Labor Management Rela- tions Act, 1947, as amended, herein referred to as the Act. Respondent duly filed its answer admitting certain al- legations of the complaint but denying the commission of any unfair labor practices. Pursuant to notice, a hearing thereon was held in Kan- sas City, Missouri, on February 14 and 20, 1967, before me. All parties appeared at the hearing, were represented by counsel, and were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to produce, examine, and cross-examine wit- nesses, and to introduce evidence material and pertinent to the issues. At the conclusion of the hearing, oral argu- ment was waived. Briefs were received from Respondent and General Counsel on April 10, 1967. Upon the entire record in the case and from my obser- vation of the witnesses, I make the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. THE BUSINESS OF RESPONDENT The complaint alleged, the answer admitted , and I find that Boyle's Famous Corned Beef Co., a Missouri cor- poration with its principal place of business and plant located at Kansas City, Missouri , is engaged in the processing, distribution , and sale of meat on a wholesale basis, and that in the course and conduct of its business operations Respondent annually purchases goods and products valued in excess of $50,000 from suppliers located outside the State of Missouri , and annually sells products valued in excess of $50,000 to customers located outside of the State of Missouri. Accordingly I find that at all times material herein Respondent was and is an employer engaged in com- merce within the meanng of the Act. II. THE UNIONS INVOLVED Amalgamated Meat Cutters & Butcher Workmen of North America, Local Union 576, and Independent Meat Cutters Union, hereinafter referred to as Independent, ' This term specifically includes the attorney appearing for the General Counsel at the hearing. ? There is no dispute between the parties as to the appropriate unit or the majority of the Union therein - at least until October 1966, 3 All dates are in the year 1966 unless otherwise noted. Schneider had been a dues paying member of Local 576 for more than 25 years. Since becoming Respondent's superintendent, Schneider had are labor organizations admitting to membership em- ployees of Respondent. III. THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES not attended union meetings although his dues to Local 576 continued to be checked off. 5 Both Gabriel and Ramsey were also members of Local 576 at this time. 6 Admittedly Schneider has been Respondent's plant superintendent since 1959 with authority to hire and fire and, therefore, an acknowledged supervisor. A. The Facts Since 1951 Local 576 has been recognized by Respond- ent as the bargaining representative for its employees.2 During the intervening years the parties have negotiated consecutive collective-bargaining agreements covering hours, wages, and working conditions of Respondent's said employees. These contracts have been practically verbatim replicas of the contracts negotiated during that period between Local 576 and Heart of America Meat Dealers Association, a multiemployer association of wholesale meat companies in the Kansas City area of which Robert Boyle, Respondent's president, has been at all times material here the president. During this whole period Robert Boyle in effect wore three hats: One as president of the Association, a second as president of Boyle's Meat Company which was a member of the Association, and a third as president of Respondent which was not a member of the Association. As I have recently found in a case related to the instant one, Heart of America, 17-CA-2965 and 17-CA-2992 [168 NLRB No. 110], the 1966 negotiations between the Association and Local 576 were punctuated by a strike and lockout which began June 28, 1966, and ended on August 17 of that year when the parties thereto agreed upon a collective-bargaining agreement coveringthe multi- employer unit which, of course, did not include Respond- ent's employees. About July 7,3 Carl Nothnagel, secretary-treasurer and spokesman for Local 576, met with Robert Boyle, as president of Respondent, to commence negotiations of the 1966 contract for the employees of Respondent here. It was then agreed between them to extend the then existing contract between them until after the deadlock in the negotiations between Local 576 and the Association was ended at which time negotiation of Respondent's contract would resume. At some indefinite time during the pendency of the strike-lockout Local 576 called a meeting of its members employed by Respondent in order to set up a picket line schedule for those employees in order to assist in the Union's dispute with the Association. Among the union members not attending that meeting were A. W. Schneider, plant superintendent for Respondent since 1959,4 Fred Gabriel, listed on Respondent's seniority list as "plant foreman," and Stephen Ramsey, grandnephew of Robert Boyle.5 All three of the above-named individuals considered it to be a "dirty deal" that Local 576 was requiring them to do picket duty in the Union's dispute with the Associa- tion. Either that same night or the following night Superin- tendent Schneider telephoned Respondent employee James W. Roberts, whom Schneider had hired for Respondent 6 years before," and warned Roberts that BOYLE'S FAMOUS CORNED BEEF CO. 301 Respondent's employees would be reprimanded by Respondent if they engaged in the required picket duty. The day following this telephone call Roberts requested a meeting over the issue with Robert Boyle. At this meeting Boyle told the assembled employees that the Association-Union fight was not the employees' fight, that the employees should not get involved therein, that he did not want to injure or cause Respondent trouble, and that Respondent's employees were not on strike and should not become involved in the existing situation between Local 576 and the Association. Despite these warnings by Boyle and Schneider some of Respondent's employees walked the picket line at the request of Local 576. Schneider's reaction to the request that he picket, which he did not honor, was shared by Foreman Gabriel and by Ramsey, grandnephew of Boyle whom Ramsey customarily addressed as "Uncle Bob." As noted, the Association-Union dispute ended on Au- gust 17. On September 21 the Union submitted its demands to Respondent as per the agreement of July 7. As was custo- mary, these demands to all intents and purposes were those just recently negotiated by the Union in the con- tract with the Association. On September 28 the parties met and Respondent sub- mitted its counterproposals which were, as usual, matters already negotiated in the Association's contract. At some indefinite date about this same time Foreman Gabriel informed Boyle that some of the employees "were interested in starting their own union or company union" and requested Boyle to suggest an attorney who might assist this endeavor. Upon advice of Counsel El- liott, Boyle told Gabriel that he, Boyle, "couldn't have anything to do with it." However Boyle did relay to Gabriel the names of two possible attorneys whom Elliott suggested for the group's purpose.7 Ramsey and Gabriel then commenced efforts to in- terest Respondent's employees in forming an indepen- dent union because of the "raw deal" Local 576 had given such employees in having them picket during the dispute with the Association. Ramsey and Gabriel informed employees that, if the Independent Union came in, "Bob" or "Uncle Bob" said that he would pay the employees $2 per week more than the union scale, and that he would pay them $7.60 per week instead of the $5.60-per-week raise the Union had negotiated in the Association 's contract. Ramsey informed Respondent employee Grammer that Respondent would make loans to employees payable out of their "retroactive backpay," to wit, obviously a reference to the $7.60-per-week increase "Bob" was quoted as saying he would give the employees. At Ram- sey's suggestion Grammer applied for such a loan from Superintendent Schneider who granted Grammer a $30 loan without provision made for repayment , even as Ramsey had said. In addition , when Respondent employee James Roberts objected to leaving Local 576 to join an independent union on the ground that he would lose 24 years' ac-' cumulated pension and vacation rights by so doing, Ramsey and Gabriel assured him that the employees would get the same benefits , including 24 years' pension rights, under the contract Respondent would have with Mutual of Omaha as they would receive from their seniority rights in Local 576. Roberts, apparently un- impressed by this promise , requested Robert Boyle to transfer him to Boyle's other company, Boyle's Meat Company, which was a member of the Association and under the newly negotiated Association's contract with Local 576. Boyle told Roberts to "take it easy" and to see how things developed . Roberts had not been trans- ferred at the time of the hearing. Prior to October 4 Stephen Ramsey requested and received permission from Boyle to hold " a meeting" in Respondent's plant. On October 4 Ramsey and Gabriel informed Respond- ent's employees during working hours that they would hold a meeting in Respondent's lunchroom at 2 p.m. Later they informed the employees that they could not hold this meeting during working hours and had, there- fore, postponed the meeting until the end of the workday at 3:3 0 p.m. As Nothnagel came to Respondent's plant for the second negotiation meeting on the Respondent-Local 576 contract on October 4, he noticed a meeting in progress. Nothnagel thereupon inquired of Boyle as to what meet- ing was taking place on Respondent's premises. Boyle pleaded ignorance thereof.8 The meeting of the employees was held in Respond- ent's lunchroom at 3:30 p.m. Ramsey acted as spokes- man and introduced Attorneys Fallon and Jenkins who came prepared with constitution and bylaws for the Independent Meat Cutters Union ready for signature. During a discussion of the merits and demerits of an inde- pendent (company) union, the attorney raised the point that there was a "possibility" that an employer would grant higher wages to independent unions "because [the employer] felt he was dealing with his own employees and he knew the money he was paying to them was not going to any other union benefits, it was going to them." The attorney cited as one of the demerits of an independ- ent union that, in the event the employer would not grant "a just wage," members of an independent union "would not have any help in case of a strike because other unions would not honor your picket and you would not get any strike funds and no leverage." The attorney then ex- plained the constitution and bylaws he had prepared for signature. Ramsey then asked if there were a sufficient number of employees who wanted to sign the constitu- tion. Ramsey signed the document first, followed by Foreman Gabriel and Dennis E. Miller, described in the transcript as a "leadman." That ended the signatures until employee Harold Roberts 9 informed Gabriel that he thought he would go get Superintendent Schneider to sign the constitution. This announcement spurred about four more employees to sign before Schneider arrived and added his signature to the document. Schneider was fol- lowed by one other employee. So the constitution was ' One of these , Attorney Fallon , accepted the suggested employment As of the date of the hearing herein , an unstated portion of Fallon's fee remained unpaid. " The facts, particularly the sudden changing of the time of the meeting from 2 to 3 :30 p.m. at the end of the workday , prove that a man as astute as Boyle could hardly have been ignorant of the purpose of the meeting which Ramsey proposed holding on Respondent 's premises, even assum- ing that Ramsey , unlike Gabriel , had only asked permission to hold "a meeting" without more. Hence I was not impressed with Boyle 's denials that he knew anything about the formation of the Independent or the pur- pose of the meeting of October 4 At this hearing Boyle was not testifying truthfully. " Not to be confused with employee James Roberts. 302 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD signed by 9 persons employed by Respondent thus giving it an apparent majority of those 13 persons employed by Respondent, exclusive of Robert Boyle himself.10 After the constitution had been so executed', officers were then elected with William Slusser as president, Dennis Miller as vice president, and grandnephew Ram- sey as its secretary-treasurer. The trustees elected were Harold Roberts for the 3-year term, Foreman Fred Gabriel for the 2-year term, and employee Donald Mill- sap for the I - year term. By letter dated October 5 over the signature of William Slusser, as president of "Independent Meat Cutters Union," Respondent was advised as follows: Please be advised that on October 4, 1966, the In- dependent Meat Cutters Union was organized and the undersigned duly elected president. A majority of the employees of Boyle's Famous Corned Beef Company eligible for membership in such union were present at the organizational meeting and at that time became members of the Union. Please consider this letter as a demand on behalf of the Independent Meat Cutters Union to be recog- nized as the representative of the employees who are members of this union, for the purposes of collective bargaining with Boyle's Famous Corned Beef Com- pany. On that same day, October 5, a representation petition over the signature of the same William Slusser as pre- sident of Independent Meat Cutters Union was filed with the Board's Regional Office in Kansas City, Missouri. This petition notes that a request for recognition as bar- gaining agent was made upon the Respondent on October 4, 1966,11 and "no reply received" from Employer re,the request. On October 12, 1966, Local 576, over the signature of its attorney, Robert L. Kimbrough, filed an unfair labor practice charge with the Board's Regional Office at Kan- sas City, charging that Respondent "did form, assist, and dominate an independent labor organization comprised of employees of the employer" and has refused to bargain with Local 576 in violation of Section 8(a)(1), (2), and (5) of the Act. On January 17, 1967, the Regional Director found that "further proceedings [on the RC petition filed by Inde- pendent] are not warranted at this time because there exists no_ question concerning representation of the em- ployees here involved" and further advised that he had is- sued a complaint upon the charges made by Local 576 and was "therefore, dismissing the petition in this matter." No appeal was taken from this decision of the Regional Director and the RC petition case was marked closed. As of October 1 Respondent discontinued making dues checkoffs and paying pension fund benefits to Local 576. It has continued to make health and welfare payments upon its employees to the insurance carrier to the date of the hearing. So far as this record indicates the Independent has held one meeting since that of October 4, 1966. This meeting, about which there is no other evidence in this record, was held during the lunch hour in the Company's plant on February 6, 1967. B. Conclusions 1. Independent Meat Cutters Union In my recent Decision in the Heart of America Meat Dealers Association case, supra, I made the finding that I could find no evidence there of an illegal, antiunion motivation on the part of the Association in locking out its employees following a strike by Local 576 against one member of the Association. If, however, the instant case had been consolidated for hearing with the Heart of America case, I could not have made such finding because in this case the antiunion motivation of Robert Boyle, president both of the Association and of Respond- ent, is conspicuous. Even though a man may wear three hats, he is prone to think alike under each. Here Robert Boyle was playing a double game. On April 7 he agreed with Local 576 to delay negotiations on Respondent's contract until the Heart of America con- tract had been settled. This probably was a timesaving device because customarily Respondent's contract with Local 576 had been identical to that Local 576 negotiated with the Heart of America even though Respondent was not a member of that Association. However, during this agreed upon delay, three men em- ployed by Respondent began efforts to replace Local 576 with an independent union. These three were A. W. (Bill) Schneider, Fred Gabriel, and Stephen Ramsey. None of the three was a rank-and-file employee. Schneider is ad- mittedly Respondent's plant superintendent receiving an- nually a $2,000 bonus and having the authority to hire and fire. Fred Gabriel is noted on the Respondent's seniority list as "plant foreman" and, in addition, he receives an annual bonus of $700 for his contribution to Respondent's welfare. Stephen Ramsey is the grand- nephew of President Robert Boyle and, in addition, Respondent pays him an annual bonus of $600 for some unstated reason. As rank-and-file employees receive an annual bonus of $100 from Respondent, it is easy to see that the three named above are considerably more than rank-and-file employees. As superintendent, Schneider threatened an employee of Respondent with reprimand in the name of the Respondent if he engaged in picketing on behalf of Local 576 in its dispute with the Association. Boyle in a fact confirmed this action the following morning. When Gabriel told Boyle, according to the evidence here, that "a group of employees" wanted to form an in- dependent union and requested Boyle to recommend an attorney for that purpose, Boyle pointedly stated that he "could have nothing to do with it" but, despite that sanc- timonious statement, in the very same conversation sup- plied Gabriel with the name of such an attorney, as requested. Strangely enough Boyle's own attorney who ordered Boyle to have nothing to do with the formation of the Independent was the one, in the very same conversa- tion in which that advice was given, who supplied Boyle with the name of the attorney. Thus the advice was vio- lated almost before being given or received. Recommend- ing an attorney for the purpose of forming an independent union constitutes assistance to that independent union. 10 Article II, section I , of this constitution restricts membership in said Independent to "every regular employee" of Respondent but specifically makes the following ineligible for membership "... department heads, supervisors, members of the management staff. " The latter provision would seem to eliminate Schneider and Gabriel at least 11 There is in this record no evidence of any such request made on Oc- tober 4 BOYLE'S FAMOUS CORNED BEEF CO. - 303 Obviously neither attorney nor client took good advice seriously. Then Foreman Gabriel and nephew Ramsey enticed union employees into abandoning Local'576 and joining the Independent with promises of benefits, made in the name of Robert Boyle, that, if the Independent was formed, the employees would receive $2 more per week over the union scale, would receive the same benefits as they would receive from Local 576, even after 24 years of such membership, as, well as notifying Respondent's employees that they could get loans from Respondent on the basis of the promised "retroactive backpay" which Boyle allegedly had promised. As confirmation thereof, Superintendent Schneider granted at least one such loan without specific arrangements being made for its repay- ment. Because of his position Superintendent Schneider, at,least, spoke for the Respondent. I find that Foreman Gabriel and nephew Ramsey were also speaking with authority of Respondent. Boyle himself supplied these same three individuals with the facilities for the formation of the Independent as well as for its one subsequent meeting. Furthermore the evidence proves, and I find, that at least four rank-and-file employees were induced or coerced to sign the constitution of the Independent upon the representation made that Plant Superintendent Schneider was coming to execute the document himself. In fact Schneider did sign the constitution and bylaws.12 Thus three of the nine signatures thereon were those of the superintendent, the foreman, and the nephew. Respondent Boyle made his own intention clear when Respondent ,ceased checking off dues to Local 576 and payment to the pension fund of Local 576 as required by the Independent Meat Cutters Union.13 Under the facts of this case as found above, I must, and hereby do; find that Respondent dominated and inter- ferred with the formation and administration of Inde- pendent Meat Cutters Union and contributed support thereto in'viol ion of Section 8(a)(1) and (2). As the purpose of this 'domination and 'interference with the formation and administration of Independent Meat Cutters Union was demonstrated by the fact that Respondent on September 1, 1966, ceased checking off dues of its employee members and ceased making con- tributions to the pension fund maintained by Local 576 in derogation of the agreement made on July 7 between Respondent and the Union that the existing contract between Local 576 and Respondent be continued until the contract between the Heart of America and Local 576 was settled, I must, and hereby do, find that Respondent used this delay' in order to dissipate the acknowledged majority which Local 576 enjoyed among the employees of Respondent in the appropriate unit for the purpose of refusing' to negotiate further with Local 576, as such bar- gaining agent of Respondent's employees, and thus Respondent has also violated Section 8(a)(1) and (5) of .the Act. IV: THE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES UPON COMMERCE The activities of the Respondent set forth in section 111, above, occurring in connection with the operations described in section 1, above, have a close, intimate, and substantial relationship to trade, traffic, and commerce among the several States and tend to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce and the free flow of commerce. V. THE REMEDY It having been found that Respondent has engaged in certain unfair labor practices , it will be recommended that it cease and desist therefrom and that it take certain affir- mative action designed to effectuate the policies of the Act. It has been found further that Respondent dominated and interfered with the formation and administration of Independent Meat Cutters Union and contributed sup- port to said labor organization Accordingly, it will be recommended that Respondent cease and desist from dominating and interfering with the formation or adminis- tration of Independent Meat Cutters Union and from contributing support thereto and completely disestablish said organization as a representative of any of Respond- ent's employees in the appropriate unit. It has also been found that Respondent has refused to bargain with Amalgamated Meat Cutters. & Butcher Workmen of North America, Local Union 576, as the acknowledged representative of the majority of Respond- ent's employees in the acknowledged appropriate unit consisting of: All beef boners, pumper cry-o-vac operators, and unskilled workers employed by Boyle's Famous Corned Beef Co. at its Kansas City , Missouri plant excluding all other employees , guards and super- visors as defined in the Act. It will be recommended that , upon request , Respond- ent bargain in good faith with Amalgamated Meat Cut- ters & Butcher Workmen of North America, Local Union 576, as the authorized bargaining representative of all Respondent 's employees in the appropriate unit found above. Because of the various types of unfair labor practices engaged in by Respondent , opposition by the Respondent to the policies of the Act in general is obvious and hence it is deemed necessary to order Respondent to cease and desist therefrom and from , in any other manner, infringing upon the rights guaranteed its employees in Section 7 of the Act - CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. By dominating and interfering with the formation and administration of Independent Meat Cutters Union and by contributing support to it, Respondent has en- gaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8(a)(1) and (2) of the Act. 2. ' By refusing to bargain collectively with Amalga- mated Meat Cutters & Butcher Workmen of North America, Local Union 576, as the recognized bargaining representative of all its employees in the aforefound ap- propriate unit, Respondent has refused to bargain in good faith with said Union as such authorized bargaining representative in violation of Section 8(a)(1) and (5) of the Act. 3. By interfering with, restraining, and coercing its em- ployees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed to them in See Auburn Rubber Company, Inc, 156 NLRB 301 In fact these payments ceased on October 1, according to the stipula- tion of the parties, and thus 4 days prior to the actual formation of the In- dependent 304 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Section 7 of the Act, Respondent has violated Section 8(a)(1) of the Act. 4. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair labor practices affecting commerce within the meaning of Sec- tion 2(6) and (7) of the Act. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that unless , within 20 days from the date of the receipt of this Decision, the Respondent has notified the said Regional Director that it will comply with the foregoing Recommended Order, the Board issue an order requiring Respondent to take the aforesaid action. RECOMMENDED ORDER Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law and upon the entire record in this case, it is recommended that Respondent , Boyle's Famous Corned Beef Co., Kansas City, Missouri, its officers, agents, successors , and assigns, shall: 1. Cease and desist from: (a) Dominating or interfering with the formation or ad- ministration of Independent Meat Cutters Union, or any other labor organization, or contributing financial or other support thereto. (b) Refusing to bargain in good faith with Amalga- mated Meat Cutters & Butcher Workmen of North America, Local Union 576, as the authorized bargaining representative of all of Respondent's employees in the aforefound appropriate unit. 2. Take the following affirmative action which it is found will effectuate the policies of the Act: (a) Withdraw and withhold recognition from Inde- pendent Meat Cutters Union and completely disestablish said organization. (b) Upon request, bargain in good faith with Amalga- mated Meat Cutters & Butcher Workmen of North America, Local Union 576, as the recognized and authorized bargaining representative of all employees in the aforefound appropriate unit. (c) Post at its plant in Kansas City, Missouri, copies of the attached notice marked "Appendix A."14 Copies of said notice, to be furnished by the Regional Director for Region 17, after being duly signed by Respondent's representative , shall be posted by Respondent im- mediately 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 . Reasonable steps shall be taken by Respondent to insure that said notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by any other material. (d) Notify said Regional Director, in writing, within 20 days from the receipt of this Decision, what steps have been taken to comply herewith.'5 " In the event that this Recommended Order is adopted by the Board, the words "a Decision and Order" shall be substituted for the words "the Recommended Order of a Trial Examiner". in the notice. In the further event that the Board's Order is enforced by a decree of a United States Court of Appeals , the words "a Decree of the United States Court of Ap- peals Enforcing an Order" shall be substituted for the words "a Decision and Order." '" In the event that this Recommended Order is adopted by the Board, this provision shall be modified to read: "Notify the Regional Director for Region 17 , in writing, within 10 days from the date of this Order, what steps Respondent has taken to comply herewith." APPENDIX A NOTICE TO ALL EMPLOYEES Pursuant to the Recommended Order of a Trial Ex- aminer 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 em- ployees that: WE WITHDRAW any and all recognition given to Independent Meat Cutters Union and hereby dis- establish that organization. WE WILL, upon request, bargain collectively in good faith with Amalgamated Meat Cutters & Butcher Workmen of North America, Local Union 576, as the representative of all our employees in the following appropriate unit: All beef boners, pumper cry-o-vac operators, and unskilled workers employed by Boyle's Famous Corned Beef Co., at its Kansas City, Missouri plant excluding all other employees, guards and supervisors as defined in the Act. WE WILL NOT in any like or similar manner inter- fere with, restrain, or coerce our employees in the exercise of their rights to self-organization , to form labor organizations , to join or assist Amalgamated Meat Cutters & Butcher Workmen of North Amer- ica, Local Union 576, or any other labor organiza- tion, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing , or to engage in other con- certed activities for the purposes of collective bar- gaining or other mutual aid or protection, or to refrain from any and all such activities , except to the extent that such representative may negotiate an agreement making membership therein a condition of employment in accord with Section 8(a)(3) of the Act. BOYLE'S FAMOUS CORNED BEEF CO. (Employer) - Dated By (Representative) (Title) This notice must remain posted for 60, consecutive days from the date of posting and must not be altered, defaced, or covered by any other material. If employees have any question concerning this notice or compliance with its provisions, they may communicate directly with the Board's Regional Office, 610 Federal Building, 601 East 12th Street , Kansas City, Missouri 64106, Telephone FR 4-5181.