Sol Samuel D/b/a National Bag Company' And St. Louis Joint Board, Textile Woriers Union Of America, C. I. O., 106 (1944)

In the Matter of SOL SAMUEL D/B/A NATIONAL BAG COMPANY' and ST. Louis JOINT BOARD, TEXTILE WORiERs UNION OF AMERICA,

3. I. O.

Case No. 14-R-996.-Decided September 6, 1944 Mr. Keith TV. Blinn and Miss Helen F. Humphrey, for the Board.

Messrs. Arthur G. McDowell and Frank J. Swoantner, of St. Louis,

Mo., for the Union.

Mr. Sam A. Kessler, of St. Louis, Mo., for Ben Samuels.

Mr. Herbert C. Kane, of counsel to the Board.

DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION STATEMENT OF THE CASE Upon a petition duly filed by St. Louis Joint Board, Textile Workers Union of America, C. I. 0., herein called the Union, alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of Sol Samuel d/b/a National Bag Company, St. Louis,

Missouri, herein called the Company, the National Labor Relations Board provided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice before Joseph L. Hektoen, Trial Examiner. Said hearing was held at St.

Louis, Missouri, on August 2, 1944. The Company and the Union appeared and participated.' All parties were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues. The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. All parties were afforded an opportunity to file briefs with the Board.

' The caption of the case was changed on motion at the hearing to the above. The case was originally captioned: National Bag Company.

P Ben Samuels, the brother of Sol Samuel, the sole owner of the Company, appeared specially to move for a continuance on the ground that the Company had not been properly served, since his brother was absent, due to ill health, at the time the Company received notice of the instant proceeding. This notice was served by registered mail pursuant to the Rules and Regulations of the Board. However, it appeared that Ben Samuels was in full charge of the Company's operations in the absence of his brother and testified at the hearing concerning the business of the Company. The ruling of the Trial Examiner denying the motion is hereby affirmed.

106 107 Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following:

FINDINGS OF FACT I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY The Company processes and jobs used textile bags. It has its sole place of business in St. Louis, Missouri. Over 80 percent of the used textile bags is shipped to the Company's plant from outside the State of Missouri. The...