Inland Container Corporation And United Paper, Novelty & Toy Workers International Union, C. I. O., 952 (1943)

In the Matter of INLAND CONTAINER CORPORATION and UNITED PAPER,

NOVELTY & TOY WORKERS INTERNATIONAL UNION, C. I. O.

Case No. R-4811.--Decided February 23, 1943 Jurisdiction: paper board container manufacturing industry.

Investigation and Certification of Representatives: existence of question: refusal to recognize petitioner because of contract with another union; amended threeryear contract in effect for more than a year held to be no bar; election necessary.

Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining: all production and maintenance employees at Middletown plant, including firemen, watchmen, and engineers, but excluding supervisory and clerical employees and foremen; stipulation as to.

Mr. Kurt F. Pantzer, of Indianapolis, Ind., and Mr. Elliott D.

Levey, of Middletown, Ohio, for the Company.

Mr. Julius Holzberg, of Cincinnati, Ohio, for the C. I. O.

Mr. C. W. Elliott, of Middletown, Ohio, and Mr. Keith Wentz, of Cincinnati, Ohio, for the A. F. of L.

Mr. Robert Silagi, of counsel to the Board.

DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION STATEMENT OF THE CASE Upon a petition duly filed by the United Paper, Novelty & Toy Workers International Union, C. I. O., herein called the C. I. O., alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of Inland Container Corporation, Middletown, Ohio, herein called the Company, the National Labor Relations Board provided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice before Peter J. Ward, Trial Examiner. Said hearing was held at Middletown, Ohio, on January 28, 1943. The Company, the C. I. O., and International Brotherhood of Pulp, Sulphite and Paper Mill Workers,

Local 317, A. F. of L., herein called the A. F. of L., appeared, participated, and were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues.

During the hearing the Company made a motion to dismiss the petition, to which the Trial Examiner reserved ruling. The motion 952 is hereby denied. The Trial Examiner sustained an objection to the introduction by the C. I. O. of evidence relating to the A. F. of L.'s majority status at the time of the execution of its contract with the Company. The C. I. O. thereupon made several offers of proof to the effect that at no time since December 1941, did the A. F. of L.

represent a majority of employees in the Middletown plant. The A. F. of L. and the Company moved to strike the offers of proof from the record and the Trial Examiner reserved ruling on the motion for the Board. The motions to strike are hereby denied. However, since for other reasons we hold in Section III, below, that the contract is not a bar to a determination of representatives, the ruling of the Trial Examiner in excluding the above-mentioned evidence was not prejudicial. The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.

On February 5, 1943, the A. F. of L. filed a brief which the Board has considered.

Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following:

FINDINGS OF FACT I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY Inland Container Corporation is an Indiana corporation, licensed to do business in the State of Ohio. In addition to its Middletown,

Ohio, plant, which alone is involved in this proceeding, the company operates plants at Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Indianapolis and Evansville, Indiana. The Company is engaged in the manufacture, sale, and distribution of paper board containers. The principal raw materials used by the Company are sulphate, craft, liner board, chestnut corrugating materials, silicate, and starch. During 1942, the Company purchased raw materials valued in excess of $1,000,000, and during that same year sold finished products valued in excess of $1,000,000. About 90 percent of these raw materials were purchased outside the States in which the four plants are located and shipped in interstate...