We certify that the counting of the ballots was accurately done, and that the results of the impartially conducted election were as follows: Number of alleged eligible voters... Number of ballots placed in ballot box Number of unchallenged ballots FOR International Jewelry Workers Union Local No. 25, A. F. of L.. Number of unchallenged ballots AGAINST International Jewelry Workers Union Local No. 25, A. F. of L.. Number of challenged ballots__ Number of blank ballots.. Number of spoiled ballots.. Number where challenge was allowed. Number where challenge was disallowed.. Result of challenged ballot count: Challenged ballots FOR International Jewelry Workers Union Loca Challenged ballots AGAINST International Jewelry Workers Union 46 s/ CLIFFORD ROEDER. 19 Director, National Labor Relations Board, 1220 Enquirer Building, Cincinnati, Ohio. DEAR FRIEND PHIL: In reply to your communication of November 2, please be advised that I called upon Attorney Seelbach yesterday and talked with him on this matter and I am not at all satisfied with this arrangement. For instance, in the outset, I cannot imagine any company or any man willing to abide by an agreement in good faith and still persistently refuse to sign an agreement. In the agreement reached between Mengel representation and the Union, Mengel agreed to notify all of their ex-employees by registered mail and to send me copies of the letters. Contrary to this agreement they have sent several letters by special delivery and I have not been notified by the company to whom they have sent these letters. Therefore, I would have no way of checking other than to personally contact all of the ex-employees which you know would be practically impossible. In the agreement, the company representatives also agreed that in the event it became necessary to negotiate an agreement with a union, they would amiaby meet with the Union and we would in the same fashion establish our majority and bargain collectively without the procedure of holding an election, etc., under the law. However, in the letter sent to you by the law office representing Menge Manufacturing Company, they insist that in the event it ever again becomes necessary to decide the question of the appropriate unit the company would be guided by their rights under the National Labor Relations Act. It appears to me that they are trying to evade this agreement in every part if possible. I think your representative Mr. Perricelli did a wonderful job in the drawing up of this agreement. I think it is fair to both parties, and I think it is a very arrogant and egotistical attitude that is now being taken by the Mengel management. However, it appears that the future welfare of the militant umonists formerly employed at the Mengel company depends upon my action at this present time and my heart being with the worker I believe it the wise thing to follow your suggestion of closing this case. No doubt you realize the advantage I would have in reorganizing this factory f I could produce a signed agreement from the Mengel management of their good aith, (no doubt this is their greatest objection), but I feel sure that with the return of Bundy and some of the other men alleged guilty of violence and the posting of the rights of employees on the billboard will be a great assistance. I therefore agree to withdraw the charges against the Mengel Company preserving the right to reinstate same in the event Mengel does not live up to their part of the agreement. May I ask you to thank your Mr. Perricelli for his earnest and intelligent efforts in behalf of these unfairly exploited Mengel workers. I extend to you the kindest personal regards of the writer, and remain, PMS Very fraternally yours, EDW. H. WEYLER, Secretary-Treasurer. N. L. R. B. EXHIBIT No. 388-B NOVEMBER 2, 1938. Mr. Edw. H. WEYLER, 205-6 Tyler Building, Louisville, Kentucky. DEAR MR. WEYLER: I attach hereto copy of letter which I have today received from the attorneys for the Mengel. It appears that they have finally come around and will agree to do all that we asked. You will note that they are now willing to take back the three men allegedly guilty of violence. I would appreciate hearing from you at your very early convenience so that this matter can be closed. Yours very truly, PGP GF PHILIP G. PHILLIPS, Regional Director. N. L. R. B. EXHIBIT NO. 388-C OCTOBER 28, 1938. To: File. From: W. J. Perricelli. Subject: The Mengel Company, IX-C-258. On Friday, October 7, 1938, Mr. Middletown and Mr. Seelbach, of the Louisville, Kentucky, firm representing The Mengel Company, were in conference with Mr. Phillips and myself with respect to the settlement of this matter. In about an hour the company agreed to write a letter setting out the substance contained in the settlement agreement in the file (typed up but unsigned), to post notices, to comply with the 8 (5) issue alleged in the charge, and also to make an offer with respect to the three felony cases. W. J. P. W. J. P/bs N. L. R. B. EXHIBIT No. 388-D JANUARY 20, 1938. THE MENGEL COMPANY, LOUISVILLE, KENTUCKY, IX-C-258 This case has been turned over entirely to Mr. Grossman. Mr. Phillips should draft a memorandum to Mr. Grossman and point out this is a written contrtct case which the Board desires to try. Mr. Grossman should find out what additional information is needed for the trial and show why the same cannot be obtained, or he should obtain the same and prepare the case for trial. It should be noted that the plant at present is completely shut down so that the obtaining of evidence should not be difficult. PHILIP G. PHILLIPS. PGP:GG 218054-41-vol. 24, pt. 2——77 N. L. R. B. EXHIBIT No. 389 MILLER CASKET CO. N. L. R. B. EXHIBIT No. 389-A To: Mr. Phillips. From: R. S. Macke. Subject: Miller Casket Company, IX-C-889 (Closed). JULY 18, 19 Received telephone call from Mr. Miller, who stated he was under negotiate for a new contract. Mr. Miller stated he was very unfamiliar with Board prx dure and recalling the difficulty he got into the last time he tried to make a * ment with his employees, he is anxious to have the advice of a field man be signing the new contract. He stated it might be that he will be forced to close plant and he was anxious to get in touch with Mr. Wagner and asked me where could be reached. I accordingly gave him Mr. Wagner's telephone number Charleston. RSM:GG R. S. M N. L. R. B. EXHIBIT No. 389-B NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, NINTH REGION Case No. IX-C-389. Week ending January 21, 1939 Name of Company: The Miller Casket Co. Date charge received: 1/10/30. Date case closed: 1/20/39. Name of union Dist. No. 50, Chemical Division, Affiliation CIO of U. M. W.A Strike: Yes. Sections of act involved: 8 (1) (3) (5). No. of workers involved: 26. Detailed report as to action taken to close case (if election, give results). Stra settled; compliance notice posted; employee placed on preferential list: Close shop agreement signed providing for 10% increase in wages, check off, senior and other improved working conditions. ADJUSTED CASE REPORT 1. Was charge (or petition) adjusted by settlement agreement? Yes. W settlement reduced to writing? Yes. Was settlement agreement reduced : writing? Yes. If so, ATTACH COPY. Did regional office participate in secur. * agreement between parties? Yes. 2. Was alleged company union disestablished? of or contract with such company union rescinded? 3. Number of workers reinstated after strike or lockout. after discriminatory discharge. Amount of back pay, $ Was company's recogni Number of workers receiving back par 4. Did parties enter into collective bargaining negotiations? Yes. If so, a written collective bargaining agreement entered into? Yes. If so ATTY COPY. (Will follow.) main terms * * * If collective bargaining agreement not in writing, set fort 5. Was notice posted? Yes. 60 days. Does notice cover If so, ATTACH EXACT COPY. How long poste 1 Section 8 (2)? Yes. Section 8 (3)? Yes. Section 8 (5)? Yes. 6. Has company furnished proof of compliance? See supra. If so, Atti # COPY. 7. Does adjustment completely dispose of all allegations in charge? Ye If not, give explanation. N. L. R. B. EXHIBIT No. 390 N. L. R. B. EXHIBIT No. 390-A NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, 1342 Nat'l Bank Bldg., Detroit, Mich., January 6, 1939. : Mr. Philip G. Phillips, Regional Director, 9th Region. om: Charles M. Ryan, Field Examiner. : Seagraves Corporation. DEAR PHIL: I am enclosing herewith, a Charge and a statement of the cominant named in the Charge. As the company against whom the charge is de is located in Columbus, Ohio, in your region, Mr. Bowen and I feel that the vestigation could more easily be handled by your office. We are of the opinion at it appears to be a complaint worthy of investigation but we are turning this arge over to you to do with "what thou wilt". I take this opportunity to wish you and all the staff a very happy and prosperous ew Year. Cordially yours, CMR/k CHARLIE RYAN. Enc. (Decision and order In the Matter of The Seagraves Corporation, Case No. -189, was received in evidence, marked "N. L. R. B. Exhibit No. 390-B", nd is on file with the committee.) N. L. R. B. EXHIBIT NO. 391 MEMOS AND MISCELLANEOUS N. L. R. B. EXHIBIT No. 391-A UNITED MINE WORKERS OF AMERICA, DISTRICT 19, Mr. PHILIP G. PHILLIPS, Regional Director, National Labor Relations Board, Federal Building, Cincinnati, O. DEAR Mr. PHILLIPS: Some time ago we filed charges against Dixie Bell Coal Co. (Board Trec), in Bell County, Ky., alleging that the company had closed its mine under circumstances we believed to be a clockout. This mine has been closed for better than a year and a half and there is no indication that it will reopen soon. We therefore do not feel that the Board can take any action in this case until such time as the mine reopens (under the same ownership which closed it) and until such time, after reopening, it may refuse to reemploy those miners who were working there on the last day it was open and operating. We therefore request that this charge be withdrawn, without prejudice to reopen the same at any time in the future, upon our notification, or refiling of the The next time I see Golden I will discuss this case with him and will endeavor to get him to withdraw. (Intermediate Report In the Matter of the Middle West Corporation, Kentucky Utilities Co., et al, Cases Nos. 9-C-725 and 9-C-1118, was received in evidere and marked "N. L. R. B. Exhibit No. 391-C", and is on file with the committer N. R. L. B. EXHIBIT No. 391-D INTER-OFFICE COMMUNICATION NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD MAY 16, 1939. To: PGP. From: Brin. Subject: Teamsters Union, Louisville, Ky. A few days ago Miss Frazier relayed to me in Louisville the information eve tained in a telegram to you from Pat Ansboury, Louisville, that he needed a. agent on the Board right away on a case against a trucking company there. I called Ansboury and was very much surprised to have him say that he or wanted to talk to me about the matter, that the company had just then sigued contract with him, and, that he did not think there was anything for the B-s to do, nor did he think there was a case for us to handle. He added that if I fostime he would appreciate it if I would drop over to his office to talk to him about I endeavored to see Pat later, and again the following day, but each time was away from his office. I will try to see him again when I return to Louisv5but unless he buzzes us again I doubt if there is anything to his telegram after s N. L. R. B. EXHIBIT No. 391-E NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, NINTH REGION Week ending May 27, 1939 CLOSED CASE REPORT Case No. IX-C-709. Name of Company: Kentucky Straight Creek Ca Company. Date charge received: 5/20/38. Date case closed 5/27/39. Na: of Union United Mine Workers of America. Affiliation CIO Strike Section | of act involved 8 (1) (3). Number of workers involved 145. Detailed rep.” as to action taken to close case (if election, give results). All men returned work and standard Appalachian agreement signed between Company and Un ADJUSTED CASE REPORT 1. Was charge (or petition) adjusted by settlement agreement? Yes. settlement agreement reduced to writing? Yes. If so, Attach Copy. I regional office participate in securing agreement between parties? Yes. 2. Was alleged company union disestablished? Was company's recognit of or contract with such company union rescinded? 3. Number of workers reinstated after strike or lockout after discrim: 19 tory discharge 145. Amount of back pay $----- Number of workers receiv back pay 4. Did parties enter into collective bargaining negotiations? If so, was written collective bargaining agreement entered into? If so, Attach Co; If collective bargaining agreement not in writing, set forth main terms. Secti 6. Has company furnished proof of compliance? See supra. If so, Atts: Copy. Has union furnished confirmation of compliance? Yes. If so, Attar Copy. 7. Does adjustment completely dispose of all allegations in charge? Yes. ! not, give explanation. |