Upon receipt of this information, we will, I believe, be in position to give you a complete memo on this case. If the investigation reveals continuing unfair labor practices, it may be necessary to postpone further the elections previously ordered by the Board. In addition to the possible unfair labor practices mentioned above, I believe you should reconsider the appropriateness of the payroll date ordered by the Board Since that date, over 60 new employees have been hired. This is contrary to the expectations expressed by the company at the hearing. No doubt the Beard ordered its election considering the company's statement that they did not anticipate hiring any new employees. I will also comment further on this pent after analyzing just who has been rehired and whether there was discrimination involved in the rehiring. N. L. R. B. EXHIBIT No. 364-E JOHN G. SHOTT. JUNE 5, 1939. To: B. M. Stern, Assistant Secretary. Recently, we received from the Company the names and classifications of employees laid off by months from December 1937 through July 1938. In addition, we also received the names of employees hired from July 1938 through May 1939. In this latter group, the Company designated those persons who ad not been previously employed with the Company prior to the 1937-38 layof We have also obtained the membership lists from both the A. F. of L. and the C. I. O. as result of their respective organizational campaigns in the summer ari fall of 1937. Comparing the employees laid off with the Unions' membership lists from December 1937 through July 1938, we find that of a total of 211 employees laid of during that period, 41 were members of the A. F. of L.; 93 were members of the C.L.O and 77 not affiliated with either Union. Of the employees reinstated or hired from July '38 through May '39, we find a total of 124 added to the payroll. this number 22 were members of the A. F. of L., 37 members of the C. I. O. and 65 not affiliated with either Union. Of the 65 not affiliated with either Unies 31 were new employees. It is also noted that a total of 72 employees were add to the payroll since January 1, 1939, the original date of the Board's Direction of of Election. Thirty-two of this number were new employees and the remainder were those who had previously worked with the Company but would not be eligib to vote in the Direction of Election. The membership lists submitted by the respective Unions included to membership of 217 by the A. F. of L., while the C. I. O. contained a total of 247 names of employees. In analyzing the layoffs from December 37 to July 3 inclusive, it is revealed that more than twice the number of C. I. O. employees were laid off than those affiliated with the A. F. of L. In the rehiring of employees from July '38 through May '39 inclusive, more than 50 per cent of the A. F. of L employees laid off were reinstated, while only about 37 per cent of the C. 1. 0. employees laid off were reinstated. In view of the above statistics as well as the affidavits submitted to a fiel examiner by the employees named in the amended charges, it appears that com siderable further investigation is necessary before taking any position with reference to a recommendation in connection with the election. Presently, I have requested the field examiner assigned to this case to conduct a thorough investigation of the charge as soon as possible. I hope that by tis time next week I can submit a final report of our investigation. However, regardless of the outcome of our investigation into the alleged unfa labor practices, the statistics quoted above of the employees hired lead me to believe that there is considerable merit for the C. I. O.'s contention that the Board reopen the "R" proceeding for the purpose of reconsidering the appropriateness of the payroll date ordered in the Direction of Election. The Tega Division informs me that in the "R" proceeding during the fall of 1938, the Company then stated that they did not contemplate adding to their payroll Nevertheless, from January 1, 1939, through May, a total of 72 employees were hired which includes 32 new employees, all of whom would have been ineligible to vote, according to the Board's Direction of Election. I hope to be able to submit a complete report on this case by next week. EJB*AC JOHN G. SHOTT. N. L. R. B. EXHIBIT NO. 364-F JUNE 28, 1939. To: John G. Shott, Director, 12th Region. Your memorandum of June 14, 1939, stated that you did not believe there was any necessity for further delaying the election because of charges of unfair labor practices. Before proceeding to a final decision in R-1070, we think it advisable to aispose of XII-Ĉ-369. If you do not believe the charges can be substantiated and do not desire to request authority to issue a complaint, will you dismiss XII-C-369 and afford the union an opportunity of appealing from your ruling. After this is done the Board will be able to proceed. Date charge received: Jan. 5, 1939. Date case closed: July 25, 1939. Name of union: S. W. O. C. in behalf of the Amalgamated Assn. of Iron, Steel and Tin Workers of North America, Lodge #1787. Affiliation C. I. O. Strike: No. Sections of act involved: 8 (1) (2) (3). Number of workers involved: 350. Detailed report as to action taken to close case (if election, give results) Numerous conferences with company and union representatives resulted in posting of a notice and preferential hiring of two of the discharged employees, who have since been reinstated. ADJUSTED CASE REPORT Did regional office 1. Was charge adjusted by settlement agreement? No. Was settlement agreement reduced to writing? No. If so, attach copy. participate in securing agreement between parties? Yes. 2. Was alleged company union disestablished? nition of or contract with such company union rescinded? Was company' recog Investigation disclosed no evidence to indicate that the AFL was dominated or influenced by the company. Amount of back pay, $ none. fafter strike or lockout after discriminatory discharge Number of workers receiving back pay 4. Did parties enter into collective bargaining negotiations? If so, was a written collective bargaining agreement entered into? If so, attach copy. If collective bargaining agreement not in writing, set forth main terms 5. Was notice posted? Yes. If so, attach exact copy. How long posted? 60 days. Does notice cover Section 7 of Act? Yes. Section 8 (1)? Yes. Section Section 8 (3)? Yes. Section 8 (5)? 8 (2)? 6. Has company furnished proof of compliance? Yes. If so attach copy. Has union furnished confirmation of compliance? Yes. If so, attach copy. 7. Does adjustment completely dispose of all allegations in charge? No. If not, give explanation: Investigation did not substantiate the 8 (3) allegation in the other five discharge cases. Mr. JOHN G. SHOTT, JULY 24, 1939. Regional Director, National Labor Relations Board, Twelfth Region. Re: Yates American Machine Co. MADISON BUILDING, DEAR MR. SHOTT: This is to request your permission to withdraw the charge involving the Yates-American Machine Company of Beloit, Wisconsin, without prejudice. Very truly yours, National Labor Relations Board, Twelfth Region NOTICE The election heretofore ordered by the National Labor Relations Board, among the employees of the Yates-American Machine Company, was, as you know, postponed for a period of fifteen days on January 7, 1939. The election was again indefinitely postponed by the National Labor Relations Board on January 20, 1939. The postponements were ordered by the National Labor Relations Board at the request of the Regional Director of the Twelfth Region of the Board, pending an investigation of charges filed against the Yates-American Machine Company on January 5, 1939, by Steel Workers Organizing Committee in behalf of Amalgsmated Association of Iron, Steel & Tin Workers of North America, Lodge 1787 The charges alleged, in part, that the Company and its supervisory force had interfered with, restrained, and coerced its employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 (a) of the Act in connection with the scheduled election In order to dispel the effects of any alleged acts of interference, restraint, or coercion by the agents of the Company in connection with the election, the Company, through its president, hereby notifies its employees as follows: 1. Under Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act, employees have the right to self-organization, to form, join or assist labor organizations, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection. 2. Section 8 of the National Labor Relations Act provides among other things, that it shall be unfair labor practice for an employer (a) To interfere with, restrain, or coerce employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7. (b) To encourage or discourage membership in any labor organization by discrimination in regard to hire or tenure of employment, or any term or condition of employment. 3. The company has adopted a policy of strict adherence to the aforesaid provisions of the law, and will not violate the same, nor will it countenance any violation of the same. 4. The Company's only interest in any election ordered among its employees by the National Labor Relations Board is that its employees freely express their own choice, and the Company will countenance no restraint or coercion of its employees in any manner whatsoever. 5. The Company has today notified each member of its supervisory force to adhere strictly to the statements made in this notice, and to refrain from any conduct which might in any way be construed as interference with, restraint, or coercion of the employees of the Company in the exercise of their right to choose their own collective bargaining representatives. 6. This notice will remain posted in conspicuous places throughout the plant of the Yates-American Machine Company for a period of at least sixty (60) consecutive days from the date hereof. Dated this.__ day of February 1939. YATES AMERICAN MACHINE COMPANY, By (Petition In the Matter of Yates-American Machine Co., case No. R-1070, a portion of this exhibit, was received in evidence and is on file with the committee.) N. L. R. B. EXHIBIT No. 364-H Affiliated with the American Federation of Labor A. O. WHARTON, Int. Pres. J. MCDONALD THOS. DIXON JAS. SINCLAIR, Business Representatives. Grand Lodge Headquarters International Association of Machinists' Building, Washington, D. C. Founded in the City of Atlanta, Ga., May 5, 1888 113 S. Ashland Boulevard, Machinists Building Telephones Monroe 4235-4234-4231 CHICAGO, ILL., August 22, 1939. Subject: Yates-American Machine Co., Case #R-1070 (XII-R-136) Regional Director, National Labor Relations Board, Madison Building, Milwaukee, Wisc. DEAR SIR: With further reference to your letter of August 3rd and my wire of August 19th, 1939, relative to an election at the present time among the employees of the Yates-American Machine Company, please be advised it is the desire of the International Association of Machinists that this election not be held at the present time. We feel an election conducted under existing conditions in Beloit would result in a "no organization" vote and that it would react to the detriment of organized labor in general. If this election can be postponed indefinitely without the withdrawal of our petition for investigation and certification, all well and good, and if not, please advise and I will forward a petition requesting the withdrawal of our former request. Very truly yours, /s/ J. W. RAMSEY, Grand Lodge Representative. JWR:LB O. E. U. #20732 (Rec'd at 12th Region, NLRB. Aug. 23, 1939.) N. L. R. B. EXHIBIT No. 364-I To: John G. Shott, Director, Twelfth Region. SEPTEMBER 5, 1939. This is with reference to your memorandum of August 23. The Board feels that the election in this case should not be postponed indefinitely. Accordingly, in view of the facts set forth in your memorandum, the I. A. M. should file a formal motion requesting a withdrawal of its petition for an investigation and certification of representatives. RR eh. B. M. S. N. L. R. B. EXHIBIT No. 364-J ORGANIZING DEPARTMENT CHICAGO, ILLINOIS, Sept. 17, 1939. Subj: Yates-American Machine Co. NLRB Case R-1070. Mr. JOHN G. SHOTT, Regional Director, Milwaukee, Wisconsin. MY DEAR MR. SHOTT: With reference to your letter of September 9th and yo wire of September 15th in regard to the position of our Association in the matter of our petition for investigation and certification, please be advised as follows The International Association of Machinists respectfully requests the with drawal of its petition for investigation and certification as the exclusive barga ring agency for the employees of the Yates-American Machine Company, Beit Wisc'n. This request is made due to the peculiar situation which exists in this communty at the present time and due to the prejudice which has been built up through the influence of this Company during the long delay between the filing of the petitio and the present date. We would request that this request be granted without prejudice and subject to refiling in accordance with the rules and regulations of the National Laber Relations Board. Yours very truly, Machinists Hall, Chicago, Illinois. /s/ J. W. RAMSEY. (Decision and Direction of Election, In the Matter of Yates-American Machin Company, was received in evidence, marked "N. L. R. B. Exhibit No. 364-K and is on file with the committee.) N. L. R. B. EXHIBIT No. 365 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, To: All Regional Directors. The House Special Committee has requested "a copy of all the reports made by Regional Directors, Regional Attorneys, and any other employees to the Board of to the secretaries relating to the covering services rendered by employees of the Board to the LaFollette Committee." The Committee also requests "a complete list of the names of all employees who rendered any service to the LaFollette Committee, the number of days engaged in that work and the amount of the salary that they received for the period so engaged." It is understood that in most cases reports made for the La Follette Committee were sent to that committee and copies may not remain in Regional office files. However, it is requested that immediate search be made and any copies be sent t this office marked "Attention: H. Blankenhorn." It is requested that data for the second request, on personnel, be obtained and sent on first, to be used as a check list against that being furnished by the personne. office here. CHARLES FAHY. (Folder labelled "12th Region Staff Encomia" was received in evidence, marked "N. L. R. B. Exhibit No. 366," and is on file with the Committee. A list of the documents contained therein follows:) 12th REGION STAFF ENCOMIA Board Supplement 1. Letter, 8/23/1937, Joseph F. Wesley, Wesley Steel Treating to N. L. R. B., Attention Mr. Robt. R. Rissman. 2. Letter, 6/10/1938, R. B. MacDonald, Mayor, Ladysmith, Wis., to E. J Brophy (Copy). 3. Letter, 6/15/1938, Maurice J. Quain, Typographical Union No. 232, to J. Warren Madden (Copy). 4. Telegram, 8/27/1938, Timber & Sawmill Workers Union, Local 15, Herbert Norris, to Frederick Mett (Copy). 5. Letter, 3/6/1939, James R. Law, Mayor, Madison, Wis., to Edward J. Brophy (Copy). 6. Letter, 5/5/1939, Wm. Skaar, Ray-O-Vac Federal Labor Union No. 19587, to N. L. R. B. 12th Region (Copy). |