021 NLRB 125
Consolidated Paper Co.
In the Matter of CONSOLIDATED PAPER COMPANY and
CONSOLIDATED
PAPER WORKERS' LOCAL INDUSTRIAL UNION, #902, AFFILIATED WITH
THE CONGRESS OF INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATIONS
Case No. R-1701.-Decided March 5, 1940
Paper Manufacturing Industry-Investigation of Representatives : controversy
concerning representation of employees : Company refuses to recognize either
of rival unions until certified by the Board-Unit Appropriate for Collective
Bargaining : all employees at Aurora , Illinois, plant, except those on Company's
pay roll under the headings, "Supervision," "Office," "Inspectors," and "Truck
Drivers" ; Company's contention for a five-plant unit not sustained .Election
Ordered
Mr. Charles F. McErlean, for the Board.
Mr. John Meloaat, of Monroe, Mich., and Mr. Altor G. Bale, of
Aurora, Ill., for the Company.
Mr. John J. Brownlee, of Chicago, Ill., and Mr. Albert Krzywonos,
of Joliet, Ill., for the Union.
Mr. John Chivari, of Aurora, Ill., for the Independent.
Mrs. Augusta Spaulding, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On October 11, 1939, Consolidated Paper Workers' Local Industrial
Union, #902, Affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organiza-
tions, herein called the Union, filed with the Regional Director for
the Thirteenth Region (Chicago, Illinois) a petition, and on January
16, 1940, an amended petition, alleging that a question affecting com-
merce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of Con-
solidated Paper Company, Aurora, Illinois, and Monroe, Michigan,
herein called the Company, and requesting an investigation and cer-
tification of representatives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act.
On January
13, 1940, the National Labor Relations Board, herein called the
Board, acting pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the Act and Article III,
Section 3, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regula-
tions-Series 2, ordered an investigation and authorized the Regional
21 N. L. R. B., No. 20.
125
126
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Director to conduct it and to provide for an appropriate hearing
upon due notice.
On January 16, 1940, the Regional Director issued a notice of
hearing, copies of which were duly served upon the Company, the
Union, and Independent Paper Workers' Organization, herein called
the Independent, an unaffiliated labor organization claiming to rep-
resent employees directly affected by the investigation.
Pursuant to
the notice, a hearing was held on January 25, 1940, at Aurora, Illi-
nois, before Henry W. Schmidt, the Trial Examiner duly designated
by the Board.
The Board and the Independent were represented by
counsel, the Union by its officials, and the Company by its officials.
All parties participated in the hearing.
Full opportunity to be
heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evi-
dence bearing on the issues was afforded all parties.
At the com-
mencement of the hearing the Company requested that the Board
take judicial notice of the entire record in Case No. R-1686, a rep-
resentation proceeding concerning other plants of the Company in
Michigan, in which hearing had been held in Detroit, Michigan, on
January 18, 1940.1
No objections were made, it being stated that
this request did not include incorporation of the record in Case No.
R-1686 into the record in the present proceeding.
At the hearing
the Union moved to amend its petition dated January 16, 1940, in
respect to the description of the appropriate bargaining unit.
The
Trial Examiner did not rule on this-motion.
The motion is hereby
granted.
During the course of the hearing the Trial Examiner made
several rulings on the admission of evidence.
The Board has re-
viewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner and finds that no prejudi-
cial errors were committed.
The rulings are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board make the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Consolidated Paper Company is a Michigan corporation, having its
principal office and place of business in Monroe, Michigan. The
Company is engaged in the manufacture of paperboard products,
such as bookbinding board, corrugated cases, folding paper boxes,
and folding boxboard.
The Company has five plants. Three plants
are situated in Monroe, Michigan, within the radius of a mile : North
Division Plant with 750 employees, South Division Plant with 723
employees, and Plant No. 1 with 122 employees.
At River Rouge,
Michigan, 31 miles from Monroe, is Plant No. 10, with 171 employees ;
i See Matter of Consolidated Paper Company and Local Industrial Union,
Locals
1001
and 1000 (C. 1. O.), 21 N. L. R. B. 116, decided this day.
CONSOLIDATED PAPER COMPANY
127
and at Aurora, Illinois, 300 miles from Monroe, Michigan, is Plant
No. 2, with 149 employees. In its petition the Union claims to repre-
sent the employees at the Aurora plant.
The principal product of the Company at its Aurora plant is bind-
ing-board used in the book industry.
For the year ending June 30,
1939, the Company used 22,542 tons of raw materials, consisting of
waste paper, carbon black, alum, and coal, at the Aurora plant.
Of
this tonnage 76 tons were shipped to the Aurora plant from points
outside Illinois.
During the same period the Company shipped 7,466
tons of binding-boards and allied products from the Aurora plant,
2,814 tons of which were sent to points outside Illinois, amounting to
38 per cent of the total products.
The Company maintains sales offices at New York City; Chicago,
Illinois;
Buffalo, New York; Kansas City, Missouri; Cleveland,
Ohio;
Boston,
Massachusetts;
Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania;
Detroit,
Michigan ; and Toledo, Ohio.
H. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
. The Consolidated Paper Workers' Local Industrial Union, # 902, is
a labor organization affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Or-
ganizations.
It admits to membership employees of the Company
at the Aurora plant.
Independent Paper Workers' Organization is an unaffiliated labor
organization.
It admits to membership employees at the Aurora
plant.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
About September 29, 1939, the Union requested the Company to
bargain with it as the exclusive bargaining representative of the pro-
duction and maintenance employees at the Aurora plant.
The In-
dependent also requested the Company to bargain with it as the
representative of the employees at the Aurora plant.
Both claimed
to represent a majority of employees at that plant.
The Company
takes the position that it will recognize the bargaining representatives
certified by the Board.
We find that a question has arisen concerning the representation of
employees of the Company.
IV.
THE EFFECT OF THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
UPON COMMERCE
We find that the question concerning representation which has
arisen in connection with the operations of the Company, described
in Section I above, has a close, intimate, and substantial relation to
128
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
trade, traffic, and commerce among the several States, and tends to
lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce and the
free flow of commerce.
V. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Union and the Independent stipulated that a unit appropriate
for collective bargaining consists of all employees of the Company at
the Aurora plant except those listed on the Company's pay roll under
the headings, "Supervision," "Office," "Inspectors," and "Truck
Drivers."
The Company does not disagree as to the description of
employees in the above stipulation, but contends that such employees
at all its five plants constitute a single bargaining unit.
In support of a unit limited to the employees of the Aurora plant
it appears that such plant is 300 miles from the nearest Michigan
plant of the Company.
The distance gives no opportunity for in-
termingling with employees of other plants.
The Aurora plant com-
pletes its own product and is the only plant that produces binder-
board.
It receives its raw materials directly from the sellers and
ships its finished products from the plant directly to the purchasers or
the consumers.
It could function independently as an entirely sep-
arate plant if a purchasing and bookkeeping department were
installed.
In support of the Company's contention it appears that all plants
are under one general management.
A group-insurance policy covers
the employees at all the plants.
The pay rolls, billing and sales,
general supervision, and the majority of the purchasing for all the
plants is handled at Monroe, Michigan.
The custom of transferring
men during slack seasons from the smaller Michigan plants to the
larger Michigan plants has been developed under a single labor
policy, and the Company questions the desirability of the continu-
ance of that practice if only the smaller plants are unionized.
How-
ever, there is no transfer of employees from the Aurora plant to the
Michigan plants, and transfers from the latter plants to the Aurora
plant are rare.
Although the paper products of the several plants
differ, they are capable of making the same product. It appears that
comparable conditions of labor and wages and hours prevail in the
several plants.
Only the three small plants of the Company are organized.
The
two large plants in Monroe, at which most of the Company's em-
ployees work, are unorganized.
The employees at the two small
Michigan plants are organized by another C. I. O. affiliate.2
Giving
due weight to the Company's suggestions, we see no reason to deny to
2 See Matter of Consolidated Paper Company and Local Industrial Union, Locals 1001
and 1006 (C. 1 0 ), decided this day, 21 N L R. B 116
CONSOLIDATED PAPER COMPANY
129
employees of this small plant at Aurora the right to bargain collec-
tively through representatives of their own choosing, although under
other circumstances a unit comprising all five plants might not be
deemed inappropriate.
We find that all employees of the Company at the Aurora plant
except those listed on the Company's pay roll under the headings,
"Supervision," "Office," "Inspectors," and "Truck Drivers," constitute`
a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining and that
said unit will insure to employees of the Company at the Aurora
plant the full benefits of their right to self-organization and to collec-
tive bargaining and otherwise effectuate the policies of the Act.
VI. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
The Union and Independent stipulated that the question concerning
representation should be resolved by an election by secret ballot.
We
find that an election by secret ballot is necessary to resolve the ques-
tion concerning representation and shall direct the holding of such an
election.
The Union and Independent stipulated that those eligible
to vote in the election should be the employees in the appropriate unit
whose names appear on Board Exhibits 8-A, 8-B, 8-C, and 8-D, the
Company's pay roll of January 14, 1940, for the Aurora plant.
We
will direct that those eligible to vote in the elections shall be the em-
ployees described in the above stipulation, including employees who
have been hired on a permanent basis between January 25, 1940, the
date of the hearing, and the date of this Direction and excluding em-
ployees who since January 25, 1940, have quit or been discharged
for cause.
Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and upon the entire
record in the case, the Board makes the following:
CONCLUSIONS OP LAW
1. A question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the repre-
sentation of employees of Consolidated Paper Company, within the
meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the National
Labor Relations Act.
2. All employees of the Company at the Aurora plant except those
listed on the Company's pay roll under the headings, "Supervision,"
"Office," "Inspectors," and "Truck Drivers," constitute a unit appro-
priate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National
Labor Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Re-
130
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
lations Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 8, of National La-
bor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended,
it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation authorized by the Board
to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining
,with Consolidated Paper Company, Monroe, Michigan, and Aurora,
Illinois, an election by secret ballot shall be conducted as early as
possible, but not later than thirty (30) days from the date of this
Direction of Election, under the direction and supervision of the
Regional Director for the Thirteenth Region, acting in this matter
as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to
Article III, Section 9, of said Rules and Regulations, among all em-
ployees of Consolidated Paper Company at its Aurora plant whose
names appear on Board Exhibits 8-A, 8-B, 8-C, and 8-D, the Com-
pany's pay roll of January 14, 1940, for the Aurora plant, including
employees who have been hired on a permanent basis between Janu-
ary 25, 1940, the date of the hearing, and the date of this Direction,
but excluding those whose names appear under the headings, "Super-
vision," "Office," "Inspectors," and "Truck Drivers," and those who
since January 25, 1940, have quit or been discharged for cause, to
determine whether said employees desire to be represented by Con-
solidated Paper Workers' Local Industrial Union, #902, Affiliated
with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, or by Independent
Paper Workers' Organization, for the purposes of collective bargain-
ing, or by neither.