Lennox Furnace Co., Inc. And Syracuse Federation Of Labor, 962 (1940)

In the Matter of LENNOX FURNACE CO., INC. and SYRACUSE FEDERATION OF LABOR Cases Nos. C-1267 and R-1305.-Decided February 28, 1940 Furnace and Air Conditioning Equipment Manufacturing Industry-Interference, Restraint, and Coercion: engendering fear of loss of employment for union activity; discrediting union and union leaders; expression of joy at results of poll conducted in plant necessitating choice of union or companyCompany-Dominated Union: domination and interference with formation and administration; advocacy of unaffiliated labor organization by respondent; outspoken hostility to 'outside' union held to have resulted in organization of company-dominated union; ordered disestablished-Discrimination: charges of, dismissed-Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining: production and maintenance employees, including the installers in the city department, but excluding executives, other supervisory employees, clerical employees, and teamstersRepresentatives: proof of choice: applications for union membership-Colleotive Bargaining: refusal to bargain in good faith; refusal at outset of negotiations to embody any agreement in a signed contract; affirmative order to bargain with the union and to embody understandings in written agreement upon request-Investigation of Representatives: petition for, dismissed, in view of order to bargain.

Mr. Peter J. Crotty, for the Board.

Fraser Brothers, by Mr. Henry S. Fraser, of Syracuse, N. Y., for the respondent.

Mr. Francis L. McElroy, of Syracuse, N. Y., for the Union.

Mr. Maurice W. Sharp, of Syracuse, N. Y., for the Association.

Mr. Louis Cokin, of counsel to the Board.

DECISION AND ORDER STATEMENT OF THE CASE On August 17 and September 10, 1938, and January 3 and February 14, 1939, Syracuse Federation of Labor, on behalf of Sheet Metal Workers International Association, Local 58, herein called the Union, filed with the Regional Director for the Third Region (Buffalo, New York) charges and amended charges that Lennox Furnace Co., Inc., Syracuse, New York, herein called the respondent, 962 963 had engaged in and was engaging in unfair labor practices affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 8 (1), (2), (3), and (5) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act.

On December 30, 1938, the Union filed a petition alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of the respondent and requesting an investigation and certification of representatives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the Act.

On January 20, 1939, the Board, acting pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the Act and Article III, Section 3, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations--Series 1, as amended, directed that an investigation be conducted upon the petition and that an appropriate hearing be held upon due notice. On the same day, the Board, acting pursuant to Article II, Section 37 (b), and Article III, Section 10 (c) (2), of said Rules and Regulations, ordered a consolidation of the representation and unfair labor practice cases.

Upon the charges and amended charges, the Board, by the Regional Director for the Third Region, issued its complaint and amended complaint dated February 6 and 15, 1939, respectively, against the respondent, alleging that it had engaged and was engaging in unfair labor practices affecting commerce, within the meaning of Section 8 (1), (2), (3), and (5) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. Copies of the complaint, the amended complaint, the petition, the Board's order of consolidation and direction of investigation and hearing, and notices of hearing on the complaint, the amended complaint, and the petition, were duly served upon the respondent, upon the Union, and upon Lennox Employees Association, herein called the Association.

The complaint, as amended, alleged in substance: (1) that the respondent fostered, encouraged, sponsored, and dominated the Association, interfered with its administration, and contributed support to it; (2) that the respondent on or about July 12, 1938, and at all times thereafter, refused and has refused to bargain collectively with the Union as the exclusive representative of employees of the respondent in a unit appropriate for collective bargaining, although the Union was on or about July 12, 1938, and at all times thereafter has been, the duly designated representative of a majority of the employees in such unit; (3) that on February 8, 1939, the respondent terminated the employment of Charles Breh and Robert Guernsey, employees of the respondent, and refused to reinstate or reemploy them because they joined and assisted the Union; and (4) that by these acts, by causing or permitting anti-union speeches on the respondent's property and time, by threats to close down the plant, and other acts, the respondent interfered with, restrained, and coerced its employees in the exercise of rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act.

On February 15, 1939, the Association filed a motion to intervene in the proceedings with the Regional Director. On February 16, 1939, the Regional Director granted the motion but limited the intervention to matters directly affecting the Association.

On February 18, 1939, and at the hearing, respectively, the respondent filed an answer and an amended answer, in which it denied that its manufacturing activities are interstate in nature, denied the allegations of unfair labor practices, and alleged affirmatively that it refused to bargain with the Union at all times subsequent to November 29, 1938, for the reason that it would have been illegal to do so.

The respondent's answer, as amended, also contained affirmative allegations with respect to the two employees allegedly discharged for union activities.

Pursuant to notice, a hearing was held on February 20, 21, 23, 24, 27, 28, and March 1, 1939, at Syracuse, New York, before Madison Hill, the Trial Examiner duly designated by the Board. The Board, the respondent, the Union, and the Association were represented by counsel and participated in the hearing. Full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues was afforded all parties. The Association moved to intervene at the commencement of the hearing. The motion was granted. At the commencement of the hearing, at the close of the Board's case, and at the close of the hearing, counsel for the respondent moved to dismiss the complaint, as amended, on various grounds. The motions were denied. At the close of the hearing, counsel for the Board moved to conform the pleadings to the proof. The motion was granted. During the course of the hearing the Trial Examiner made several rulings on other motions and on objections to the admission of evidence. The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner and finds that no prejudicial errors were committed. The rulings are hereby affirmed.

On March 17, 1939, the respondent filed a brief. On April 26, 1939 the Trial Examiner issued his Intermediate Report, copies of which were duly served upon all parties, finding that the respondent had engaged in and was engaging in the unfair labor practices alleged in the amended complaint. On June 20 and 21, 1939, respectively, the respondent and the Association filed exceptions to the Intermediate Report. On May 8, 1939, the respondent requested oral argument before the Board. On July 1, 1939, the respondent filed a brief.

Pursuant to notice duly served upon the respondent, upon the Union, and upon the Association, a hearing for the purpose of oral 965 argument was held before the Board on October 31, 1939, in Washington, D. C. The respondent appeared by counsel and participated in the argument. The Union and the Association did not appear.

The Board has considered the exceptions of the respondent and the Association and the briefs of the respondent, and save as the exceptions are consistent with the findings, conclusions, and order set forth below, finds them to be without merit.

Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following FINDINGS OF FACT I. THE BUSINESS OF THE RESPONDENT The respondent, an Iowa corporation, owns and operates plants at Marshalltown, Iowa, and Syracuse, New York, where it is engaged in the business of manufacturing and distributing steel furnaces, airconditioning equipment, blowers, and oil burners. This proceeding is concerned only with the plant at Syracuse.

In 1934 the Syracuse plant expended $460,000 for the purchase of raw materials, 90 per cent of which were shipped to it from points outside the State of New York. The respondent does an annual business amounting to approximately $1,000,000 at its Syracuse plant, 84 per cent of which is derived from shipments made to points outside the State of New York. The respondent employs approximately 110 employees at its Syracuse plant.

  1. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED Sheet Metal Workers International Association, Local 58, is a labor organization affiliated with the American Federation of Labor. It admits to membership all employees of the respondent engaged in handling 10 gauge or lighter steel, excluding office workers, foremen, other supervisory employees and watchmen.

    Lennox Employees' Association is an unaffiliated labor organization admitting to membership all production and maintenance employees of the respondent, including watchmen, but excluding department heads, foremen, other supervisory employees, and office and clerical employees.

  2. THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES A. Sequence of events On July 12, 1938, the Union held a meeting attended by employees of the respondent. On July 13 or 14, 1938, one Fredericks and John Speirs, representatives of the Union, called upon Ralph E. Martin, factory manager, and stated that the Union had been designated by a majority of the respondent's employees and requested exclusive recognition for the production and maintenance employees. The...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT