Louis Shoe Co., Inc.

In the Matter of Louis SHOE CO., INC. and UNITED SHOE WORKERS OF AMERICA, AFFILIATED WITH THE CONGRESS OF INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZA- TIONS Case No. C-1079.-Decided November 30, 1939 Shoe Maaaufactering Industry-Settlement : stipulation providing for com- pliance with the Act, including withdrawal of recognition from and disestab- lishment of company-dominated union, disaflirmance of collective agreement with company-dominated union, and back pay for one employee discriminatorily discharged-Order: entered in stipulation. Mr. Benjamin E. Gordon, for the Board. Mr. George Karelita, of Haverhill, Mass., for the respondent. Mr. Clyde R. Mitchell, of Lynn, Mass., for the Union. Mr. Martin F. Connelly, of Amesbury, Mass., for the Association. M. Roman Beck, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND ORDER STATEMENT OF THE CASE Upon charges, and amended and supplemental charges, 'duly filed by United Shoo Workers of America, herein called the Union, the National Labor Relations Board, herein called the Board, by its Regional Director for the First Region (Boston, Massachusetts), issued its complaint dated January 6, 1939, against Louis Shoe Co., Inc., Amesbury, Massachusetts, herein called the respondent, alleging that the respondent had engaged in and was engaging in. unfair labor practices affecting commerce, within the meaning of Section 8 (1), (2), and (3) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act. Copies of the complaint, accompanied by a notice of hearing, were duly served upon the respondent, upon the Union, and upon Amesbury Shoe Workers Independent Association, Inc., herein called the Association, a labor organization alleged to be dominated and supported by the respondent. The complaint alleged, in substance (a) that on or about November 1, 1936, and at various times thereafter, the respondent by its officers, 17 N. L. R. B., No. 106. 1065 1066 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD agents, and employees formed the Association, dominated and inter- fered with its administration, and contributed financial and other support to the Association; (b) that on or about March 1, 1938, the respondent entered into an agreement with the Association as the exclusive bargaining representative of the respondent's employees at its plant in Amesbury, Massachusetts; (c) that the respondent termi- nated the employment of four persons 1 and refused to reinstate them to their employment, for the reason that they were members of and active in behalf of the Union, and engaged in concerted activities with other employees for their mutual aid and protection; (d) that the respondent interfered with, restrained, and coerced its employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act by the foregoing acts, and by spying upon union meetings, and causing them to be placed under surveillance, by attempting to discourage its em- ployees from engaging in union organization, and by other acts. On January 11, 1939, the respondent filed an answer to the complaint in which it admitted the Board's jurisdiction of the subject matter, but denied that it had engaged in the alleged unfair labor practices. Pursuant to notice a hearing was held at Amesbury, Massachusetts, from February 27 to March 10, 1939, before Mapes Davidson, the Trial Examiner duly designated by the Board. At the beginning of the hearing the Trial Examiner granted a written motion of the Association to intervene. The Board, the respondent, and the Asso- ciation were represented by counsel; the Union by its representative, and.all_participated in the hearing. All parties were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing upon the issues. The Trial Exam- iner made various rulings upon motions and on objections to the admission of evidence. In view of the stipulation and agreement of the parties, hereinafter mentioned, we need not review these rulings. On May 8, 1939, the Trial Examiner filed his Intermediate Report, copies of 'which were duly served upon the respondent, upon the Union, and upon the Association, in which he found that the re- spondent had engaged in unfair labor practices affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 8 (1), (2), and (3) and Section 2 (6) and. (7) of the Act, and recommended that the respondent cease and desist from its unfair labor practices and that it take certainraffirma- t.ive action to remedy the situation brought about by the unfair labor practices, including the reinstatement with back pay of the four employees alleged to have been discriminatorily discharged, the with- drawal by the respondent of recognition from the Association, and the disaffirmance by the respondent of a collective agreement with 1 The names of these employees are Louis Rollins, Bachedoor Tatosian, Steve Yurkavich, and Victor Biladeau. LOUIS SHOE COMPANY, INC. 1067 the Association as the bargaining representative of the respondent's employees. On May 18, 1939, the respondent, and on May 19, 1939, the Association,- filed exceptions to the Intermediate Report- Thereafter, Thereafter, the respondent, the Association, and counsel for the Board entered into a stipulation and agreement in settlement of case subject to and effective immediately upon approval of the Board. The stipulation and agreement was approved by the Union. It provided as follows : Charges having been filed with A. Howard Myers, Regional Director of the National Labor Relations Board for the First Region by the United Shoe Workers of America, Affiliated with the C. I. O. on. August 19, 1938 and amended on October 17, 1938, alleging that the Respondent, Louis Shoe Co. Inc. had violated Section 8 (1), (2) and (3) of the National Labor Rela- tions Act, 49 Stat. 449; a complaint having been issued and served on January 6, 1939; a hearing having been held before a duly authorized agent of the National Labor Relations Board at Amesbury, Massachusetts from February 27 to March 10, 1939; an Intermediate Report having been issued and served on May 6, 1939; and it being the intention of the parties to dispose of the matters which have arisen, It is hereby stipulated and agreed by and between Louis Shoe Company, Inc. by its Attorney and Jacob Blum, Attorney, National Labor Relations Board as follows : I. Louis Shoe Company, Inc. is incorporated in the Common- wealth of Massachusetts and is engaged in the manufacture and distribution of shoes. It has its principal office and plant in the City of Amesbury, Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Fifty per cent (50%) of the raw materials used by the Respondent in the manufacture of its shoes is shipped to the factory at Amesbury, Massachusetts from points outside of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The sales of the Respondent in 1938 and early in 1939 amounted to about $770,000. During the same period the Respondent manufactured 612,000 pairs of shoes. About ninety-five per cent (950% of the Respondent's finished product is shipped from the factory at Amesbury to various designations outside of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Louis Shoe Company,-Inc. admits that it is engaged in inter- state commerce within the meaning of Section 2 (6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449. . II. The Respondent, Louis Shoe Company, Inc. waives all further or other procedure provided by the National Labor Relations Act and the Rules and Regulations of the National 1068 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Labor Relations Board, including the making of Findings .of Fact and Conclusion of Law. III. Upon the basis of the facts stipulated in Paragraph I above, the Pleadings heretofore filed, the Record, the Inter- mediate Report, this Stipulation and by agreement of the parties hereto, the National Labor Relations Board may enter its Order in the following form in the above-entitled case : ORDER On the basis of this Stipulation and pursuant to Section 10 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, the National Labor Rela- tions Board hereby orders that Louis Shoe Company, Inc., its officers, agents, successors and assigns shall: 1. Cease and desist : (a) from in any manner interfering with, restraining or coerc- ing its employees in the exercise of their rights to self 2organiza- tion, to form, join or assist labor organizations, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing and to engage in concerted activities for. the purposes of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection as guaranteed in Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act; (b) from discouraging membership in the United Shoe Work- ers of America, Affiliated with the C. I. O. by discharging or refusing to reinstate any of its employees or in any other manner discriminating in regard to their hire or tenure of employment or any term or condition of their employment. (c) from dominating or interfering with the administration of the Amesbury Shoe Workers Independent Association, Inc., its successors or assigns, or any labor organization, and from con- tributing financial or other support, to said Amesbury Shoe Workers Independent Association, Inc., or any other labor or- ganization. 2. Take the following affirmative action which the Board finds will effectuate the policies of the Act: (a) make whole Louis Rollins for any loss of pay he may have suffered by reason of the Respondent's discrimination in regard to his hire or tenure of employment by payment to him of the sum of Twenty-five Dollars ($25.00). (b) withdraw all recognition from the Amesbury Shoe Work- ers Independent Association, Inc., its successors or assigns, as representative of its employees for the purpose of dealing with the Respondent concerning grievances, labor disputes, wages, rates of pay, hours of employment and other conditions of em- LOUIS SHOE COMPANY, INC. 1069 ployment and completely disestablish the Amesbury Shoe Work= ers Independent Association, Inc. and its successors or assigns, as such representative; (c) post immediately in conspicuous places in its factory at Amesbury, Massachusetts and maintain for a period of at least sixty (60) consecutive days, notice to its employees stating: 1. that the Respondent will cease and desist in the matter aforesaid ; 2. that the Respondent has withdrawn all recognition from the Amesbury Shoe Workers Independent Association, Inc. its suc- cessors or assigns, as the representative of the Respondent's em- ployees for the purpose of dealing with the Respondent concern- ing grievances, labor disputes, wages, rates of pay, hours of employment or other conditions of employment and that said association is completely disestablished as said representative and 3. that the contract between the Respondent and the Amesbury Shoo Workers Independent Association, Inc., its successors or assigns, is null and void and of no legal effect whatsoever and (d) notify the Regional Director for the First Region in writing within ten (10) days of the date of this Order what steps Respondent has taken to comply herewith. And it is hereby ordered that the cases of all persons men- tioned in the above charge 2 and not herein reinstated or made whole for loss of pay shall be dismissed. IV. It is the understanding of the parties that in carrying out Section 2 (b) of the above Order that the provisions of that section of the said Order shall not be effective until ten (10) days after the Decree of the Circuit Court of Appeals, herein- after provided for, has been signed by said Circuit Court of Appeals. V. The Respondent, Louis Shoe Company, Inc. hereby con- sents to the entry by the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Appropriate Circuit, upon application by the Board, of a Consent Decree enforcing an Order of the Board in the form hereinabove set forth and hereby waives further notice of the application for said Decree. VI. The entire agreement is contained within the terms of this Stipulation and there is no verbal agreement of any kind which varies, alters or adds to the Stipulation. VII. It is understood and agreed that this Stipulation is sub- ject to the approval of the National Labor Relations Board and shall become effective, immediately upon granting such approval. z We construe the word "charge" to refer to the charges upon which the complaint issued. 1070 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD On November 16, 1939, the Board issued its Order approving the above stipulation and agreement and making it a part of the record herein. Upon the basis of the above stipulation and agreement, and upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following : FINDINGS Or FACT I. THE BUSINESS OF THE RESPONDENT The respondent, Louis Shoe Co., Inc., a Massachusetts corpora- tion, having its principal office and manufacturing plant in Ames- bury, Massachusetts, is engaged in the manufacture and distribution of shoes. In the manufacture of its shoes the respondent causes approximately 50 per cent of the materials which it uses, consisting of leather, shanks, heels, counters, box toes, lacings, eyelets, cement, and various other materials, to be purchased in States of the United -States other thaii the Commonwealth of Massachusetts,, and..trans- ported in interstate commerce to the respondent's plant at Amesbury from States of the United States other than Massachusetts. The respondent causes approximately 95 per cent of the shoes which it manufactures to be transported in interstate commerce from its Amesbury plant to destinations outside the Commonwealth of Mas- sachusetts. During 1938 and .the early part of 1939 the sales of the respondent's finished products amounted to approximately $770,000. During that period it manufactured approximately 612,000 pairs of shoes. The respondent admits that it is engaged in interstate com- merce, within the meaning of Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. We find that the activities of the respondent set forth above consti- tute a continuous flow of trade, traffic, and commerce among the several States. H. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED United Shoe Workers of America, chartered by the Congress of Industrial Organizations, a labor organization, and Amesbury Shoe Workers Independent Association, Inc., are labor organizations, with- in the meaning of Section 2 (5) of the Act. ORDER Upon the basis of the above findings of fact, the stipulation and agreement, and the entire record in the case, and pursuant to Section 10 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, the National Labor Rela- tions Board hereby orders that the respondent, Louis Shoe Co., Inc., Amesbury, Massachusetts, and its officers, agents, successors, and assigns shall : LOUIS SHOE COMPANY, INC. 107 1 1. Cease >;and desist : (a) From in any manner interfering with, restraining , or coercing its employees in the exercise of their rights to self -organization, to form, join , or assist labor organizations ,- to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing and to engage in con- certed activities for the purposes of collective bargaining . or other mutual aid or protection as guaranteed in Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act ; (b) From discouraging membership in United Shoe Workers of America;'affiliated with the Congress 'of Industrial- Organizations, by discharging or refusing to reinstate any of its employees or in any other manner discriminating in regard to their hire or tenure of em- ployment or any term or condition of their employment; (c) From dominating or interfering with the administration of Amesbury Shoe Workers Independent Association , Inc., its succes- sors or assigns, or any other labor organization of its employees, and from contributing financial or other support to said Amesbury'Shoe` Workers Independent Association , Inc., or any other labor organiza- tion. 2. Take the following affirmative action, which the Board finds will effectuate the policies of the Act : (a) Make whole Louis Rollins for any Joss of pay he may have suf- fered by reason of the respondent's discrimination in regard to his hire or tenure of employment by payment to him of the sum of twenty-five dollars; (b) Withdraw all recognition from Amesbury'Shoe Workers Inde- pendent,,alAssociation, -Inc.,•-its successors -or assigns; as representative of its employees for the purpose of dealing with the respondent con- cerning grievances, labor disputes, wages, rates of pay, hours of employment, and other conditions of employment and completely dis- establish Amesbury Shoe Workers Independent Association, Inc., and its successors or assigns, as such representative; . (c) Post immediately in conspicuous places in its plant at Ames- bury, Massachusetts, and maintain for a period of at least sixty (60) consecutive days, notices to its employees stating ( 1) that the re- spondent will cease and desist in the manner aforesaid ; (2) that the respondent has withdrawn all recognition from Amesbury Shoe Workers Independent Association, Inc., its successors or assigns, as the- representative of the respondent's employees for the purpose of dealing with the respondent concerning grievances, labor disputes, wages, rates of pay, hours of employment, or other conditions of employment, and that said Association is completely disestablished as said representative; and (3 ) that the contract between the respondent 1072 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD and Amesbury Shoe Workers Independent Association, Inc., its suc- cessors or. assigns, is null and void and of no legal effect :whatsoever; (d) Notify the Regional Director for the First Region in writing within ten (10) days from the date of this Order what steps the respondent has taken to comply herewith. AND IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the complaint, in so far as it al- leges that the respondent discriminatorily terminated the employment of Kachedoor Tatosian, Steve Yurkavich, and Victor Biladeau, be, and the same hereby is, dismissed.