Extract
Alma Piston Co., 339 (1962)
tives had a part in the dissolution vote of the Association. On the contrary, the CIO and AFL representatives left before the business part of the meeting. Moreover, this dissolution vote was later confirmed by unanimous vote of all 47 members present at a special meeting called for such purpose on December 13, 1953, at which the CIO and AFL representatives were not present.
Since that time, the Association has had no officers or funds. No dues have been collected or grievances processed, and all 56 former Association members have now joined the Petitioner. In view of the foregoing, we conclude that the Association is defunct. Under all these circumstances, we find that the existing contract is not a bar to, the petition. 1The Employer contends that if the Board directs an election at this time such election be directed solely for the purpose of allowing the employees in the unit to determine whether they desire to select the Petitioner as their exclusive bargaining representative for the purpose of administering the existing contract. We do not find it necessary to pass upon this issue in a representation proceeding for the reasons set forth in Boston Machine Works Company. 24. The following employees of the Employer constitute a unit appropriate for purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of section 9 (b) of the Act : All warehouse employees and chauffeurs at the Employer's Boston, Massachusetts, plant, excluding office and clerical employees, sales and shipping office employees, sales trainees, administrative employees, professional employees, guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act. 3 [Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.] 1 Universal Utilities, The, 108 NLRB 58; C d D Batteries, Inc, 107 NLRB 1405 ; Ben7amtis Asr Rifle Company, 107 NLRB 1042 89 NLRB 59 While agreeing with the majority decision on this aspect of the case,Chairman Farmer deems the issue presented here substantially different from that of the Boston Machine case, and therefore finds it unnecessary now to express any opinion as to.the rule of that decision Members Rodgers and Beeson believe that, under the circumstances of this case, if the Petitioner is certified as a result of the election directed herein, it should be deemed to assume the rights and obligations conferred by the existing contract.3 The unit is described in accord with the agreement of the parties.ALMA PIs'roN COMPANY and INTERNATIONAL UNION, UNITED AIITOMOBILE, AIRCRAFT AND AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA, (UAW-CIO). Cases Nos. 7-CA-727, 7-CA-758, and 7-CA-763October 18, 195/ Decision and Order On April 9,1954, Trial Examiner Lee J. Best issued his Intermediate Report in the above-entitled proceeding, finding that the Respondent had engaged in and was engaging in certain unfair labor practices in 110 NLRB No. 51.violation of Section 8 (a) (1) of the Act, and recommending that it cease and desist therefrom and take certain affirmative action, as set forth in a copy of the Intermediate Report attached hereto. The Trial Examiner also found that the Respondent had not engaged in certain other alleged unfair labor practices and recommended the dismissal of these allegations of the complaint. Thereafter, the Respondent and the Union filed exceptions and briefs in support of the exceptions.The Respondent's request for oral argument is denied as the record and the excep...See the full content of this document
Sponsored links
