Appendix — Western Cartridge Co. v. National Labor Relations Board

Supreme Court brief1943

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

INDEX.

Answer of National Labor Relations Board and Re-

quest for Enforcement in 8142....................

Answer of National Labor Relations Board in 8155...

Appearances

Exhibit 3-A

Exhibit :

Exhibit 3-C

Exhibit ¢

Exhibit 3-K

exhibit 5-F

Exhibit ¢

Exhibit 3-H

Exhibit ¢

exhibit ¢

Exhibit ¢

Exhibit :

Exhibit &

Kxhibit 11

Exhibit 13

Exhibit 21

Exhibit 23

exhibit

Board

Olds, Fred

Hopper, Earl

Rela te eis 5 yu avd woe kk es

Carroll, Robert

SS Ge OR, C0 Se 88 EE ee eee eS Se AD ON ee

Bunzy, Francis .......00: secre ccceeeecccerscccens

Jones, Lowell .........c.seeeeeecereeserecceccesess

Chapman, Jay Du... 2... cc cece seer er neerenccerees

Frisson, Blanche .........seeesesreeseseeeeeeeeeese

Po | ewe rere ere Or

Gent, Jr., William...........seecceeeereeveceenens

Wilkt,. Jolin Bon ccc ec cc cde reese veeeceeer eens nes

Chapman, Jady B.......--.00ecceser cece ese ceeeeees

Meisenheimer, Chris ......--...seeeee reece eee eees

Billiott, William .......-.5-ccercecceneceenvocsncnss

Clark, Raymond ....... ccc ccc yerccrec cence esreres

ne Se) See ee eo eee Ee hae ee dd

McPherson, Bllis ..........--ee eee rreeeeeeed has

Womack, Charles .......--ccceecereerecesereeeees

Weishaupt, Elden ........... eee eee ee erect eeerees

Witnesses ror RESPONDENT.

aAb, CU ae Ao oh So eee eee ee es Coe eons

Arnold, Arthur ......6c0scccecenssennateceee arenes

Wortz, Thomas L..........-cseecereeeeercereeeces 82,

Krinard, Albert Biv... 6... ee eerie rien:

Hamilton, Orlan S...........-c eee ee rere ee eeeeeeees

Andrus, Charles .......:.sseseecseeceersecceeceees

a, RON a ei

Goessman, Gale ......0scrscccrecverececscevereces

Wie CUE dansk ccs e seeps connersierses threes teas

Kratschmer, Frank ©........e0eec eee eereeeeseecees

Monical, Forest .......-.ssceeeecseeeeeceerecereces

—_

In THE Unitep States Crrcuir Court or APPEALS

For the Seventh Circuit.

No. 8142.

Western Cartridge Company,

Petitioner,

vs.

National Labor Relations Board and American Federation

of Labor and Its Affiliated Organizations,

Respondents.

On Petition to Review and Set Aside an Order of the

National Labor Relations Board.

ANSWER OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS

BOARD AND REQUEST FOR ENFORCEMENT.

To the Honorable, the Judges of the United States Cireuit

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit:

Comes now the National Labor Relations Board and,

pursuant to the National Labor Relations Act (49 Stat.

449, 29 U.S. C., See. 151, et seq.), files this answer to the

petition to review an order of the Board, filed herein, and

this request for enforcement of the Board's order.

(1) Answering the allegations of the petition to review

on pages 2 and 3 entitled, ‘‘Statement of the Nature of the

Proceedings,’’ the Board prays reference to the certified

transcript of the entire record of the proceedings before

the Board filed herein for a full and exact statement of the

pleadings, evidence, findings of fact, conclusions of law, and

order of the Board, and all other proceedings had in this

matter before the Board.

RUS

SweNwAy

SE a en at ace ae ae eae ee

ee ae

ETRE.

EIS a AN

2S NIE ERAN AE DN RIG LOA LO: NMA BIRDS AE LY RNS OAS DL PS MING EEA UT, BUTE . a - -

. A EIR AAI PEPE NLM SEB FEE ES ASE

Fm sGse CE RETR

2 Answer of N. L. R. B. and Request for Enforcement.

(2) The Board admits the allegations on pages 3 and

4 of the petition to review entitled, ‘‘ Venue.’’

(3) The Board denies each and every allegation of

error set forth under the caption ‘‘Statement of Points”’

on pages 4 to 11, inclusive, of the petition to review.

Wherefore, having answered each and every allegation

contained in the petition to review, the Board requests this

Honorable Court to deny said petition insofar as it requests

that the order of the Board be set aside.

Further answering, the Board, pursuant to Section 10 (e)

of the National Labor Relations Act, respectfully requests

this Honorable Court for enforcement of its order against

petitioner dated September 16, 1942, entered in the pro-

ceeding before the Board entitled, ‘‘In the Matter of West-

ern Cartridge Company, a corporation, and American Fed-

eration of Labor and its affiliated organizations,’’ which

proceeding is designated in the records of the Board as

Case No. C-2123. In support of its request for enforcement

of this order, the Board alleges:

(a) Petitioner, a Delaware corporation, transacts busi-

ness and has a manufacturing plant in the City of Kast

Alton, Illinois; and the unfair labor practices occurred at

that plant.

(b) Upon the proceedings had before the Board in Case

No. C-2123, including, without limitation, the complaint, the

answers, the hearing for the purpose of taking testimony,

the Trial Examiner’s Intermediate Report, the exceptions

filed thereto, and the oral argument before the Board, more

fully shown by the transcript of the entire record filed

herein, to which reference is hereby made, the Board, on

September 16, 1942, duly stated its findings of fact and

conclusions of law and issued an order directed to peti-

tioner, its officers, agents, successors, and assigns, as fol-

lows:

Order.

Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and con-

clusions of law, and pursuant to Section 10 (c) of the

Ietional Labor Relations Act, the National Labor Re-

lations Board hereby orders that the respondent, West-

a SUE FRESE ER. RID SN AE RO SANIT CAO IN DTS ROTI NS

Answer of N. L. R. B. and Request for Enforcement. 3

ern Cartridge Company, Kast Alton, Illinois, and its

officers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall:

1. Cease and desist from:

(a) Giving effect to its individual contracts of em-

ployment with employees or to any modification, con-

tinuation, extension, or renewal thereof, and from re-

questing its employees to enter into any similar con-

tracts of employment;

(b) Dominating or interfering with the administra-

tion of Western Cartridge Employees Independent

Union or with the formation or administration of any

other labor organization of its employees, and from

contributing support to Western Cartridge Employees

Independent Union or to any other labor organization

of its employees;

dependent Union as the representative of any of its

employees for the purpose of dealing with the respond-

ent concerning grievances, labor disputes, rates of pay,

wages, hours of employment, or other conditions of

employment ;

(d) Giving effect to its agreement of August 12,

1937, March 18, 1941, and June 4, 1941, or to any other

contracts or agreements it may have entered into with

Western Cartridge Employees Independent Union in

respect to rates of pay, wages, hours of employment,

or other conditions of employment ;

(ec) Discouraging membership in International

Molders and Foundry Workers Union of North Amer-

ica, Local No. 333, affiliated with the American Federa-

tion of Labor, or in any other labor organization of

its employees, by discriminating in regard to the hire

or tenure of employment or any term or condition of

employment of any of its employees;

(f) In any other manner interfering with, restrain-

ing, or coercing its employees in the exercise of the

right to self-organization, to form, join, or assist labor -

organizations, to bargain collectively through repre- %

sentatives of their own choosing, and to engage in

concerted activities for the purpose of collective bar-

4 Answer of N. L. R. B. and Request for Enforcement.

gaining or other mutual aid or protection, as guaran-

teed in Section 7 of the Act.

2. Take the following affirmative action, which the

Board finds will effectuate the policies of the Act:

(a) Withdraw all recognition from Western Cart-

ridge Employees Independent Union as the representa-

tive of any of its employees for the purpose of dealing

with the respondent concerning grievances, labor dis-

putes, wages, rates of pay, hours of employment, or

other conditions of employment, and completely dis-

establish Western Cartridge Employees Independent

Union as such representative ;

(b) Offer William Elliott immediate and full re-

instatement to his former or a substantially equivalent

position, without prejudice to his seniority and other

rights and privileges;

(ce) Make whole Wliliam Elliott for any loss of pay

he may have suffered by reason of the respondent’s

discrimination against him, by payment to him of a

sum of money equal to the amount he would normally

have earned as wages from July 25, 1941, the date of

his discharge, to the date of the respondent’s offer of

reinstatement, less his net earnings during such period;

(d) Give separate written notice to each of its em-

ployees who has signed an individual contract of em-

ployment, or any modification, continuation, extension,

or renewal thereof, that the respondent will not in any

manner enforce or attempt to enforee the contract,

that the employee is not required or expected because

of the contract to deal individually with the respond-

ent or to relinquish in any manner his right to engage

in concerted activity, and that discontinuance of the

contract is without prejudice to the assertion of any

legal rights the employee may have acquired under it;

(e) Post immediately in conspicuous places

throughout its plant at East Alton, Illinois, and main-

tain for a period of at least sixty (60) consecutive

days from the date of posting, notices to its employees

stating: (1) that the respondent will not engage m

the conduct from which it is ordered to cease and desist

in paragraphs 1 (a) to (f) of this Order; (2) that the

a ED RRL ATOLL ENE ANE EEDA IES OT —~

Answer of N. L. R. B. and Request for Enforcement. 5

respondent will take the affirmative action set forth in

paragraphs 2 (a) to (d) of this Order; and (3) that the

respondent’s employees are free to become or remain

members of Chemical Workers Local Union No. 22574,

or International Molders and Foundry Workers Union

of North America, Local No. 333, both affiliated with

the American Federation of Labor, and that the re-

spondent will not discriminate against any employee

because of membership in, or activity on behalf of,

said organizations ;

(f) Notify the Regional Director for the Four-

teenth Region in writing within ten (10) days from the

date of this Order what steps the respondent has taken

to comply herewith.

served the aforesaid decision and order upon petitioner.

Wherefore, the Board respectfully prays this Honorable

Court that it cause notice of the filing of this answer and

request for enforcement and of the filing of the entire

record in said proceedings before the Board to be served

upon petitioner and that this Court take jurisdiction of the

proceedings and of the questions determined therein and

make and enter upon the pleadings, testimony, and evi-

dence, and proceedings set forth in the transcript of said

proceedings and upon the order made thereon, a decree

denying the petition to review and enforcing in whole said

order of the Board and requiring petitioner and its officers,

agents, successors, and assigns to comply therewith.

/s/ Ernest A. Gross,

Ernest A. Gross,

Associate General Counsel, National

Labor Relations Board.

SERA TR PRET RIBBONS LET ONTENTS ERIN

Dated at Washington, D. C., this 4th day of December, :

1942. 1

POS CONTRNER PEAIOTIEL ANT LL AR LOBE CE OEY ERI TI POM OEP LEAS

6 Answer of N. L. R. B. and Request for Enforcement.

District of ~

Columbia, :

Ernest A. Gross, being first duly sworn, states that he is

Associate General Counsel of the National Labor Relations

Board; that he is authorized to and does make this verifica-

tion in behalf of said Board; that he has read the foregoing

answer and request for enforcement and has knowledge of

the contents thereof; and that the statements made therein

are true to the best of his knowledge and belief.

/s/ Ernest A. Gross,

Ernest A. Gross,

Associate General Counsel.

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 4th day of De-

cember, 1942.

/s/ Joseph W. Kulkis,

Joseph W. Kulkis,

(Seal) Notary Public, District of Columbia.

My Commission expires April 15, 1947.

Endorsed: Filed Dec. 7, 1942. Kenneth J. Carrick,

Clerk.

Answer of N. L. R. B. 7

In tHE Unitep States Circuit Court or APPEALS

For the Seventh Cireuit.

No. 8155.

Western Cartridge Employees’ Independent Union, a Vol-

untary Association and Trade Union,

Petitioner,

vs.

National Labor Relations Board, American Federation

of Labor and Its Affiliated Organizations,

Respondents.

On Petition to Review and Set Aside an Order of the

National Labor Relations Board.

ANSWER OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS

BOARD.

To the Honorable, the Judges of the United States Cireuit

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit:

Comes now the National Labor Relations Board and,

pursuant to the National Labor Relations Act (49 Stat.

449, 29 U. S. C., see. 151, et seq.), files this answer to the

petition filed herein to review and set aside the Board’s

order.

1. Answering the allegations of the petition relating to

the proceedings before the Board, the Board prays refer-

ence, for a full and exact statement of the pleadings, find-

ings of fact, conclusions of law, and order of the Board,

to the certified record of the proceedings before the Board

filed in Western Cartridge Company, a Corporation vs.

National Labor Relations Board and American Federation

of Labor and Its Affiliated Organizations, No. 8142, which

case was initiated by the petition of the Western Cartridge

Company for review of the Board’s order issued in the

8 Answer of N. L. R. B.

proceedings before the Board known as Case No. C-2123

entitled ‘In the Matter of Western Cartridge Company and

American Federation of Labor and Its Affiliated Organiza-

tions.’’

2. The Board denies each and every allegation of error

contained in the petition.

Further answering, the Board avers that the proceed-

ings had before it, the findings of fact, conclusions of law,

and its order are in all respects valid and proper under the

Act.

Wherefore, the Board respectfully prays this Honorable

Court that the petition for review be denied, and the Board

further prays that this Honorable Court cause notice of the

filing of its answer to be served upon petitioner.

/s/ Kynest A. Gross,

Ernest A. Gross,

Associate General Counsel, National

Labor Relations Board..

Dated at Washington, D. C., this 4th day of December,

1942.

District of

Columbia.

Ernest A. Gross, being first duly sworn, states that he

is Associate General Counsel of the National Labor Re-

lations Board, respondent herein, and that he is authorized

to and does make this verification in behalf of said Board;

that he has read the foregoing answer and has knowledge

of the contents thereof; and that the statements made

therein are true to the best of his knowledge, information,

and belief.

/s/ Ernest A. Gross,

Ernest A. Gross,

Associate General Counsel.

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 4th day of De-

cember, 1942.

/s/ Joseph W. Kulkis,

(Seal) Notary Public, District of

Columbia.

My Commission expires April 15, 1947.

Appearances. 9

BerorE THE NationaL Lapor Rexations Boarp,

Fourteenth Region.

In the Matter of :

Western Cartridge Company, a

corporation,

and > Case No. XIV-C-469.

American Federation of Labor

and its Affiliated Organiza-

tions.

City Hall,

Kast Alton, Lllinois, q

Monday, December 8, 1941. 4

SAE ERA

The above-entitled matter came on for hearing, pursu-

ant to notice, at 10 o’clock a. m.

Before:

Horace E. Ruckel, Trial Examiner.

Appearances:

Jack G. Evans, U. S. Court House, St. Louis, Mis-

souri, appearing for National Labor Relations

Board.

Fred Olds, 207 West Main Street, East Alton, Illi-

nois, appearing for American Federation of Labor

and its affiliated organizations.

Bryan, Williams, Cave and McPheeters, Boatmens

Bank Building, St. Louis, Missouri, by R. H. Me-

Roberts, appearing for the respondent.

Wayne Ely, 10th Floor Commerce Bldg., St. Louis,

Missouri, appearing for Western Cartridge Em-

ployees Independent Union.

* *

* * *

13 Mr. Evans: Mr. Examiner, with respect to the

reference to the corporation referred to on page 2 of

the complaint, the first paragraph, the parties hereto stipu-

late that the name of said corporation is the East Alton

10 Witness for N. L. R. B.

Manufacturing Company; that it was incorporated under

and by virtue of the laws of the State of Maryland on or

about July 8, 1941; that said corporation has the same

officers and directors as the respondent corporation and

that those same men direct the labor relations policies of

the East Alton Manufacturing Company.

Mr. McRoberts: It may be so stipulated.

* * * *

14 FRED OLDS, called as a witness by and on behalf

of the National Labor Relations Board:

* * * * *

Direct Examination.

* * #* * -

15 Q. Was the local ever formed?

A. Yes. We had another meeting with Bunzy and

Anderson on January 24, 1941, and I gave them a number

of application blanks, and then on January 31, 1941, we

had a mass meeting at Wood River, Lllinois, at which time

a great number of men joined the union to be formed and

known as the Chemical Workers Union. The charter was

applied for on February 4, 1941, and on February 5 the

charter was granted to the Chemical Workers Local Union

No. 22574.

Q. Was that a Federal Labor Union?

A. That is a Federal Labor Union.

Q. By whom was that union chartered?

A. By the American Federation of Labor. That charter

was installed on February 17 and the permanent officers

were elected.

Q. Thereafter did you ever meet with management?

A. Yes; I did.

* * * * *

16 You met on February 17, is that right?

The Witness: We met on—our organization?

Trial Examiner Ruckel: March 13.

The Witness: March 13 we met.

” * * ~ e

Rg REA 2 OAS PE IRATE REAR .

Ba SSE AEE PR IED OE NET ITIE -

Testimony of Fred Olds. 11

Q. (By Mr. Evans.) At that meeting was any request

made for recognition or collective bargaining?

A. At that meeting we requested the company to recog-

nize the union as the sole collective bargaining agency for

all of its employees coming into the jurisdiction of the

union, which was defined as the Chemical Workers in the

Smokeless Powder Division.

* * * * *

17 Mr. Schotters stated that he had no authority at

this time to go into that phrase until he could take it

back to his Board of Directors.

Q. You mean that phase?

A. That phase of recognition.

We submitted to Mr. Schotters or offered to submit to

Mr. Schotters our application cards, and he said he would

have to take it up with his Board of Directors and meet

with us at a later date. A later date was set for March 20.

Q. Did you meet on that date?

A. We did meet on that date?

Q. Where?

A. At the company’s office; the same place we met the

previous meeting.

Q. Whom did you see at that time?

A. At that meeting we met with Mr. Schotters and Mr.

Trish.

Q. And was a request made for recognition and collee-

tive bargaining at that time?

A. We again requested recognition of collective bar-

gaining and we offered to submit our applications to the

company to check against their payroll, or in whatever—to

check against their payroll or against cancelled checks, and

Mr. Schotters asked: Could he see one of the applica-

tions.

* * * * *

A. I stated ‘‘Yes’’ and handed him Emmert F.

Anderson’s application, and Mr. Schotters stated that

this was only an intent, and was not an application.

He passed it over to Mr. Trish, and Mr. Trish looked at

the card and handed it back to Mr. Schotters, and Mr.

Schotters then handed it back to me.

PEA NRE Y See

IIE CAS SAE! SRY

Argos:

BSS peepee Oe Baer, ME PE

«< EI tO Re:

12 Witness for N. L. R. B.

Mr. Schotters stated that he would have to take this up

with his legal department.

Trial Examiner Ruckel: Take up what?

The Witness: The question of recognizing the union.

We then set another date for a meeting, which was held on

March 22.

Q. (By Mr. Evans.) Where?

A. At the office of the company.

Q. With whom did you meet on that occasion?

A. At that date we met Mr. Schotters and Mr. Casteel,

who was introduced to us as the attorney for the company

at that meeting.

We asked again that we be recognized as the sole col-

lective bargaining agency for the employees of the Smoke-

less Powder Division; that they were members; that we

had a majority of members of the Chemical Workers Union

No. 22574.

Mr. Casteel then asked if he could see one of the applica-

tions that we offered to submit for a cross-check of

20 their payroll or cancelled checks. I handed to him the

same application that I, at a previous meeting, handed

Mr. Schotters; that one of Kmmert Anderson.

Mr. Casteel made the same statement that Mr. Schotters

had made; that this application was only an intent and was

not an application. He contended that the Smokeless

Powder Division was not an appropriate unit. However,

he stated that before he could recognize our union, he would

have to meet the National Labor Relations Board at St.

Louis and find out if, by recognizing us on a cross-check,

it would be legal or not. He did not know if, by checking,

without having a certification of the Labor Board, if it

would be legal.

* * * * *

21 Q. (By Mr. Evans.) Thereafter did you file a

9(c¢) petition with the Labor Board in St. Louis?

Yes.

That was on March 25, 1941?

I believe that was the R case, wasn’t it?

That is what I mean by 9(c) petition.

Yes.

* * * 7 *

POPOP

Testimony of Fred Olds. 13

Cross-Examination.

“J

* * * * *

44 @. Mr. Olds, have charters been granted to any

other local unions with employes of the Western Cart-

ridge Company?

A. There has been one.

Q. One?

A. May I look at this?

Trial Kxaminer Ruckel: You may refresh your recol-

lection.

A. It is the International Molders Union, Local 333—

International Molders & Voundry Workers Union of North

America, Local 333.

Q. Is that the only local union which has been chartered

by the American Federation of Labor with jurisdiction over

employes of the Western Cartridge Company?

A. To the present date, in the Western Cartridge Com-

pany, that is the only charter granted, outside of Chemical

Workers charter granted in the Kast Alton Manufacturing

Company. That is the only one that has been applied for.

* * * *

45 Q. When did you begin to organize this unit

which became the International Molders & Foundry

Workers of North America, Local 333, approximately? To

refresh your recollection, was that sometime in the month

of June 1941?

A. We were really in activities at that time, but we

started organization sometime in April; may be the middle

of May.

Q). When did you first obtain any applications for mem-

bership in that particular local union?

46 A. I couldn’t say the exact date, Mr. McRoberts,

we obtained applications for membership in that par-

ticular union.

Q. Was that, approximately, June 1941?

A. I will say previously to that, because we were get-

ting applications all over the plant and I was trying to

segregate them as much as possible as I got them in, and

We were getting applications both in the brass mill and the

14 Witness for N. L. R. B.

casting shop, which 1 had been under the impression it

was all casting shop employes, and it later developed they

were not all employes of the casting shop, but some at that

particular time were in the brass mill.

* * * * *

47 Q. Mr. Olds, in the complaint it is alleged that the

Western Cartridge Company deducted dues from the

employes’ pay and turned over said dues to the Western

Cartridge Company employes’ independent union. I will

ask you whether or not in the course of the negotiations

on behalf of the Chemical Workers Local Union, in the

early stage of those negotiations, and particularly at a

meeting in the Mineral Springs in Alton, Illinois, the Chem-

ical Workers Union asked if the Company—the Western

Cartridge Company—would be willing to deduct dues, and

the Company’s representatives advised they would be will-

ing to deduct dues upon receipt of authorizations from em-

ployes in substantially the same manner that they were de-

ducted on behalf of the independent union?

A. No, I don’t recall that, because if that was agreed

upon it would have surely been in that contract, be-

48 cause we sure wanted it.

Q. Don’t you recall that you had that in your

draft of the contract?

A. Yes, we did submit it to the Company, and I agree.

Q. Don’t you recall the Company proposed to change the

form of the application so as to provide that the employe

would have a right to cancel the authorization, and advised

that if such a change was made they would have no objee-

tion to collecting dues and turning them over to the union?

A. I do now recall something on that, that was tenta-

tively agreed to and later denied.

Q. Don’t you recall the Kast Alton Manufacturing Com-

pany in finally making this contract with the Chemical

Workers Local Union gave you a so-called maintenance of

membership clause, and then the checkoff of dues became

unnecessary, and that demand was not pressed?

A. We received the maintenance of membership clause

at the recommendation of the Mediation Board.

Q. When you received that you did not press further

re CLRERETE EEE, EM ROAM EIN ARE LENE LL SIEGE IV RETO ORIEL ITN Ne TOE Ie

coil

Testimony of Earl Hooper. 15

the checkoff of dues provision? Isn’t that about the situ-

ation?

A. No, 1 don’t think that was it.

Q. What is your recollection?

A. My recollection is that the Company withdrew that

offer—those things were withdrawn, if you reeall, what we

tentatively agreed to at the Mineral Springs Hotel.

49 Q. But we did tentatively agree at the Mineral

Springs Hotel that the East Alton Manufacturing

Company would deduct dues upon authorization signed

by the employe, upon the condition that employes were

given the right to cancel such authorizations at any time?

A. Without a union shep clause, and then it was later

withdrawn.

Q. You did not present your demand for a checkoff to

the Mediation Board, did you, Mr. Olds?

A. No, we did not.

Q. After you had received this maintenance of mem-

bership elause?

A. That is right. We presented it in the beginning—

we presented our whole contract in the beginning.

52 KARL HOOPER, called as a witness by and on be-

half of the National Labor Relations Board,

* * * * *

Direct Examination.

53 Q. Did you take part in the formation of the West-

ern Cartridge Employees Independent Union?

A. I did.

* * > P * «

59 Q. Did you colleet dues for the organization ?

A. Yes; I collected some dues.

. * . * a

Q. Where did vou pay your dues to Wilmering?

A. Wherever I would see him; if it was any place in

the plant, I came in.

Q. Did you ever pay him outside of the plant?

ratte a |

AEF ER PERE AIIM LI ENR PL ION ILS 2

Beesrreeeeanaegerenep gana ey cee

16 Witness for N. L. R. B.

A. No; not as I remember. There might have been, but

I don’t remember.

* * * * *

60 Q. (By Mr. Evans.) Did any foreman ever tell

you to stop activities on behalf of this inside union at

any time?

A. No.

65 Recross Examination.

Q. (By Mr. McRoberts.) Mr. Hooper, are you a

66 member of the Chemical Workers Union?

A. That is right.

* * * *

Q. (By Mr. MeRoberts.) When did you become a

member, approximately?

* ” * * *

A. Well, I would say in February or March, 1941.

* * *

* .

67 VIRGIL KEEFH, called as a witness by and on be-

half of the National Labor Relations Board,

* * * * >

Direct Examination.

* * * * .

Q. In 1937 did you work for Western Cartridge Com-

pany?

A. Yes, sir.

* * * * *

Q. Were you solicited to join?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. By whom?

68 A. Kenneth Ladd.

(). Who was he?

A. He was on the organizing committee of this organ-

ization.

Q. Did you observe whether or not he went to other

emplovees?

Testimony of Virgil Keefe. 17

A. Yes, sir.

* * * * *

69 Q. (By Mr. Evans.) Where did that oceur, Mr.

Keefe?

A. I worked on the header line, and that is a row of

machines.

Q. Did he come to you or did you go to him?

A. He came to me.

Q. Was it during working hours?.

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Did you observe whether or not he talked to other

employes?

A. Yes.

(). About the same time?

A. Yes.

Q. Did he have cards with him at the time?

A. Yes.

Q. Were those cards similar to Board’s Exhibit Num-

A. Yes.

Q. Did he have a copy of the constitution?

A. He gave us all a copy—all over the department, be-

fore we joined the union, I believe. They passed them

out.

(Q). Were they like Board's Exhibits 6 and 7?

A. Yes.

Q. Did Mr. Ladd collect dues at the time he signed the

emploves up?

70 A. When you signed the card up vou were sup-

posed to pay him a quarter.

Q. Did anybody else solicit employes that vou saw?

A. Leo Ferguson, from the Plant Department, he was

over in our department quite a bit.

Q. Is the Plant Department the Maintenance Depart-

ment?

A. Yes, sir.

* * o * .

Q. About how many were in your department at that

time?

A. Approximately 100 or 125.

18 Witness for N. L. R. B.

Q. Of that number about how many did you see Ladd

and Ferguson solicit?

Mr. McRoberts: Just what you saw yourself, Mr.

Keefe.

A. I saw about twenty-five.

Q. Did you become representative of the union at

some time?

A. Yes, sir.

* * * * +

71 Q. Did any foreman or boss make any statement

to you with respect to the petition that was going

around in your behalf?

A. No, sir.

* * * * *

77 Q. I hand you Board’s Exhibit 10, for identifica-

tion, and ask you to tell what that is.

A. That is the basic agreement.

Q. That is dated August 12, 1937?

A. Yes.

Q. And you signed that agreement?

A. Yes.

* * * *. *

Q. Where did vou sign that?

A. Down in the main office cafeteria of the Western

Cartridge Company.

Q. Who ealled you down to the cafeteria on that ocea-

sion?

A. We had been talking by telephone conversation to

the Company and asking for a meeting, and they called

78 this meeting, and Mr. Williams—I believe Senator

Williams they called him, attorney for the Company,

presented this agreement.

* * * * *

Q. At that meeting was there any discussion as

79 to whether the union represented a majority?

A. No, sir.

85 Q. Were the petitions in your division after the

time that vou held office passed around in the plant?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Like it was for vour petition?

Testimony of Virgil Keefe. 19

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Was that the system used for all of the divisions?

* * * * *

A. Yes, my answer is ‘‘yes’’.

* * *

Cross-Examination.

* * * * *

89 Q. (By Trial Examiner Ruckel.) As I understand

your testimony, Mr. Keefe, it is that Board’s Exhibit

8, a letter dated July 22, 1937, to Mr. Olin, was sent by

your organization: is that correct?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And you stated that you tried to get a representa-

tive of management on the phone to get together in a

meeting ; was I correct in that understanding?

A. I don’t believe it was referring to this letter; no.

It was referring to these demands here.

(). Well, you wanted a meeting with the company ? ;

A. With the company; yes, sir. i

Q. To talk over these demands; that is, to make a con-

tract, is that right?

A. Yes, sir. i

Q. How did you try to establish contact with the com-

pany?

A. Well, we phoned them.

Q. And you finally had a meeting; is that right?

A. Yes, sir.

Q). Or you did have a meeting?

A. We had a meeting; ves, sir.

90 Q. And that meeting was held long after July 26,

1937, do vou recall?

A. No; I don’t recall the exact date.

Q. Approximately?

A. <A week, I believe, or two weeks.

Q. Now, that would make it the first few days in Au-

gust or approximately the first of August: is that right?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Now, was it at that meeting that Mr. Williams pre-

sented the contract, Board’s Exhibit 10?

A. Yes, sir.

20 Witness for N. L. R. B.

Q. For the first time?

A. For the first time, yes, sir. We didn’t sign it that

day. We signed it later on; I believe, the next meeting.

Q. Well now, at the meeting at which this was exhibited

for the first time, Mr. Williams produced it, is that it?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. What did he say about it?

A. Well, we had heard—we had not seen the copy, but

Mr. Manning had gone to St. Louis and talked to Mr.

Williams down at the Boatmen’s Building.

* * * * a

91 Q. Mr. Williams prepared this contract?

A. Mr. Williams, ves, sir.

Q. Do vou know what Mr. Williams said when he

presented the contract that day at the meeting? How did

he refer to this, if he did?

A. John Olin was talking, and T believe he made the

statement that he wished he could find some way that we

could get started on our demands, and Senator Williams

spoke up and said: ‘‘T have the way.’’ And, he presented

the basic agreement.

Q. Who said: ‘‘T wish there was some way we could

get started on our demands?’’

A. John Olin.

Q. And John Olin is what?

Mr. MeRoberts: Vice president.

The Witness: Vice president.

Mr. MeRoberts: Of the Western Cartridge Com-

pany.

92 Trial Examiner Ruckel: While we are on the sub-

ject, may it be stipulated that F. W. Olin is the presi-

dent?

Mr. MeRoberts: President, and John Olin is vice-

president and Mr. Spencer Olin is secretary-treasurer.

Q. (By Trial Examiner Ruckel.) Now, what further

did Mr. John Olin say, if anything, after he said, ‘‘T have

the wav’’?

Mr. Ely: Senator Williams said ‘‘T have the way.”’

Trial Examiner Ruckel: T am sorry.

Q. (By Trial Examiner Ruckel.) After Mr. Williams

said that?

Testimony of Virgil Keefe. 21

A. He said, ‘‘Let us have it.’’ ‘‘We have the way.”

And, Mr. Williams presented the basic agreement.

* * * * *

95 Q. (By Mr. Ely.) You say you didn’t want to

sign this basic agreement that Senator Williams pre-

sented to you?

A. That is right.

Q. Did they take a vote on it there at that meeting?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Did the majority vote to sign it?

A. The first time the majority voted not to sign it, and

then we had another meeting among ourselves. In the

meantime T believe our secretary and treasurer, Mr. Sulli-

van, and I don’t know,—but he did bring it back to us;

him and Mr. Manning said the company would not agree

to any of our demands unless we did sign that.

Q. Had Mr. Manning been in consultation with Mr.

Williams before that?

A. Yes, sir.

(). And he told you that the company. would not meet

your terms unless you signed this resignation; is that

right?

A. That is right.

(). Then did vou take another vote on it?

A. Yes, sir.

65 Q. And the majority of your board voted to sien

it?

A. To sign it; ves, sir. Four to two; ves, sir.

(). That was after you received vour advice from Mr.

Manning?

A. Yes, sir.

(). Originally the board voted to turn it down?

A. Turn it down; ves, sir.

Q. Mr. Manning then made his explanation and advised

vou to sign it, did he?

A. TI wouldn’t say he advised us to sign it.

(). But he advised vou vou would not get what you

were after unless vou did sign it?

A. Yes.

22 Witness for N. L. R. B.

133 ROBERT CARROLL, called as a witness by and on

behalf of the National Labor Relations Board:

* * * * “

Direct Examination.

* * * * *

Q. You work in the smokeless powder division?

A. Yes, sir.

About how long have you worked for the company?

A. I went to work at the Western in 1935, the 9th day

of April.

Q. Anybody ever ask you to join the Independent

Union?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Who was that?

A. Berkley Wilmering.

Q. Who is he?

A. He was from smokeless powder.

Q. At that time where were you working?

A. Fulmanite mixing department.

Q. Is that in the smokeless powder division?

A. No; that is here on this side, at the Western.

134. (. Was that during working hours?

A. Yes, sir.

* * a2 * *

137 Q. Tell us how you came to be a representative?

A. Well, they got out a petition for me and I

didn’t want it. I told them I didn’t want it at all, any

part of it. So, they went—

* & * * *

And they went ahead and held an election and elected

me anyhow.

Q. (By Mr. Evans.) Now, was there a petition for your

nomination as representative?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Where was the petition signed?

A. It was signed by the employees down there in that

division.

Q. Did the petition pass around during working hours?

Testimony of Robert Carroll. 23

A. Yes; it did. Some of them signed it during

138 working hours.

Q. Was there actually an election after this peti-

tion was signed, or were you seated by reason of the

petition?

A. Well, I was really seated by the petition; by the

signers on the petition.

Q. In other words, nobody else had a petition?

A. No; nobody else had a petition against me.

Q. After you became representative, did you solicit any

members in the Independent Union?

A. Yes. I talked to several of them that didn’t be-

long. There was only a few that signed up.

Q. Where did you do your soliciting?

A. Well, I done some of it at noon hour, some of it

during working hours.

Q. About how many did you solicit during working

hours?

A. Well, I would say about six.

(). Did you collect any dues?

A. Yes; 1 collected some dues.

Q). Did you collect those during working hours?

A. Well, some of them I did, yes, and some I didn’t.

* * *

145 Q. When did you join the A. F. of L. Union, Mr.

Carroll?

A. Well, I don’t remember the exact-date on it.

Q. Approximately?

A. It was last spring. It was along in March, I be-

lieve.

Q. That is the Chemical Workers Local that you joined?

A. Yes, sir.

* * * * .

148 Q. You work for the Western Cartridge Company ?

A. I did, but I work at East Alton Manufacturing

Company for the time being.

Q. About how long have you worked at the plant?

A. Well, altogether I would say fifteen years.

Q). Were you working there in 1933?

A. Yes, sir.

ras

EAT LOE EE PS

Fe et Lele Se Las a eT dh ee

UDR TM

eevrcomseerestreeer

24 Witness for N. L. R. B.

Q. Was there any effort by any union to organize at

that time?

* * > * *

A. Yes, sir.

Q. (By Mr. Evans.) What organization?

A. TheC. I. 0.

153 Q. (By Mr. Evans.) Anybody ever solicit you to

join the Independent Union?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. About when was that?

A. When they first started. I think it was around in

1937.

Q. Who solicited you?

A. Huck Imel.

* * * *

154 Q. Where were you solicited by Imel?

A. In the cap department.

Any other employees solicited by Imel at that time?

Yes, sir.

About how many others did you observe?

Oh, I would say around 50.

Did he have ecards at that time?

Yes, sir.

. Were they cards similar to Board’s Exhibit 4, which

lL hand you?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Did Imel work in your department at that time?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Was the foreman present when this activity was

going on?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Did it take place during working hours?

A. Part of it did and part of it didn’t.

* * *

OPOPOPO

155 QQ. Were you ever elected a representative?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And when did that occur?

A. It was in 1933. I am sure it was in 1933.

* * * *

Testimony of Francis Bunzy. 25

Q. Was there a petition passed around for your nom-

ination as representative?

156 <A. Yes, sir.

Q. How was that passed around?

A. Well, I went to the office and had a petition made

out through the stenographer, and I started out in my

department from one member to the other, and it was

passed out through the other departments in my division.

Q. Did these activities occur during working hours?

A. Some of it did and some of it didn’t.

* + - o

Q. Were you elected to be chairman, vice-chairman,

secretary-treasurer or anything like that?

A. I was elected as secretary-treasurer for six months.

Q. And when did that occur?

A. That was in 1940, I believe.

GETS BOOMERS Ren Pen a He ara

In August, 1940?

Yes, sir.

* ~ . * * (

166 Cross-Examination. 4

+ x * * * E

180 FRANCIS BUNZY, called as a witness by and on

behalf of the National Labor Relations Board:

Direct Examination.

* * * * *

Q. You work in the smokeless powder division of the

plant? :

A. I do. 4

Q. About how long have you worked there? $

A. About a year and a half.

Q. Have you worked for the company longer than that?

A. Yes. I worked with the company since February,

1935.

Q. Before that you worked in one of the other divisions

in the plant?

A. Yes.

—

26 Witness for N. L. R. B.

Q. In 1937 did any labor organization start to

181 organize employees of the company?

A. The Independent Union started in 1937.

Q. Any other organization?

A. Well, the C. I. O. was making contacts down there

at that time.

Q. Did you attend any C. I. O. meetings?

A. Yes. I attended one in the Faulstich Building, in

Alton.

Q. Was that before or after the start of the Independ-

ent Union?

A. Well, they were about the same time. There wasn’t

a week’s difference either way. I just couldn’t say about

when it was.

Q. Did anybody solicit you to joint the Independent

Union?

A. Yes; Leo Ferguson.

Q. And when did that take place?

A. In the plant department building on the western

Q. Did he give you a card similar to Board’s Exhibit

a 2

Q. Did you sign it?

A. Yes.

(. Do you know whether or not he solicited other em-

ployees in your department about that time?

A. Yes; he did.

* * * * *

188 A. After I went back in the smokeless powder, I

was standing in the yard talking with Leo Ferguson,

pipefitter foreman now, and Mr. Wortz was coming back

on this meeting,—oh, I didn’t mention Mr. Wortz; he was

present with Mr. Irish and Mr. Hamilton and Mr. Schot-

ters.

And he called me down to his office. He asked me to

come down to his office. And I went on down there.

Q. Was anybody else present besides you and Mr.

Wortz?

A. Just Mr. Wortz and I.

Testimony of Francis Bunzy.

(). What was said at that time?

A. Why, he told me to come in and sit down.

And he said, ‘‘Bunzy, I have heard your name a lot,’’

he said, ‘‘and I was surprised to see you when you came

in the office over here. I expected a man about 50 years

old, and a rough sort of a fellow, being mixed up with a

union like you are.’’

And he said, ‘‘You are a young fellow, and you have a

nice personality,’? and, I don’t know, a lot of stuff, about

a goodlooking fellow, and the fellows liked me, and this

and that.

And he said, ‘‘ How old are you?”

And I said, ‘‘28.”’

And he said I could go places with the company if I

would make myself right with them. He said if I would

come down to school I could go Pete Brown and he

189 would teach me how to handle business, or something,

And I told him I didn’t want it.

And he said how come that we want a union, and what

did we want by it?

And I told him that we wanted working conditions.

And he said, ‘‘Well, you fellows are intelligent. Why

don’t you come in as a committee and talk with me about it

instead of going over to East St. Louis and get a pot-

bellied racketeer to do your business for you?”’

And he gave the union hell at great length. He just

said it was no good and anyone that belonged to it was no

good; that it was a bunch of guys that were bosses and

wouldn’t work, and they would have the good fellows

‘arrying them through.

So he said if we would consider it, he would show us a

contract that they had with other companies—that he had

took part in with other companies. I believe he mentioned

Bethlehem Steel or some other steel company.

And I told him no, that I didn’t eare for it.

And he asked again if I would care to come down to

school.

And I said no; if I would come down to school and done

go to union meetings and work with the fellows, it would

just be playing both ends against the middle and it wouldn’t

;

‘d

NAEP a

SRA

SOPOT Rt LENG ARLE OES, MOGI

WO: COR AI

28 Witness for N. L. R. B.

last, so I would go ahead with the union, and I just

190 thanked him and went out.

Q. Did he mention anything as to what would

happen to your dues?

A. Oh, he said, ‘‘How does them guys get the money?

How do they get to live like they do off of you fellows’

wages,’’ he said. ‘‘Why don’t you have a union of your

own,’’ he said. He said, ‘‘We know our troubles here and

our jobs. We can straighten them out ourselves instead

of having to walk the streets and striking.’’ He said, ‘‘We

would be like the Monsanto Chemical Works and the auto-

mobile companies in this locality.’’

* * * * *

227 LOWELL JONES, a witness, called by and on behalf

228 of the National Labor Relations Board:

* hal * * *

Direct Examination.

* * * a =

Q. You work for the Western Cartridge?

A. Yes sir.

Q. Do you work in the brass mill?

A. Brass mill shipping.

Q. About how long have you worked for the Company!

A. About eight years.

Q. Did anybody solicit you to join the independent

union?

A. I joined, yes.

Q. About when was that?

A. I believe it was in the latter part of 1937 or the

first part of 1938, I am not sure.

Q. Who was it solicited your membership?

A. I believe it was Cletis Baker.

* * * * *

2299 Q. He talked to you on the job about that?

A. I believe he did, yes.

* ¥

* * *

Q. Were you ever elected as a representative for the

independent?

Testimony of Lowell Jones. 29

A. Yes sir.

Q. About when did that occur?

I believe it was in August 1940.

How did that come about?

I circulated a petition.

Where did you get the petition?

I believe Mr. Baker gave them to me.

What division was this?

Division Number 4.

Did you pass the petition around in Division Num-

().

ber 4?

A. Yes.

Q. Was that done during working hours?

A. Yes sir.

* . - +

235 @. Do you know whether copies of these were dis-

tributed to employes?

A. I believe we did distribute them, or at least we eave

them to the advisory committeemen.

Q. (By Trial Examiner Ruckel. ) Which advisory com-

mittee do you refer to? .

A. Each division representative most of the time had

one or several departments which he was representative

of, and in each department—we always tried, if there

wasn’t one elected, to appoint someone who was fairly well

known in that department.

Q. When you say advisory committee are you referring

to the executive committee?

A. We called it advisory committee. Where the repre-

sentative wasn’t handy or he had a man on the advi isory

committee he would take it up as a grievance himself with

the employe or he would eall in a representative.

Q. Was the advisory committee separate and apart

from the executive committee?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Two different committees?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. (By Mr. McRoberts.) There would be a different

advisory committee in each department, is that right, Mr.

Jones?

Qoneeensamver nesses

GASSES IR SARESEN AIRE IK ALA NEED OPAL SUED EDINGER, BOERNE GEOR NBME SEN GEEK GS SO MIE

30 Witness for N. L. R. B.

236 <A. Yes, sir.

Q. To advise with the representatives who were on

the executive committee of the independent union?

A. You, air.

Q. (By Mr. Evans.) Was there just one advisory com-

mitteeman in each department?

A. No, where the department was large and they

worked shift work, we usually tried to arrange so there

would be one on each shift.

* * * * *

238 Q. Did the board of the Independent Union discuss

the question of whether to participate or take part in

a proposed election by the Labor Board in the smokeless

powder division?

A. I don’t believe we ever discussed whether we would

enter it or not; no.

Q. Did you discuss whether you would not enter it?

A. Well, I believe we received a letter from the

939 Labor Board asking someone to appear at that Board,

and we, or the executive board, instructed the secretary

and the chairman to go and we waive our claims to smoke-

less powder.

Q. Thereafter were you called to the office of the com-

pany?

A. No, not in the office, no, sir.

Q. Did anybody, any representative of the company

talk to you about it?

A. Well, I believe Mr. Ebberts and Mr. McRoberts, and

I believe Mr. Schotters had a meeting in the dinging room

of the main office.

Q. And Mr. Ebberts was an attorney for the company?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And Mr. McRoberts is the attoney for the company

sitting at the table there?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Do you know about when that occurred?

A. Well, I believe it was—I don’t know; about the 20th

of April, I believe, something like that.

Q. Who else was there besides yourself?

A. The executive board.

Q. Of six members?

A. I believe so; yes, sir.

he BBA IAN AP

Testimony of Lowell Jones. 31

(). What was said at that time?

A. Well, I believe Mr. Ebberts asked us if we knew

240 what we had signed, and I think—I believe he said—

asked us if we were or we would—oh, I don’t know the

word he did use,—repudiate the letter, and we told him that

we would not.

Trial Examiner Ruckel: What letter do you mean?

The Witness: The letter we wrote to the Labor Board

waiving our claims on the smokeless powder.

. (By Mr. Evans.) What else was said at that time?

A. Well, I believe that was about all. All he wanted us

was to deny the letter, to say that we didn’t know what we

was doing, or something like that.

Trial Examiner Ruckel: Who is the ‘‘he’’? now?

* * * * *

The Witness: Mr. Ebbert or McEbbert.

(). (By Mr. Evans.) Was there any further meeting

in this regard?

A. Yes. We had another meeting with MceEbbert or

Ebbert,—I get those Me’s in the wrong place. I think it

was about the same thing. He wanted us to repudiate

that letter, and we still refused to do it.

Trial Examiner Ruckel: Who was present on that oe-

casion?

The Witness: The executive board of the Independ-

241 ent Union.

Trial Examiner Ruckel: And who on behalf of the

company? Mr. McRoberts was there?

* * al * *

The Witness: Only Ebbert.

* * * * ~

Q. (By Mr. Evans.) Did Mr. Dawson ever talk to you

about i?t

A. Yes, sir.

Q. When did that oceur?

A. About the 22nd of April, I believe.

Q. That was while the hearing was going on; the repre-

sentation hearing?

A. It was either the day of or the day before.

242, Q. Who was Mr. Dawson?

A. Mr. Dawson was personnel man at the time I

was elected, I think, and he—

PEST PIE tee: @

ve — DRM IN EARNEST IAT, GPR NRL LO he ES PAE ALO ERR MALS

32 Witness for N. L. R. B.

Q. Excuse me. Who else was present when you and

he talked?

A. Just the two of us.

Q. Where did the conversation take place?

A. In the factory office.

Q. How did you happen to be in the factory office ?

A. Well, I wasn’t. I was on a job, and I believe the

foreman said that someone wanted to see me over in the

factory office.

Q. All right. Then, what occurred? What was said

when you got there?

A. Well, Mr. Dawson said—he shook hands with me

and said he hadn’t seen me in a long time, and then we

went in the office, and he said that he realized that we had

not accomplished everything that we should have, but there

was great possibilities there to make a go of the Independ-

ent Union, and I believe he asked if we were going to

appear at the trial.

Trial Examiner Ruckel: What trial did you understand

him to refer to?

The Witness: To the trial to determine whether the

smokeless power was an appropriate bargaining unit.

243. Q. (By Mr. Evans.) What did you tell him?

A. Well, I told him I didn’t know whether we were

or not. At that time we hadn’t decided, I guess.

Q. Did you have any conversation with Mr. Hamilton

about it?

A. No; not concerning that. At the time I talked to

Mr. Hamilton was in the lunchroom, at the cafeteria res-

taurant.

When was that?

The day of the trial, on the 23rd, I guess, of April.

Of April this year?

Yes, sir.

Who else was present at that time?

A. Well, the cafeteria was full. They were eating lunch

at that time.

Q. I mean, who else was present that heard this con-

versation?

A. TI don’t believe there was anyone that heard it.

Q. What was said at the time?

OPOro

Testimony of Lowell Jones. 33

A. Well, he told me that we were supposed to be at the

trial at one o’clock. I started out to the gate. When I got

out to the gate I met Richard Hartingg who at that time

was secretary-treasurer, and asked him what he was going

to do.

And he said, well, Hamilton had told him to come out

too. Well, we decided that we would not go unless we

244 were subpoenaed. Then we were subpoenaed.

Q. Who handed you the subpoena?

A. Well, I don’t know. I guess he was a deputy sheriff

or something.

Q. Was that at the gate that that occurred?

A. Yes.

(). Did you go to the hearing?

A. No, sir.

(). Did you talk to any representative of the company

after you received the subpoena?

A. No, sir.

Q). Did you talk to Mr. Ebbert after that?

A. Well, I don’t know whether they couldn’t locate or

they didn’t locate all of the representatives of the union

the same day that Mr. Harting and me was subpoenaed,

and we were told that we would be used around 10 o0’clock

the next morning.

Well, the representatives—the executive board met in the

office of the independent union and we all went over there

in a body, and when we got out in front of the—where the

trial was being held on Church Street, in East Alton, Mr.

Ebbert asked us if we had changed our minds, and we ‘said,

‘*No,’’ and he dismissed us.

Trial Examiner Ruckel: By changing your minds, vou

understood him to mean what?

2445 <A. Well, the letter which we waived our claims to

the powder mill.

Trial Examiner Ruckel: You had not changed your

mind not to repudiate the letter; is that the idea?

The Witness: Yes: we had not changed our minds, no.

21 Q. Prior to that hearing the Western Cartridge

Employees Independent Union had received a letter or

request from Mr. de Schweinitz, the Regional Director of

34 Witness for N. L. R. B.

the Labor Relations Board, asking your representatives to

eall; is that correct?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And you had a meeting of the executive board of

your union and delegated to Mr. Chapman, Mr. J. B. Chap-

man and Mr. Richard Harting the duty of meeting with

Mr. de Schweinitz?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And did you then delegate to your attorney, Mr.

Weisman, the job of going with them and advising them

on that matter?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. The Independent Union was then being represented

by Mr. Emanuel Weisman; is that correct?

A. Emanuel Weisman, yes, sir.

Q. He is an attorney of Alton, Illinois?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Representing several American Federation of Labor

unions, I believe, doesn’t he?

252 <A. Well, I couldn’t say about that. I have heard it.

Q. But you don’t know?

A. I couldn’t say for sure.

Q. Following that meeting, it is your understanding

that the original, of which this Respondent’s Exhibit 3

is a copy, was written and signed and sent to Mr.

de Schweinitz ?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Now, that letter was not submitted to your executive

board before it was sent out, was it?

A. We drew it up at the meeting.

Q. You did?

A. I believe we told Mr. Weisman that we felt, as we

didn’t have any representation to speak of in the smoke-

less powder, that we weren’t going to contest it in any way.

If they wanted another union, why it was all right with us.

Q. Following those instructions, this letter was written

and sent?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And on the morning when the meeting was held in

the cafeteria at the main office building, Mr. Ebbert and

Mr. Schotters and I were present on behalf of the company

Testimony of Jay D. Chapman. 35

and the members of your executive board were present on

behalf of the Independent Union, and we asked you whether

this letter had been authorized by the board; that is in

substance what was asked you, wasn’t it?

253 <A. I believe so.

Q. And whether your board had seen it before it

was sent out and whether the board approved it and

whether the board was going to stand by it or whether

they were going to enter the union’s appearance in the

proceeding and contest the charges?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And I believe you told us in substance at that meet-

ing that while the Board had not formally authorized this

particular letter, it was the decision of the Board to stand

behind it nevertheless?

A. Yes, sir.

* * * * *

264 JAY D. CHAPMAN, called as a witness by and on

behalf of the National Labor Relations Board:

Direct Examination.

Q. (By Mr. Evans.) Will you state your name and

where you live?

How long have you been president, Mr. Chapman?

Since August, 1940.

Q. I hand you Board’s Exhibit 13 for Identifica-

265 tion and ask to state whether or not that is a copy of

the working agreement entered into between your or-

ganization and Western Cartridge Company on or about

June 2, 1941?

A. Yes, sir. This appears to be the working agreement.

* * * * *

A. Jay D. Chapman, 400 Lincoln, East Alton.

(). You work for the Western Cartridge Company?

A. Ido.

Q. You are the president of the Independent Union?

A. I am.

().

Q. (By Mr. Evans.) Mr. Chapman, have you and the

executive board of the Independent Union and representa-

36 Witness for N. L. R. B.

tives of the company been negotiating for a working agree-

ment for some time?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. So far as you know, was that the first working

agreement signed between the two parties?

A. Since we signed the basic agreement; yes, sir.

Q. That is what I mean. In your negotiations at any

time was any question raised as to the majority status of

the Independent Union?

A. Well, I would say that the executive board left the

impression ‘that we had the majority; yes, sir.

Q. Was any proof of majority submitted to the

566 company in your negotiations for the working agree-

ment?

A. No, sir.

* * a * *

267 Q. Did the working agreement cover the same

groups of employees as the basic agreement?

A. With the exception of smokeless powder; yes, sir.

Q. Well, did the contract entered into on June 2 or June

4, 1941, eliminate the smokeless powder division from

consideration?

A. No, sir. It included all employees of the Western.

Q. No exclusions at all are listed?

A. No, sir.

Q. Was there any understanding at that time of any

exclusions?

A. I don’t think there was; no, sir.

Q. Did it exclude office employees?

Mr. MeRoberts: I think the contract speaks for itself

as to what it covers.

Mr. Evans: I am talking now about any understanding

as to what the parties meant.

Trial Examiner Ruckel: Any understanding in addition

to the contract?

Mr. Evans: That is right; any oral understanding as

to what employees were covered by the contract.

268 Trial Examiner Ruckel: He may answer.

A. No; I don’t think there was.

Q. (By Mr. Evans.) There was no understanding at

all?

Testimony of Jay D. Chapman. 37

A. No, sir.

Q. Were you later informed by representatives of the

company that the contract entered into on June 4, 1941,

would not cover the smokeless powder division?

A. I don’t think so.

Q. May I see vour minutes for July of 1941? I refer

you to the minutes of July 9, 1941, and ask you to read

the paragraph beginning with ‘‘ Mr. Schotters’’.

Mr. McRoberts: May I see that first?

Mr. Evans: Yes,

Mr. McRoberts: Do you want just that paragraph read

into the record?

Mr. Evans: Yes.

Mr. McRoberts: I have no objection to it.

A. (Reading.) ‘‘Mr. Schotters stated that the East

Alton Manufacturing Company had been formed and would

take over the so-called smokeless powder division. As this

was a separate company, the independent union was not

the bargaining agent for those employees under the blanket

agreement. ’’

Q. (By Mr. Evans.) Was the blanket agreement there

referred to the agreement entered into on June 4, 1941,

269 or would that include both the basie agreement entered

into in August, 1937, and the working agreement en-

tered into in June, 1941?

A. I think that this refers to the raise that was coming

up on 7-138, I think.

Mr. MeRoberts: I think the language speaks for itself.

I don’t believe we need further interpretation.

A. That is what that has reference to. You see, on

7-13, we had been granted a raise that we were negotiating

for, and this meeting was on July 9, and the raise took

effect on the 13th, I think it was, and it would not be effec-

tive in the smokeless powder.

Trial Examiner Ruckel: Well, it is your understanding

that the language does not refer to this working agree-

ment, Board’s Exhibit 13?

The Witness: Yes, sir.

Trial Examiner Ruckel: It does refer then to Board’s

Exhibit 13?

38 Witness for N. L. R. B.

The Witness: This paragraph refers to that raise that

was coming up.

Trial Examiner Ruckel: The paragraph you just read

into the record?

The Witness: Yes, sir; that is what this paragraph

refers to.

Mr. McRoberts: The blanket raise effective July 13,

270 Mr. Examiner, of 5 cents an hour, something like that.

The Witness: Yes.

Q. (By Mr. Evans.) Was it your understanding, Mr.

Chapman, that it was just the raise that would no longer

come under this blanket agreement, or was it all matters

pertaining to wages, hours and working conditions of the

smokeless division that would no longer come under that

agreement?

A. When he made this statement?

Q. Yes.

A. I took it for granted that he meant the raise that

was coming up on the 13th.

Q. So, as far as your understanding is concerned, the

Independent Union is still the bargaining agent for the

smokeless powder division?

A. For all employees of the Western, and if that is

the Fast Alton Manufacturing Company, I would say no.

Q. Then it is your understanding that the date of the

formation of the East Alton Manufacturing Company, or

as of that date, the Independent Union was not any longer

the bargaining agent for its employees?

A. That is right.

Q. And you take that from what Mr. Schotters said at

that meeting?

A. This meeting was concerning that raise.

Q. Well, if you didn’t obtain that understanding

271 from that meeting, where did you obtain that under-

standing?

* * * * *

Trial Examiner Ruckel: Does the Board contend, in

spite of its contract with the charging union, that the

respondent is still recognizing the independent as the rep-

resentative of the employees in the smokeless powder di-

vision; is that the contention?

Testimony of Blanche Grisson. 39

Mr. Evans: I believe that up to July 9, 1941, the com-

pany’s position was that the independent union contract

covered the smokeless powder division.

* * * * *

320 BLANCHE GRISSON, a witness called by and on

behalf of the National Labor Relations Board:

* * ” * *

Direct Examination.

* * * * *

You work for the Western Cartridge Company?

Yes, I do.

What department do you work in?

Metallic manufacturing.

Do you know a man named Melvin Taylor?

Yes sir.

Did he ever solicit you to join = Independent?

Yes sir.

When did that occur?

It occurred about the first part of Aaa.

Of what year?

This year.

Where did it take place?

At my machine.

Was that during working hours?

Yes sir.

+ * . * *

POPOPOPOPOPO LOSS

Q. Did he solicit you to join the independent union

at that time?

A. Yes sir.

Did he hand you a card?

. No sir.

. Did he ask you to sign a wage assignment?

. Yes sir.

Did you sign either one?

. No sir.

Do you know whether or not he talked to any of the

other women in that department?

A. Yes sir.

40 Witness for N. L. R. B.

Q. At about that time?

A. Yes sir.

Q. About how many others did you observe him talking

to there there?

A. There are 18 on our job, and I saw him talking to—

I could see six on the cappers; that is the machines that

was right back of us.

Q. Did he have these application cards and wage assign-

ment slips in his hand?

A. Isaw wage assignment slips, but no cards.

322 Q. Did he just go from one girl to the next on the

line?

A. Yes sir.

Q. Was the foreman about when this was going on?

A. He passed by several different times while he was

talking to the other operators.

Q. What was the foreman’s name?

A. Floyd Bennett.

Q. Did Bennett make any effort to stop Taylor?

A. Not at that time.

Q. Did Taylor come back and talk to you later?

A. He came back the next morning.

Q. What did he say to you at that time?

A. He asked me if I had changed my mind about joining

the union.

Q. What did you tell him?

A. I said ‘‘No sir’’.

331 FRANK LOVELL, a witness, called by and on behalf

of the National Labor Relations Board:

~ * * * *

Direct Examination.

* * *. * *

Q. You work for the Western Cartridge Company?

A. Yes sir.

Q. In what department?

A. I am in the metalic inspection; that is in the metalic

manufacturing.

Testimony of William Gent, Jr. 41

Q. Do you do the same type of work as Melvin Taylor?

A. Practically the same.

_ Q. What is his-job?--—-

A. He inspects shells from, I guess, two hundred

machines, different types of shells and different operations.

(. Does he supervise the work of any other men?

A. No, sir, he is just by himself.

Q. Did he ever solicit employes to join the independent

union in your presence?

A. Yes sir.

332. Q. About when did that occur?

A. Just about the first of August.

Q. (By Mr. McRoberts.) Which year?

A. This year.

Q. (By Mr. Evans.) 1941?

A. Yes sir.

Q. Where did that occur?

A. Right at work.

Q. About how many employes did you observe him

solicit ?

A. On the job, I inspect, I had 20 machines, he solicited

each of those operators, and have six adjusters, each one

of those—I imagine I saw him approach twenty others at

the machines.

Q. Was this during working hours?

A. Yes sir.

Q. Was the foreman around the department at that

time?

A. His foreman is Youngbluth, foreman of metalie in-

spection, and he is there all the time on the day shift, and

that i is when it happened.

* *

3389 WILLIAM GENT, JR., a witness called by and on

behalf of the National ‘Labor Relations Board:

* * * . *

340 Direct Examination.

” * 7 * *

Q. You are in the Smokeless Powder Division?

A. That is right.

—— rs

42 Witness for N. L. R. B.

Q. About how long have you worked at the plant?

A. At the East Alton Manufacturing Company?

Q. At the East Alton Manufacturing Company?

A. It was two years last October.

Q. Are you a foreman of any kind?

A. Yes.

Q. What kind?

A. Right now they call it sub-foreman.

Q. (By Trial Examiner Ruckel.) What?

A. Right now they eall it sub-foreman.

Q. (By Mr. Evans.) What department?

A. Hardening; ball powder hardening.

Q. How long have you held such a job?

A. About four months I would s say, roughly.

Q. Is that an hourly jaid job?

341 A. Yes sir.

Q. Did you ever sign a card for the A. F. of L.?

A. Yes sir.

Q. About when?

A. About March.

Q. 1941?

A. 1941, ves sir.

* * * * *

Did you ever have any conversation with Mr. Wortz

about your membership in the union?

A. You mean if I asked him if I should join or not?

Q. (By Trial Examiner Ruckel.) Either before or after

you joined, did you have any conversation in which the

union was mentioned, or vour having joined it was men-

tioned?

A. TI have; one particular time he talked to me about

wearing the union badge and he says that it wasn’t a very

good idea for a foreman to wear a union badge.

Q. (By Mr. Evans.) You were wearing a union badge

at the time?

A. Yes sir.

Q. When did that conversation occur?

A. Right then—I can’t say specifically when he did

342 talk to me about it.

Q. About when?

A. It was before the election, though.

Testimony of William Gent, Jr. 45 j

(). Before the Labor Board election?

A. Yes sir. :

Q. Where did that conversation take place? F

A. It took place in Mr. Wortz’ office. 4

* * * . *

Q. Did he ever ask you to sign a withdrawal from the '

A. F. of L. union?

A. Yes, he did. j

Q. When did that take place? tb

A, That was still before the election, too. :

Q. Where? :

A. In his office. ia

343° Q. Was anybody else there at the time? :

A. No, there was not. :

Q. (By Trial Examiner Ruckel.) Was this the same or ;

another conversation ? 4

A. This is a different conversation. §

Q. (By Mr. Evans.) What was said at that time? :

A. He told me that he felt the best thing for me to do 3

would be to take a withdrawal from the union; he said

they couldn’t do anything for me, and it wasn’t going to be

A. F. of L. down there.

Q. (By Trial Examiner Ruckel.) It wasn’t what?

A. The A. F. of L. was not going to get in there after

the election.

Q. (By Mr. Evans.) Was anything else said at that

time?

A. No, I don’t believe there was.

Q. Do you reeall whether or not anything was mentioned

as to Otten and Bunzy?

A. Yes, he told me Mr. Bunzy and Mr. Otten could not

do anything for me, that the Company could do more for me

than they could.

Q. Bunzy is president of the local?

A. At this time, yes. ;

Q. And Otten was what?

A. Recording secretary.

44 Witness for N. L. R. B.

345 Cross-Examination.

346 Q. When Mr. Wortz told you he thought it was a

bad policy for a foreman to wear a button did he ask

you to withdraw from the union at that time?

A. No, sir, he did not.

Q. You say you did sign a withdrawal from the union?

A. Yes sir.

Q. Whatever happened to that?

A. Mr. Wortz got that.

Q. After that what happened to it?

A. I don’t know what happened to it then.

Q. You did not withdraw?

A. No, sir. I wrote in to the union after I found out

where I made my mistake and told them not to accept any

written letter containing my name on any such matters,

and at that time I did write that withdrawal it was with

the understanding that foremen were allowed in the union.

* * * * *

347 Q. Mr. Wortz, you say, did tell you that he thought

foremen should not be members of the same union that

men under them belonged to, is that correct?

A. No, he didn’t say anything of that type to me.

Q. He just said you should not wear a button?

A. That is right.

Q. At that time he did not say you should not be mem-

bers of the same union?

A. No.

* * * * *

348 Q. (By Mr. McRoberts.) He just asked you to

withdraw, and you withdrew and signed a withdrawal?

A. That is right.

Q. But you never heard of that withdrawal after that

time?

A. No.

Q. It was never sent in to the union that you know of?

A. It was never sent in to the union, no sir, that IT know

of.

Q. Was it in pen and ink, you say?

349 <A. Yes.

Q. Did you write it out?

Testimony of John B. Wildt. 45

A. Yes. I have a duplicate of it at home.

(). Pardon?

A. Ihave a duplicate of it at home.

Q. It just said ‘‘I withdraw from the A. F. of L.’’, or

something to that effect?

A. Yes. I wrote it to Mr. Otten, recording secretary.

Q. (By Trial Examiner Ruckel.) You wrote it to who?

A. Mr. Otten, recording secretary of the A. F. of L.

Q. But you did not send it to him?

A. No sir.

Q. You sent it to who?

A. I gave it to Mr. Wortz and he said he would take care

of that.

Q. (By Mr. McRoberts.) After giving it to him that is

the last you saw or heard of it?

A. Yes sir.

> * * a *

300 JOHN B. WILDT, a witness, called by and on behalf

of the National Labor Relations Board:

Direct Examination.

* * * * *

Q. You work for the East Alton Manufacturing Com-

pany?

A. That is correct.

Q. And you have worked in the Smokeless Division for

about how long?

A. Since December 31, 1940,

(). Shortly after you were hired there and started to

work did you have any conversation with any foremen

about unions?

A. When the A F of L started in the smokeless powder

division, at the time,—that was in January—my fore-

man—supposed to be a supervisor or foreman, I don’t know

just what title he does have.

Q. (By Mr. McRoberts.) What was his name?

Q. (By Mr. Evans.) Tell us his name.

A. I. Canhan.

46 Witness for N. L. R. B.

Q. C-a-n-h-a-n?

A. That is right; he came to the office in the storeroom

and called the boys that were working on the store-

351 room floor in one by one, and the foreman was in there,

Bill Jones, and he asked us to think it over before

joining any organization.

Q. (By Trial Examiner Ruckel.) He called you one at

a time?

A. One at a time, yes.

Q. From where?

A. From off of the stockroom floor.

Q. And called you to where? The office?

A. The storeroom office.

(). The storeroom office?

A. Yes sir.

Q. Who was present there?

A. Bill Jones.

Q. Canhan called you and told you to go to the office?

A. No, he ealled us in the office.. The office is right off

the storeroom floor.

Q. The foreman there is Jones?

A. Yes sir.

Q. (By Mr. Evans.) What did you say Jones’ position

was?

A. Jones was foreman of Number 5 storeroom.

Q. How many employes at that time were called into

the office?

A. There were three of us.

Q. You say there were three of you?

A. Yes sir.

352 “Q. Were you asked to sign an individual contract

after you started to work for the company?

A. I was; yes.

Q. About when was that?

A. That was the first of May, 1941.

* *

* * *

Q. And when you returned did you have any conver-

sation with anybody about it?

A. Not that day; no.

Q. Did you at any time?

Testimony of John B. Wildt. 47

A. Yes; I had a conversation with my foreman, Mr.

Canhan, about the contract and about the union.

Q. About how long after your signing of the con-

tract?

353. A. Well, I would say that was about two or three

days.

Q. Where did that conversation with Canhan take place?

A. The conversation with Canhan took place at No. 5

storeroom.

Q). Who else was present?

A. There was three boys on the floor but I don’t think

they heard any of the conversation.

Q. What was said at that time?

A. Mr. Canhan asked me if I had signed my individual

contract, and I told him yes.

Q. What else was said?

A. And Mr. Canhan and I discussed the union, or the

A. F. of L., and I told him I joined the A. F. of L.

And, he asked me if I thought it would do me any good.

And I told him I wasn’t sure; that I belonged to the

A. F. of L. organization once before in Wood River and I

didn’t think very much of it, but being as how the rest of

the boys in the storeroom had joined the A. F. of L., why I

wasn’t going to be one to stay in there and not join it. |

Then the conversation just went from one thing to the

next.

Q. Well, tell us what else was said.

A. Well, Mr. Canhan went ahead to tell about his

brother-in-law in Washington that works in a lumber mill,

and he said that they were out on strike out there

354 about six months out of the year, and he asked me if I

wanted to be like that; be out on strike about half of

the time.

And I told him, no.

Q. Anything else said?

A. Mr. Canhan asked me if I thought the A. F. of L.

would do me any good, and I told him yes, I did.

And Mr. Bunzy at the time was—they had a wage scale

at the Monsonto Chem‘ -al Company, and he showed me the

rate seale for the stockroom clerks of that company, which

48 Witness for N. L. R. B.

was 92 cents an hour, and I told Mr. Canhan that I would

join any organization for 92 cents an hour.

Q. Anything else said?

A. That is about all I recall. We discussed this indi-

vidual contract.

Q. What was said about that?

A. And Mr. Canhan showed me where if I had this con-

tract, where it would mean about five cents more on the

hour, by having this individual contract, than if I joined

an organization and lost it.

Q. Was anything said about the Independent Union?

A. No, sir—or, wait a minute; I will take that back.

Mr. Canhan said that he thought the Independent Union

could do more for me than an outside union.

Q. Did you wear an A. F. of L. button in the plant?

A. I did; yes.

+ *

* * *

371 JADY B. CHAPMAN, thereupon resumed the witness

stand:

Direct Examination (Continued.)

* * * * *

388 Q. After the election on May 6, 1941, did the Com-

pany continue to deduct dues for employes in the

smokeless powder division and include those among the

dues turned over to you each month?

A. After the election?

Q. After the election in the smokeless powder division

on May 26th, 1941?

A. Yes sir.

Q. Is the Company still deducting dues for employes in

the smokeless powder division and turning those dues over

to you each month?

A. I think so, yes.

Q. Do you have the financial statement of the union for

August, 1941?

A. Yes sir.

Q. Does the financial report reflect certain amounts

paid to individuals for obtaining members?

Testimony of Jady B. Chapman. 49

A. May I ask again just what month you said?

Q. August.

389 A. To August 1 or from August 1?

Q. From August 1 to September 1. Does the finan-

cial report for that month indicate such names?

A. Yes sir.

Q. Will you read to us the amounts that were paid to

various individuals for the month of August?

A. Rudolph S. Hale, $3.60. Frank Pfeiffer, $23.75.

Morris Medford, $30.25. Raymond Hutchins, $3.00. Earl

(reeling, $29.50. Willie Holder, $10.25. Melvin Taylor,

$50.05. Lois Franklin, $9.25. Edith Brenner, $8.00.

(). What were these amounts paid for—I beg your par-

Did you have some more there?

Yes.

Read the rest of them, please?

A. James Carroll, $7.25; Leslie Britton, $3.25. Emil

Lang, $3.25. Ed. Nolan, $4.25. Gilbert Clark, $10.25.

Harry Frazer, $3.50.

Q. What were those payments for.

A. They were listed as miscellaneous expense incurred

in obtaining memberships.

Q. What was the agreement with the individuals as to

how much they would get for that work?

A. The Board knew—

Q. That is the Union board?

A. Yes, the Executive Board of. the union knew

390 there would be quite a bit of expense in obtaining mem-

bers, so they arrived at twentyfive cents each would

be fair reimbursement.

Q. So these wage assignment statements and applica-

tion cards were distributed to various persons, beginning

August 1941, with the understanding that those returned,

signed, they would get twentyfive cents for each such state-

ment signed, is that correct?

A. That is correct.

Q. (By Trial Examiner Ruckel.) Your records then

show Melvin Taylor ob‘ained approximately two hundred

new members?

A. Yes sir.

Q. Fifty some odd dollars?

Ray Cae

Naar ES Ye GS Rly EE Pee! UE or .

50 Witness for N. L. R. B.

A. Yes, for the month of August.

Q. 1941?

A. That is right.

(By Mr. Evans. ) Did that proposition continue up

to the present time?

A. Yes sir.

Q. And your subsequent financial statements indicate

similar amounts paid to those and other employees for

later months?

A. Not near as much.

Q. August was the big month, is that it?

A. Yes sir.

Q. Did the representatives and committeemen like-

391 wise receive twentyfive cents commission for each new

member?

A. The committeemen did; the representative did not.

Q. So in addition to the ones indicated in August 1941,

for those you have read, there were additional ones which

the representatives obtained?

A. Yes sir.

Q. (By Trial Examiner Ruckel.) What department

does Melvin Taylor work in—Melvin or Melville, which is

it?

A. M-e-l-v-i-n.

Q. What department did he work in in August 1941?

A. As far as I know it was in the metalic department.

Q. Metalic manufacturing?

Yes sir.

Q. (By Mr. Evans.) Was there any instructions given

as to where the employes would solicit these new member-

ships and wage assignments?

A. I don’t know what the other fellows did, but any that

I instructed I told them not to do it on company time or

property. They were instructed that way.

Q. You do not know whether they followed your in-

structions or not?

A. I ecouldn’t say, no sir.

* * * * *

Testimony of Jady B. Chapman. 51

394 Cross-Examination.

Q. (By Mr. McRoberts.) Your union, the independent

union, still has some members over in the Smokeless

Powder Division who are now working for the East

3895 Alton Manufacturing Company, does it not?

A. Yes sir.

Q. Just a few members still over there?

A. Yes sir.

Q. And it is their dues that have still been collected

and their wage assignments which have not been canceled?

A. That is right.

Q. And their dues have been remitted to you during the

last few months?

A. Yes sir.

Q. About how many of them are there?

A. Twentyfive or thirty.

Q. With respect to this booklet, Mr. Chapman, Exhibit

number 14, I believe the representatives of the Company

advised the representatives of the independent union some-

time ago that they were going to put out some such a book-

let as this?

A. Yes.

Q. And you suggested to them it would be helpful if

they included in that booklet a copy of these contracts, is

that correct?

A. May I answer it this way: That the union intended

to make a booklet with all contracts and working agree-

ments so each employe would have one that they could

carry with them, and our methods of distributing had

396 been so bad, and when the Company suggested putting

out a booklet, that they were going to put out a book-

let stating from the founding of the Company, we asked

would they insert the working agreement and the contract.

Q. And they inserted not only the working agreements,

but grievance procedure and this basic agreement as well?

A. Yes sir.

Q. And you on several oceasions—and by you I mean

representatives of the union, on several occasions had

meeting with the Company representatives and asked them

when these booklets were going to come out?

fA |

Witness for N. L. R. B.

A. Yes sir.

Q. You wanted them and you asked for them?

A. Yes.

Q. And they were eventually issued a short time ago,

is that correct?

A. Yes sir.

Q. Within the last month or two?

A. Yes, within the last month or two.

+ * * *

400 . I believe you testified yesterday in June 1941

the Company did not demand to see any evidence as to the

number of members which the union had?

A. I don’t think they did.

Q. But I think you testified that you left the impres-

sion—the union representatives left the impression with

the Company you did have a majority?

A. Yes sir.

* + . ” *

435 CHRIS MEISENHEIMER, called as a witness by

and on behalf of the National Labor Relations

Board:

+ * * . *

Direct Examination.

* * * * *

436 Q. You work for the Western Catridge Company?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. What department do you work in?

A. Casting shop.

Q. About how long have you worked for the company?

A. I hired in in 1933.

. Do you hold any office or position with the Inde-

pendent Union?

A. I am a representative of that department on our

shift.

Q. How long have you been representative?

A. Since last spring, along in February, I think, the

latter part of February, I think, I was appointed repre-

sentative or elected representative.

Testimony of Chris Meisenheimer.

Q. Elected by the group in the cast shop?

A. On our shift.

Q. What shift was that?

A. No. 1.

* * * 7 *

439 QQ. Mr. Williams, Burdette Williams and Mr. Wil-

liam Elliott worked in the same department you did?

A. They worked in the same department I do or did.

Q. After their discharge did you discuss that matter

with Mr. Day?

A. Yes. We held a meeting in the brass mill office and

I told Mr. Day according to our working agreement that

the Independent Union had, that they had no right to dis-

charge them men without taking it up with the union repre-

sentatives first.

Q. I show you Board’s Exhibit No. 15 and ask you to

state whether or not that is the agreement to which you

refer, or a copy of it?

A. This is a copy of the agreement, and I based my

argument on ‘*‘When management wants to remove a man

from the job they must show the union representative be-

yond a reasonable doubt the man has failed in one of the

following—”’

Q. That is Paragraph No. 9?

A. No. 9.

Q. Then it sets forth the A, B, C, D, and E provisions?

A. Provisions. And, I told Mr. Day that he should

have taken that up with the representatives before he dis-

charged them men.

Trial Examiner’ Ruckel: Before he discharged

whom?

440 The Witness: Mr. Williams and Mr. Elliott.

Q. (By Mr. Evans.) What did Mr. Day say?

A. He said he realized that it was a mistake; that it

would never happen again.

* * * * *

ie Me ES ROR SRR CN Pe IED ‘ Pp $a ease 7"

54 Witness for N. L. R. B.

449 PROCEEDINGS.

* * * * *

480 WILLIAM ELLIOTT, called as a witness by and on

behalf of the National Labor Relations Board:

* * * * *

Direct Examination.

. * * * *

Q. Did you work for the Western Cartridge Company

at some time?

A. About 13 years, I guess.

Beginning when and to when?

A. Well, the first time was in 1925, and I guess I worked

a year and a half.

Then, later, about the latter part of 1927, I think I

worked something like a year; probably a year and a half.

Then, the last time I worked from November of 1930 until

July, 1941.

Q. In 1937 you were working at the plant?

A. Yes.

481 Q. Was there an effort by the C. L O. to organize

sometime during that year?

A. Well, there was. They were soliciting and passing

out handbills along about that time.

Q. Did that begin before or after the beginning of the

Independent Union?

A. Before.

Q. Did you sign a card for the union at that time?

A. I did.

Q. The C. I. O. union?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And did you attend meetings of that union?

A. I attended several meetings.

Q. Thereafter did anybody solicit you to join the Inde-

pendent?

A. Oh, yes.

Q. And who was that?

A. GQus Robinson was the first man that ever solicited

me to join the Independent.

Testimony of William Elliott. 5d

Who was he?

He was an employee that worked in the casting shop.

Did that take place in the shop?

It took place in the shop; yes.

Anybody else solicit you?

Yes; Bill Keil.

* * * 7 *

483 Q. Did you later sign a card for the Independent

Union?

A. Qh, yes; later I did.

* *

* * *

Q). Had you ever become a department committeeman

for the Independent Union?

A. Yes.

Q. About when did that oceur?

484 A. I think it was last February, probably the last

of last February, 1941; somewhere along about that

time.

al * * * oe

Q. Did you ever have any conversation with Mr.

485 Day about the Independent Union last spring?

A. Several times; several different occasions.

(). When, approximately, was the first time?

A. Well, I would say it was probably in the latter part

of February.

Q. Where did the conversation take place?

A. In the brass mill office; in his office.

Q. Anybody else present at the time?

A. I don’t think se, no.

Q. What was said at that time?

a About the Independent Union—well, Mr. Day at

different times called me up to the office, his office, and

asked me about different things, work and the union, and we

discussed unions and the work and the kind of work and

the qualifications and all of the men that worked there, and

some way to better conditions.

And he talked to me abou! the Independent Union and

he asked me—he told me—he said that he didn’t see any

reason why the Independent Union couldn’t be made to

work. He says, ‘‘Now, Bill, you are the only man back

there can put the union inside or out.”’

NER LE MEN SE PRL RS GR POSER PNT CTR OMI 5

56 Witness for N. L. R. B.

Now he said, ‘‘It is up to you, and I am counting on you

to help me.’’

Well now, I said, ‘‘Mr. Day,’’ I said, ‘‘I never solicited

any union of any kind.’’ I said, ‘‘I would not ask a

486 man to join any union; I never have and I don’t expect

to. But,’’ I said, ‘‘it is not up to me to help these men

make their minds up.’’ I said, ‘‘They don’t especially like

that union for different reasons. They have been told it is

a company union.’’

* * * * .

Q. (By Mr. Evans.) Go ahead.

A. I told him that the employees had been told by

different representatives of the union it was a company

union, and I said, ‘‘I don’t know whether it is or not, but

I have been told it is.’’

And I said, ‘‘You ean’t expect me to go out there and

try to sell that union to those fellows if they don’t want it.”

Well, he said, ‘‘You can do it. You are the only man out

there that can do it.’’

Well, I said, ‘‘ Maybe I am, but I can’t do it. I won’t do

it,’ I said. ‘‘I don’t want anything to do with it, no more

than if there is anything I can do to help you out and these

men out at the same time, I am perfectly willing to do it.

But,’’ I says, ‘‘when it comes to the question of putting the

union over,’’ I says, ‘‘you can count me out.”’

487 . You say this conversation took place the latter

part of February, 1941?

A. The latter part of February.

Q. Was that shortly after you had become the commit-

teeman for that department ?-

A. Committeeman.

Q. Later on did you sign for the A. F. of L.?

A. Yes; I did.

Q. About when was that?

A. I think that was sometime in July. I signed the card

sometime in July; I am not sure.

Q. Did you resign from the Independent Union at any

time?

A. Yes; 1 resigned from the Independent Union along

the first of July.

Q. 1941?

A. 1941.

Testimony of William Elliott.

“I

Q. And did you stop your wage assignment?

A. I stopped the wage assignment.

Trial Examiner Ruckel: How did you do that?

The Witness: I had to go over to the Independent Union

office over here and sign a card authorizing them—the eom-

pany, to stop the wage assignment.

* * *

488 Q. (By Mr. Evans.) After Gruner became the com-

mitteeman from that department, did he solicit em-

ployees there to join the Independent Union?

A. Yes, sir; most every day.

(). Did he do so in the presence of foremen?

A. Yes. I happened to be standing right next to him,

talking to the foreman, when he was talking to a new em-

ployee there, trying to get him to join the union.

(). What was the name of the foreman?

A. Otis Cooper.

* *

489 Q. Were you ever elected to any office in the A. F. of

L. union?

A. Financial secretary.

Q. When did that occur?

A. The 23rd of July, 1941.

Q. What local was that for?

A. 333 International Molders and Foundry Workers

Union.

Q. About that time did you have some discussion with

some foreman about a shift change?

A. Yes; with Orville Carlton and Terry, Clyde Terry.

(). What was Carlton’s job?

A. I am not sure at the time, but I found out after-

wards he was assistant superintendent out at the mill

490 at night; in the brass mill at night.

Q. What was Terry’s job?

A. He was foreman in the casting shop on my shift.

Q. Tell us what this was about; what was said.

A. Well, it was about a change in shifts. They hed a

shift bulletin up on the board and they wanted to change

for a new one, so they brought them up and hung them up

on the bulletin board, and wanted all the men to look at it

to see what they thought of it.

So, we all decided, that is, the majority, that they didn’t

58 Witness for N. L. R. B.

want anything to do with it; they didn’t want the new

bulletin, after we had been told that it lost us money.

Mr. McRoberts: What?

The Witness: That we would lose money.

Trial Examiner Ruckel: That you would lose money by

reason of what?

The Witness: By reason of the change in the shift.

Trial Examiner Ruckel: When you say you didn’t want

the bulletin, you mean you didn’t want the change that the

bulletin notified you of?

The Witness: That is right.

Q. (By Mr. Evans.) Were you to sign this bulletin

notice if you were in favor of it?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Who told you that?

491 <A. Terry.

Q. And did you sign it?

A. No; I didn’t sign it.

Q. Anything else said between you and Terry at that

time?

A. Oh, ves, we diseussed it. I said, ‘‘Have you figured

that new bulletin out, that new schedule out, that is on the

bulletin board?’’

He said, ‘‘No.’’

And I said, ‘‘ Figure it out.’’

And he said, ‘‘ Why?’’

And I said, ‘‘I have been figuring it out, figuring out

how many extra days work you have in a year, and see

how much overtime you lose at the end of the year.”’

He figured it out. So, he and I went over on my furnace

and figured it out, and he said, ‘‘ Well, I didn’t know that.”’

And I said, ‘‘I didn’t know either until I figured it out.”

So he said—well, he said, ‘‘I am supposed to go around

and ask all you fellows to vote on it.’’ He said, ‘*You can

vote on it if you want to or not, if you don’t want to.’’ And

he said, ‘‘I have a list of names of the men on the shift,

and they are supposed to vote yes or no.”’

So I said, ‘‘Well, that is a poor way to vote. It is sup-

posed to be a change manipulated some way by the

492 Independent Union; anyway, they had something to do

with the change, or schedule,—the Independent Union

was supposed to have.”’

Testimony of William Elliott. 59

Trial Examiner Ruckel: You said that to him?

The Witness: No; he said that to me.

Well, I said, ‘‘If they wanted them to vote on it, why not

let them vote in the proper manner?” [| said, ‘‘That is the

kind of vote Hitler gave the Czechs when he took the coun-

try over.’’

Well, he said he didn’t think very mueh of it himself,

but if they want to have the men vote, why not give them

the privilege and let them vote on it. And I said, yes, that

is the way I thought about it too.

So, we had quite a lot of discussion, and several other

fellows joined in it. They was not very much impressed

with the goodness of the changeover.

Q. (By Mr. Evans.) Did you later have a conversation

with Carlton then?

A. Yes. Terry, I suppose, told Carlton. So he said,

‘Bill, what have you got against that change in the sched-

ule?’’

I said, ‘‘There is lots of things against it.’’ I said, ‘In

the first place, we lose money on it; in the second place, we

haven’t enough time between changes of the shifts.’’ I

493 said, ‘‘ You have no time at all between the two shifts.’?

Well, he said, ‘‘If you made up your mind, there is

no use for me to try to sell you this,’’ he said, ‘‘but the

fact is, we want to get all the men working together on the

same shift.’’ He said, ‘‘You know there is a lot of men

out of town that work here now.”’’ He said, ‘‘Some of the

men have bought new cars on the strength of other em-

ployees riding with them to help pay for them.’’

I said, ‘‘If a man would buy a new ear on the strength

of somebody else helping him pay for it, he must be silly.’’

I said, ‘‘I am not obligated to do anything like that,’’ I

said. I said, ‘‘ Are you obligated to pay for somebody else’s

automobile ?’’

And he said, ‘‘No.’’

Q. Did you have any further conversation with Mr.

Carlton about that?

A. I said, ‘‘Have you figured out how much money we

lose at the end of the year?’

And he said, ‘‘No.’’

And I said, ‘‘Figure it out.’

He would not discuss the loss to the employees about

PEL IATL EL EL HOTT IPH HE OG Es LEE PLE IM PU LE | EVIL EI STE TRH HEL AE SOP ng a er ORS Ie

—

GO Witness for N. L. R. B.

that. He didn’t say much more that night, but he came up

the next night and he said, ‘‘ Hello, Bill, how are you?”’

And I said, ‘‘O. K. How are you?”’

He said, ‘‘I am mad as hell.’’

494 I said, ‘‘What about?’’

He said, ‘‘ You told the men up here that I said that

the new schedule was losing money.”’

I said, ‘‘Now, I am not sure that I said that, but,’’ I

said, ‘‘you don’t deny it, do you?’’ I said, ‘‘After all, it

is true, isn’t it?’’

Well, he didn’t say whether it was or not. But, he says

that he didn’t like to have me tell the men.

Well, I said, ‘‘I am not sure that I told them that you

said that.’’

‘It is something or other,’’ he says, ‘‘something else."’

And I says, ‘‘Maybe I did tell them. Even if I did,” I

said, ‘‘what of it?’’

And he said nothing.

I said, ‘‘Let us forget about it.’’

And he said, ‘‘It is not worth arguing about.’’

Trial Examiner Ruckel: When was that conversation?

The Witness: That was around about the 22nd or 23rd

—I think it was on the 22nd and 23rd of July.

Trial Examiner Ruckel: Was it before or after you

were elected financial secretary of 333?

The Witness: It was after.

Trial Examiner Ruckel: Well, I thought you testified

that you were elected financial secretary on the 23rd of

July.

495 A. That was about the night I was elected. The

first conversation I think over there was on the night

that I was elected financial secretary.

Trial Examiner Ruckel: And the second conversation

was the morning after you were elected?

The Witness: Not after. We were working the mid-

night shift then. The first conversation was one day before

and the second on the same day as the election of the

union; I am not sure, but it was around there somewhere.

Q. (By Mr. Evans.) Do you know Herschel McCauley!

A. Yes.

Q. What is his job with the company?

Testimony of William Elliott. 61

A. Well, he has been with the company a good many

years. His job last year, I think, was—the first of last

year he was assistant superintendent in the brass mill,

or he held that position.

Q. In July, 1941, was he still in that position?

A. No; I think he was transferred out to the employ-

ment department, employment office.

Q. Did you have any conversation with him about the

Independent Union?

A. Oh, several times.

Q. Did you have one in July?

A. I am not sure I had a conversation with him then,

but he was in the employment office in July—

496 Q. When did you have the conversation with him

about the Independent?

A. Well, when we were negotiating the contract for the

cast shop, he was P. W. Day’s assistant, he was holding

that capacity at that time, and I had several conversations

with him then, personal conversations along in, I would

say, February or March; probably up until April.

Q. Did he at one time ask you to solicit men to join

the Independent?

A. More than one time he asked me. He asked me more

than one time why I didn’t get behind the Independent

Union to try to make something out if it.

Q. And what did you tell him?

A. I said, ‘‘Herschel, Chapman told me—’’ he is the

president of that union— ‘‘that it was a company union;

it was formed by the company, for the company’s own

benefit.’ And I said, ‘‘He told the men that at a meeting

one night.’’ I said, ‘‘Do you expect me to go out there and

ask those men to join that union?’’ I said, ‘“Just between

you and I, is it a company union?’’

And he said, ‘‘Off the record, it is.’’

* * * * .

Q. (By Mr. Evans.) Well, what happened about your

job in July?

497 A. I was fired.

Q. Who fired you?

A. P. W. Day.

Q. What day was that?

. . Se een

ae ope Re PCO a Dee es i aa Be Ln A 4 -

aS ~ aa Re eS, ERI, LON : .

62 Witness for N. L. R. B.

A. The 25th.

Q. Did you have a conversation with him?

A. Oh, yes. I had a lengthy conversation with Mr. Day

at the time I was fired.

498 Q. (By Trial Examiner Ruckel.) July 25th, you

say you were discharged?

A. The 25th, yes.

Q. (By Mr. Evans.) July 25th?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Was anybody else present at the time?

A. Not at the beginning of the conversation, but at the

finish of the conversation he nodded his head for Bernard,

and he is personnel man in the brass mill; he nodded his

head for him to come over, and he came over and took

a seat.

Q. What was said before Bernard came over?

A. Mr. Day called me in, and I was off that day, and

my wife told me Mr. Day wanted to see me; so I went

down to his office and sat down, and he said ‘‘Sit down”

and I said ‘‘All right’’, and he had a kind of belligerent

manner, and he said ‘‘I called you in to tell you you haven’t

a job here any more’’, and I said ‘‘That is funny, what is

it all about?’’ and he said ‘‘You stuck me in the back, and

let me down’’, and I said ‘‘I stuck you in the back and

let you down? What do you mean? He didn’t exactly ex-

plain himself, but he went ahead to tell me—the conversa-

tion led up to the fact I had let him down on the inde-

pendent union, and I said ‘‘No, I didn’t let you down’’,

and I said ‘‘I made a bargain about it one day with

499 you, and I have kept it, and I never let you down, and

the Company let you down’’. I said ‘‘I went out

and sold you to the men that worked in the casting shop”’,

and I said ‘‘You told me what you could do, what you

would do, that they would get a square deal’’, he said he

knew they had never had a square deal before, but 4s

long as he was superintendent out there he would see they

had a square deal. I said ‘‘Now, when you find out you

cannot give the men a square deal you want to tell me |

have laid down on you”’ and I said ‘‘I have done every-

thing I could to help you in every way I could, and now all

I get for it is getting fired’’,

ooh E tal ane tte ane en o 4 .

TERE Rees SPAS RRR Ge ee SES Pe REAR Satay Crh Remeirrtiete ne ee nb peng

Testimony of William Elliott. 63

Q. You say Mr. Bernard was called over?

A. He was called over. After that we got into a con-

versation about back pay.

Q. What was that?

A. We had a conversation about the bonus, and we

used to work under a bonus system, about the money that

the Company beat the men out of under the bonus system,

and I had that conversation with Mr. Day before.

Q. How long ago was that?

A. The discussion about—

Q. About the bonus? Was that back of 1938?

A. 1938, I think they started to quit paying the bonus

along the early part of 1939, I am not sure.

500 Q. You and Mr. Day had a discussion about the

bonus?

A. We had a discussion about the bonus. He wanted

to know what was the matter with the men out there, at

different times, and I told him the biggest majority of the

men that worked out there talked about it and they all

know how much money they were beat out of under the

bonus system, and that kind of rankled them, and I said

‘You know it was a bonus you promised to pay some

hourly men and the other men that were put on the bonus,

and it is different, and they make more metal now than we

did at any time they were working under the bonus SYs-

tem.’’

Q. Was Bernard present in this conversation?

A. Not right there until the very last.

Q. Go ahead.

A. I told him they made a lot less money for the amount

of work they did, and I said ‘‘That is one thing that is

the matter with the men’’, and I said ‘‘You know all that

money’’—some of the men kept track of the money the

company beat us out of on the bonus, and it ran into four

figures, and I said ‘‘That is what makes some of the men

mad out there.’? He said ‘‘We don’t owe you anything’’,

and I said ‘Yes, you do. You remember a couple of

months ago when you and I were discussing the matter you

called me up here to find out what was the matter with

the men in the casting shop, and why they were dis-

01 satisfied, and we discussed that before, and I gave

you a figure of how much they beat me out of and you

ETT RELIES TER TMA RTM rete a ASS

64 Witness for N. L. R. B.

said to me the Company still had the records of how much

money they beat us out of on the bonus system’’, and |

said ‘‘You know they owe that money”’ and he said ‘‘Bill,

if you think you have a just claim against the Company

I will call a conference with the management and we will

try to get this thing straightened out’’, and I said ‘‘No,

I am not that smart, Mr. Day.’’ At the present time I

was kind of upset, and I said ‘‘When I have a conference

with the management I would like to have a lawyer around

to kind of defend me’’, and he said ‘‘ All right’’, and that

was about the time he called Bernard over; so the con-

versation didn’t last much longer, and he just went ahead

and said ‘‘Bill, I am sorry I have to do this, it is not my

idea’’, and he said ‘‘I would rather fire any man that works

for me than I would you’’, and I said ‘‘Why’’ and he

said ‘‘For different reasons.’’ I said ‘‘I think I know the

reason’’, I told him what the reason was, I said ‘‘ Because

I was always a little more honest with you than anyone

vou could find’’ and he said ‘‘That and a few other things;

I could always depend on you to tell me the truth’’ but

he said ‘‘I have orders to fire you, and you don’t expect

me to lose my job over not firing you, do you?’’ and |

said ‘‘No, I don’t expect you to lose your job over not

firing me’’ and I said ‘‘I think I know what you are up

502 against just as well as you do’’, and he said ‘‘ Well,

you understand the situation’’, and I said ‘‘ Yes, per-

fectly’’, and he said ‘‘I wish you a lot of luck’’ and he

said ‘‘Be careful and take care of yourself.’’

Q.. Did you have any conversation then with anybody

else?

A. Yes, after I left the office I went out to see Mr.

Haddelton.

(). The personnel manager?

A. Yes, Mr. Day told me I could stop and see Mr.

Haddelton, and I went to see him.

Did you see him?

Yes.

Was anybody else present at that time?

No, he was by myself.

What was said at that time?

I just told him who I was, and I just got fired, and

POPO>O

Fie OTC ON Pease oe ae we

Testimony of William Elliott. 65

what I thought it all amounted to, and he said ‘‘I am sorry,

there is not a thing I can do. I don’t know, what seems

to be going on, to tell me this, and during the last war

everybody was crazy’’, and he said ‘‘The same thing this

time, everybody acts crazy to me’’, and I said ‘‘ All right’?

and he said ‘‘There is nothing I ean do”’ and I said ‘Thank

you.’’

Q. Did you go to see anybody else?

A. Mr. Schotters, the general plant superintendent.

D103 Q. Did you see him?

A. Yes.

Q. Where?

A. In the main office, in the lobby.

Q. Was anyone else there at that time?

A. There was no one in the conversation. There were

several in the building, but not in the conversation.

Q. What was said at that time?

A. I went in ano I said ‘I am Bill Elliott; I did have

a job out in the casting shop, but I just got fired’’ and

he said ‘‘Oh, yes, this man Olds called me about you about

five minutes ago’’, and I said ‘“What has he got to do

with firing me?’’ and he said ‘‘T don’t know, you will have

to find out’’. I said ‘Oh, you are firing me for union

activities’? and he said ‘‘T didn’t know you belonged to the

union’’, and I said ‘‘That is funny, you just got through

telling me that Olds called you up about me and he is the

union organizer’’, and he said “I am not firing you for

that’’, and I said ‘‘What are you firing me for?’’ and he

said ‘‘For making insinuating remarks about the manage-

ment’’ and I asked him what kind of remarks I had made,

and he said ‘About the Company beating you out of

money”’, and I said ‘‘Well, didn’t they?” and he said “The

Company doesn’t owe you a damned cent?’ and I said ‘‘Oh,

yes, they do”’ and he said they didn’t do business that

904 way, and I said ‘‘May be they don’t, but they did’;

and he said ‘‘I am new here, I have only been here

since January’’ and IT explained to him the bonus system

we worked under for several years, and he said “‘I am

new here, and I don’t know anything about it, and I would

have to look it up’? and I said “‘You are new, and still

“WL MORN aE AD ETUC NE TI A i

PELE LE LL EOL ELS GLUES SLEEVE MIRE NODE EAE DL GIES BEML TE IEE OEE ES AIAG

66 Witness for N. L. R. B.

you say the Company doesn’t owe me a damned cent?”

and he said ‘‘I would have to go into that.’’

Q. Was anything else said?

A. He told me that no one—that he was not firing me

for union activities, but he said ‘‘Anyone that has any

remarks to make about the management will be fired’’, and

I said ‘‘What are you going to do, fire everybody that

works for you’’, and he said ‘‘No’’ and I said ‘‘You say

that is the reason for firing me, I have heard several people

making remarks about the management’? and I said “I

have been here a long time, and I know several people,

and I don’t know any yet that didn’t have some remark

to make about the management”’ and he said ‘‘Who were

they?’’ and I said ‘“‘I didn’t say’’ and I said ‘‘T heard

some monthly salaried men make remarks about the man-

agement’’, and he said ‘‘Who were they?’’ and I said ‘‘I

didn’t say’’, and he said ‘‘Anybody who makes remarks

about the management will be fired’’, and I said ‘‘You

had better fire all of them then’’ and I said ‘‘I have

heard people make remarks about the management

505 I wouldn’t begin to think of.’’

Q. Have you ever been called back to work since

that time?

A. No, I never have.

Mr. Evans: That is all.

* * #* * *

518 Q. I think you said you had several conversations

with Mr. Day?

A.° I did; I had several conversations with him.

Q. In which the independent union was discussed?

A. We discussed working conditions, and the work, and

the metal, independent union, and various other sub-

jects.

519 Q. How many discussions did you have with him in

which the independent union was discussed?

A. Practically every one I had with him we got around

to discussing the independent union.

Q. Over what period of time?

A. I would say a period of two months, may be once or

twice a week.

a a

RELIES STELIOS ae aes

Testimony of William Elliott. 67

Q. What was the substance of those conversations

with him?

A. He told me different times about the union.

Q. About the independent?

A. About the independent, and he said that he didn’t

see any reason why the independent union couldn’t do good

work, and I said it could if it had proper representation,

and I said if it was just something like the Standard Oil

we could, and we talked about the Standard Oil union and

1 told him we couldn’t get that because it is a Federal

union, or at least it was, of petroleum workers, and we

couldn’t get anything like that, and I said that it might be

made to work if it was started and rebuilt from the ground

up on different lines, and he said he didn’t see any reason

why it couldn’t be done that way, and he said ‘‘ Why don’t

you get behind it and try to do something with it?’’ and I

said ‘‘I am not much of an organizer myself.’’

@. What date was it you testified you joined the A. F.

of L.?

A. I think it was the 23rd of July, 1941.

520. Q. (By Mr. McRoberts.) Is that the date you

joined or were elected to office?

. Q. (By Trial Examiner Ruckel.) You testified you

were elected to office the 25th of July?

A. Elected to office. It was somewhere near the 5th or

6th when I really joined the organization.

Q. Of July?

A. Yes, What I mean by joining is signing up with

the A. F. of L.

Q. When did you resign from the independent?

A. Somewhere around the first of July.

Q. That is, the time you resigned as an officer of the

independent?

A. I never was elected an officer of the independent

and I kind of checked up the men who worked on my shift

in the casting shop. ’

Q. As representative?

A. Representative.

Q. About when was it that you resigned from the in-

dependent, you say?

A. It was around the first of July.

ble ea NT AL here ees Bae Ov DANS Sas BOLL Tyce ena aR aoe

SEDO EEN RO

68 Witness for N. L. R. B.

’ Q. It was before you joined the A. F. of L.?

A. It was before or about that time; it was close to

that time.

* , * * * *

522 Q. (By Mr. McRoberts.) Mr. Elliott, in these con-

versations with Mr. Day were you presenting various

grievances that you or the other men in the shop had?

A. No, it was more—Mr. Day would call me to his

office and ask me about different things and changes, and

he was new on that job, and he would call me out there

and ask my advice about different changes in the casting

shop, and I would make recommendations to him for the

changes, and he did follow some of them.

* a . * *

523. Q. (By Trial Examiner Ruckel.) After you were

told you were discharged, and before you saw Mr.

Schotters, did you speak to Mr. Olds to tell him you had

been discharged?

A. No, I didn’t have any opportunity. I left Mr. Day’s

office and immediately went to Mr. Haddelton, and from

Mr. Haddelton’s office I went down to the main office, to

see Mr. Schotters.

Q. How soon after you were told you were discharged

was it Mr. Schotters told you Mr. Olds had called up?

A. I would say thirty minutes, because I sat and talked

probably thirty minutes, or longer, after he told me I was

discharged, and I said ‘‘It is strange all of a sudden you

make up your mind to fire me, Mr. Day’’ and I mentioned

about joining the union, and he said ‘‘I didn’t know you

joined the union’’ and I said ‘‘That is funny, Mr. An-

ders—’’ he is Mr. Day’s assistant in the cast shop—he

said he named practically all the officers of it that had been

elected the night before.

Q. Who did?

A. Charles Anders.

524 QQ. Heis Mr. Day’s assistant?

A. He is Mr. Day’s assistant.

Q. To whom did he name them?

A. To some of the fellows who were talking.

Q. To whom did he name them? Did you have a talk

with Mr. Anders?

Testimony of William Elliott. 69

A. There were two other fellows he was talking to, and

| was taking the conversation in, and I was standing close

to him.

Q. What did Mr. Anders say?

A. He said ‘‘How about you?”’ and I made some slight

remark about it, and I don’t know exactly, but it was some

joking remark to him ‘‘I am the guy that handles the

money’’ or something like that.

Q. What was the date of that conversation?

A. I would say that was on the morning of the 23rd.

We worked the graveyard shift and it was on the morning

of the 23rd.

(). You were elected on the 23rd?

A. I was elected on the 23rd, and it was the next morn-

ing; we worked the graveyard shift that night after the

election.

Q. What further did Mr. Anders say, if anything?

A. I don’t just remember now, he had some few thing's

to say, and I laughed about it, and T went on away.

* * * * *

625 Q. (By Mr. McRoberts.) You say he was joking

about the matter?

A. Ina joking manner he said ‘What were you elected

to?’ and I said ‘‘I am the fellow that gets all the money’?

and he said ‘‘There is nothing like having all the money”’

or something like that.

Q. Who were the other two men he was talking to, do

you remember that?

A. Homer Terry and someone else, and I am not sure

who else, and I just came out of the bathroom and I was

coming in to work, and he works all day, and that is where

the conversation took place, right outside of the bathroom

door.

Q. (By Trial Examiner Ruckel.) Who started the

conversation, you or he or somebody else?

A. He did; he started the conversation.

* *

* * *

SSE SPR PES

70 Witness for N. L. R. B.

559 RAYMOND CLARK, a witness called by and on be-

half of the National Labor Relations Board:

al * * * *

Direct Examination.

* * * * 7

Q. You work for the Western Cartridge Company?

A. Yes sir.

Q. About when did you start to work there?

September 21, 1940.

* ¥ * ~

575 Q. Did you go to the plant sometime after that?

A. I was notified Mr. Schotters wanted to have a

talk with me a couple or three weeks after that, and I

called him up, and he told me to come to his office at one

o’clock in the evening.

Q. One o’clock in the evening?

A. Yes, after lunch. So I went down there at one

o’clock. .

Q. Was anyone else there?

A. No, sir, and we sat down on the bench in the hall,

and he said to me ‘‘Clark, why did you turn your case

over to the Labor Board over at St. Louis?’’ and I told

him the reason, and he said ‘‘You should have brought

your troubles to me before taking them to the Labor Board,

or telling Miss DeSchweinitz about it, you see she

576 takes everything to heart, and it caused me a lot of

trouble going back and forth’’ and he said ‘‘ Between

you and me the union is horseshit, but I will be better to

you than you were to me, and I will put you back to work”’

and I said ‘‘O.K.’’ and he said ‘‘When does your shift

go back on?’’ and I said ‘‘They go back Saturday night

at midnight’’, and that was Thursday, and he said ‘‘I will

get in touch with Mr. Day and have him call you, and you

come back to work’’ and Miss De Schweinitz told me Mr.

Schotters told her the same thing, I was going to work

Saturday night at midnight, or I thought I was, so when

Friday came I wasn’t notified, so I called up Mr. Schotters;

so he had me come into the office again.

SPE PRESS Ae NR BN NE TGS CORI ee te ee nn ———

Testimony of Homer Terry. 71

595 HOMER TERRY, called as a witness by and on behalf

of the National Labor Relations Board:

Direct Examination.

. * . . *

Q. You work for the Western Cartridge Company ?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. What department?

A. Casting shop.

Q. About how long have you worked for the company ?

A. Since July 20, 1933.

Q. Are you an officer in the Molders Union?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. What office do you hold?

096 <A. President.

Q. Were you working for the company in 1937?

A. Yes, sir.

. Was there any effort of the C. I. O. to organize at

that time?

A. There was.

Q. Did you take part in any way in that organization?

A. I did.

Q. Thereafter, in 1937, did anybody ask you to join

the Independent?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Did you sign for the Independent ?

A. I did

Q. Where did you sign?

A. In the casting shop.

998 Q. When was it you were eltcted president of the

Molders Union?

A. It was in July.

Q. Do you know what date?

A. No; I don’t.

(. Was that about the 23rd?

A. Somewhere around that time.

Trial Examiner Ruckel: 1941?

The Witness: Yes, sir.

eae PALA

72 Witness for N. L. R. B.

Q. (By Mr. Evans.) This is Local No. 333 of the In-

ternational Foundry and Molders Union?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Did you go to work that night after the meeting?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. About what time?

A. Well, it was somewhere around 11 o’clock.

599 Q. Did you have any discussion with any of the

foremen about that?

A. The next morning.

Q. What time?

A. It was somewhere around 7 or 8 o’clock.

(). Who else was present?

A. Gale Groessman and Charlie Andrews.

Q. And Andrews was the assistant superintendent?

A. Well, I don’t know. He is some kind of a foreman.

‘Q. What was Groessman’s job?

A. He was foreman also, in the serap department.

Q. What was said at that time?

A. Groessman said that he understood that I was

elected vice-president and Andrews said that he under-

stood I was elected president.

Q. Anything else said?

A. Oh, there was a little kidding going on about that,

that was all. I told them I was.

Q. Was what?

A. Elected president.

Q. Who did Groessman say he thought was elected

president?

A. Burdette Williams, I believe.

Q. Were the names of the other officers mentioned?

A. Yes.

Q. Who?

600 <A. Bill Elhott and Arthur Williamson; I think

Hubert Morning was mentioned and Bo Williams,

Burdette Williams. We call him ‘‘Bo”’ for short.

(. Do you know a Mr. Keil; William Keil?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. What is his job with the company?

A. He is a foreman.

Q. In what department?

Testimony of Ellis McPherson. 73

A. Casting shop.

Q. Did you ever have a conversation with him about

unions?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. About when?

A. Well, it was sometime in August, I think.

Q. Where?

A. Up in the casting shop.

Trial Examiner Ruckel: August, 1941?

The Witness: Yes, sir.

Q. (By Mr. Evans.) Who else was present?

A. Nobody.

Q. What was said at that time?

A. He asked me why I though the American Federation

of Labor could do more for me than the Independent

Union.

Q. What else was said?

A. Well, I told him that I thought they could.

He wanted to know why. He asked if the company

601 hadn’t been pretty good to me.

And, I says, ‘‘Yes, they have.’”? And I says, ‘‘ They

are a little off on their seniority, but I think that could

be remedied some.’’

Q. Anything else?

A. I don’t exactly know. We talked quite a little bit

about that there. We had quite a conversation.

Q. That was the substance of it?

A. Yes.

634 ELLIS MePHERSON, called as a witness by and on

behalf of the National Labor Relations Board.

Direct Examination.

s e e oe *

You work for the Western Cartridge Company?

East Alton Manufacturing Company.

You work in the smokeless powder division?

Right.

635 <A. They did.

Orore

(

sign a wage assignment?

A. He did himself?

Q. How many times?

A. Oh, I would say three different times.

Q. During working hours?

636

Workers Union; the A. F. of L. Union?

A. Yes; I did.

Q. About when did you join that?

A. In February of 1941.

Q. Did you wear your union button around the shop?

A. I did.

Q. And when did you do that? When did you begin

doing that?

637 <A. Yes.

Q. Do you know an Arthur Arnold?

A. Ido.

Q. Does he work in the smokeless powder division?

Witness for N. L. R. B.

How long have you worked in the plant?

Six years and nine months.

You are still working there now?

Yes, sir.

Anybody ever solicit you to join the Independent

nion?

* e &

Where did he solicit you?

In the Hardening house, out at work.

During working hours?

Yes, sir.

Did you sign at that time?

I did.

Did he ask you to sign a wage assignment?

He did.

Did you sign one?

I did not.

Did he or anybody else ask you at a later date to

Yes, sir.

* * * *

Q. (By Mr. Evans.) Did you ever join the Chemical

In April, I believe it was, the first button we got.

Q. April, 1941?

Testimony of Ellis McPherson. 75

Yes, sir.

What job does he have?

He has—

Or, what job did he have in April of 1941?

Well, he was a foreman at that time, but I really

don’t know whether he was a salaried foreman at that

time or not, the first part. Towards the last part he was

salaried. He was really my foreman.

Q. Did you have any discussion with him about your

membership in the union?

A. I did.

. I mean, the A. F. of L. union?

Yes, sir.

About when did that conversation take place?

. I believe it was on the 25th of April. I got the

date and all down, if vou eare for me to look.

Q. It is your memory that that is the date?

A. I believe that is the date.

Q. Where did the conversation take place?

A. Right after T went to work, right at the hardening

building—right outside of the hardening building, on

638 the Mini Max line.

Q. Anybody else present at the time?

A. No, sir, they was not.

Q. What was said at that time?

A. He asked me about withdrawing from the union.

He said that Mr. Smith, Albert Smith, didn’t belong, and

that Vonnahmen had withdrawed, and that Pitchford was

undecided. They was more hourly paid foremen at the

time.

Q. You were an hourly paid foreman at the time?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Anything else said at that time? ‘

A. Well, he asked me about withdrawing. re

And, I told him—I said—well, do you want me to tell f

what we said at the conversation?

Q. Yes.

A. Well, I said, ‘‘I don’t want to be contrary about it,’’

but I said, ‘‘T hadn’t thought much about it,’’

And he said—well, he said, ‘You know, these fellows

POPS >

Oro

76 Witness for N. L. R. B.

are not—the company don’t like for the Independent—or,

for the foremen to belong to the union.”’

Then I said, ‘‘I don’t want to be contrary,’’ but I said,

‘‘You haven’t promised me anything if I withdraw.’’ And

I said, ‘‘If the union comes, I will probably have to be-

long.’’

And he said, ‘‘If you withdraw, you probably can’t get

back in.”’

639 And I said, ‘‘Until something else is done, I won’t

withdraw. I will just stay where I am.’’

Q. Do you know Mr. Monical?

A. Ido.

Q. What was his job about that time?

A. He was supervisor over our shift. There was four

different shifts—there is still four shifts out there, and

he was our supervisor.

Q. Did you ever have any conversation with him about

the union; the A. F. of L. union?

A. Yes;I did.

Q. About when was that?

A. Two days later. That was Friday evening, Mr.

Arnold and myself. That was on Sunday evening, two

davs later.

Q. Where did that conversation take place?

A. Right outside of the hardening house, right at the

rolls. The rolls are in the same building that the harden-

ing is.

Q. Anybody else present at that time?

A. No, sir.

Q. What was said?

A. He asked me which I thought could do the most for

me, the company or the union.

Well, I told him, ‘‘T am not in a position to say right

now,’’ but I will tell you just exactly what I told Mr.

Arnold, ‘‘I will stay where I am until they offer me

640 something, or there is something else doing.’’

Q. Thereafter did they change your job or any part

of your job?

A. He did.

Q. How soon after?

SO IRE. 00 eRe ray ear — on

ose Ane * ae a A ai SA ep pro eoR REAR SAY BERS mee 3

Testimony of Ellis McPherson. 77

A. Well, I judge it was two months after that time

before they had taken me off of that job.

Q. You are not just a production worker?

A. Just a moment. It was later than two months. It

was longer than that; probably four months.

About when was that?

That was in May, the first one. I had different con-

versations with him.

Q. Where was the conversation?

A. In Mr. Wortz’ office.

Q. What was said at that time?

A. He sent for me to come in, and I went in his office

and he told me that all of the men was mad at me, and

some of them didn’t want to work with me.

And he asked what I thought he ought to do with a

man like that.

641 Q. This was still while you were an hourly fore-

man?

A. Yes; it was.

So I told him—I says, ‘‘I didn’t know that anyone was

made at me,’’ and he knew what he could do with me.

So then he begin on me. I had the A. F. of L. button

on. He said, ‘‘I can’t tell you not to belong,’’ and he

pointed at the button, and I can’t tell you how to vote.”’

And he told me about the Labor Board had granted a

hearing for the A. F. of L., and it was just a few days

before that hearing.

And he told me that the job I was on also paid more

than I was getting, and if I would go along with him and

the company, he would get me a raise right away, and

then later on he would get me up to the top of the bracket,

and also during the summer we would get beer and get

out and have a party and have a good time.

* * * * *

Q. You are not just a production worker?

A. Yes;I am.

Q. Did you ever have any conversation with Mr. Wortz?

A. I did.

Spates

LECCE NE AGES ATE, OREN EE SRE RTE He

EES ITS TES

78 Witness for N. L. R. B.

643 Cross-Examination.

* * * * *

645 Q. Mr. Wortz, you say, pointed to this button in

this conversation before the election and said, ‘‘I

646 can’t tell you which way to vote.’

A. That i is right, ‘‘I can’t tell you not to belong, or

how to vote.’

bod * * * *

648 CHARLES WOMACK, a witness, called by and on

behalf of the National Labor Relations Board:

Direct Examination.

* * * * *

Do you work in the smokeless powder division?

I do.

About how long have you worked in the plant?

Since about April 4, 1934.

What is your job?

Truck driver.

Did you ever join the A. F. of L. union?

I did.

About when?

About February.

Of this year?

Yes, sir.

(By Trial Examiner Ruckel.) What union was

OPOrOPOPOPOre

that?

A. The A. F. of L.

Q. The Chemical Workers Union or some other?

A. Yes, sir, the Chemical Workers.

Q. (By Mr. Evans.) Was a man named Pivoda

649 vour boss at any time?

A. Yes, sir. He is my boss now.

Q. He is your boss now?

A. Yes.

_ How long has he been your boss?

A. I think he took over about the middle part of April

of this year.

Testimony of Elden Weishaupt. 79

Q. Did vou ever have any conversation with him about

the union?

A. I did.

Q. About when?

A. It was just a few days after he started taking the

trucks over.

Q. Where did the conversation take place?

A. In front of Fred Olsen’s office in the Smokeless Pow-

der.

Q. Was anyone else present at the time?

A. No.

Q. What did he say?

A. He told me I had better lay low on union talk, they

had spotters in the plant; and he went on to tell me he

has two brothers who belonged to the union and he thought

one had made a horse’s ass out of himself, and the other

he thought he had bettered himself a little bit, but he hadn’t

made up his mind.

Q. Were you wearing a union button at the time?

650 A. I was.

657 ELDEN WEISHAUPT, a witness, called by and on

behalf of the National Labor Relations Board:

* * * * *

Direct Examination.

* * * * s

A. For the East Alton Manufacturing Company.

Q. You work in the Smokeless Powder Division?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. How long have you worked in the plant?

A. February 22, 1941.

Q. Did you ever sign a card for the Chemical Workers,

A. F. of L.?

A. Yes.

Q. About when?

A. About a week later.

Q. After you were hired?

—

Witness for Respondent.

After I was hired.

Did you wear a button around in the shop?

Yes, sir.

And that was an A. F. of L. button?

That is right.

About when did you start wearing that?

As soon as the A. F. of L. first came out with a but-

ton, ‘and for some days they didn’t have them, and right

after they got them I wore it.

POrPOPOD

Q. Do you know Mr. Shindle? és

A. Yes, sir.

Q. What is his position with the Company?

659 <A. He is shift supervisor.

Q. Was he your boss?

A. Yes.

Q. Did you have any conversation with him about the

union?

A. Yes.

Q. About when?

A. It was shortly after I was hired in and there was a

lot of talk about union.

Q. About the A F of L union?

A. That is right.

* *

748 OTIS YATES, a witness called by and on behalf of

the Respondent:

* * * * *

Direct Examination.

* * * * s

Where are you employed?

Western Catrdige Company.

What is your position there?

Carpenter foreman.

How long have you been with the Company?

Nine years this June.

How lorg have you been a carpenter foreman?

Assistant foreman five years, and carpenter fore-

man about two years.

* *

POPOPOoOrPS

SP nr op ree nee —— Pus i

Siicilinsetsiesnentntiassraeemnacrcconaial

Testimony of Arthur Arnold. 81

762 Cross-Examination.

* * * * *

763° Mr. McRoberts: The date is June 4th, and there is

no contract with referenee to seniority prior to that

date.

Trial Examiner Ruckel: 1 think the record is clear.

The question is have you paid any attention to the con-

tract since that time. Is that the question?

Mr. Evans: That is right.

A. What contract do you have reference to?

Q. The contract between the Company and the inde-

pendent union.

A. No, we haven’t.

(). In other words, you have followed the same system

you have always used?

A. Yes sir.

* . * a *

861 ARTHUR ARNOLD, a witness, called by and on be-

half of the Respondent:

Direct Examination.

* * + * e

Q). Where are you employed?

A. Western Cartridge Company.

@. How long have you been with that Company, Mr.

Arnold?

A. Almost eleven years.

Q. What is your position?

862 A. At the present time I am supervisor.

Q. Supervisor in what department?

A. The 4,000 minamax smokeless powder line.

Q. At the moment that is the East Alton Manufactur-

ing Company?

A. Yes sir.

Q). How long have you been supervisor of that par-

ticular line?

A. Since last March.

See a gtr ee maga Gee.

82 Witness for Respondent.

Q. Since March of 1941?

A. Yes sir.

Q. Before that time what was your position with the

Company?

A. Since September 1940 I have been foreman in the

four thousand minamax line.

Q. The same line?

A. Yes sir.

Q. Before that what was your position?

A. Iwas ranking control chemist in the laboratory.

* * * * *

954 THOMAS L. WORTZ, a witness called by and on be-

half of the Respondent:

Direct Examination.

* a = & 2

Q. What is your occupation?

A. Superintendent of the East Alton Manufacturing

Company, a subsidiary of the Western Cartridgt Com-

pany.

Q. You have been with that Company since July 1941?

A. Yes. I have been there since February 7, 1941.

Q. Between February 7, 1941, and July 7, 1941, you

have been with the Western Cartridge Company, is that

correct?

A. Yes sir.

Q. Did you then have the position of superintendent

of the smokeless powder division of the Western Cart-

ridge Company?

A. No, not until March 1941. Prior to that I had

955 no title whatever.

Q. Mr. Wortz, you were first employed by the Com-

pany in any capacity in March 1941?

A. That is right.

Testimony of Albert R. Krinard. 83

990 ALBERT R. KRINARD, a witness called by and on

behalf of the Respondent:

* * * * *

Direct Examination.

* * ° * *

Q. Where are you employed?

A. Western Cartridge Company.

Q. How long have you been with them?

A. Twenty-six years next Wednesday.

Q. What is your position with the Company at the pres-

ent time?

A. At the present time personnel work in the brass divi-

sion.

Q. How long have you been holding that position?

A. I returned to that job on June 4th of this year, 1941.

Q. June 4th, 1941?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. You say you returned to it?

* *. * *

996 Cross-Exramination.

* . 7 * *

999 Q. What rights would Clark lose by signing the

quit slip, if he returned to work?

A. What rights would he lose?

Q. Yes.

A. Mr. Day told him be could go back in there and go

to work. I don’t know of any rights that he could lose.

Q. Any seniority rights or anything like that?

A. No, we have no set up rules on seniority rights.

Q. There was no agreement in effeet concerning the

brass mill?

A. No, nothing at all in the rolling mill.

(). You did not know about the agreement between the

superintendent and the independent union dated Mareh 14,

1941, covering the brass mill?

A. There is nothing that gives seniority preference that

I know of.

Q. Have vou ever seen such an agreement?

Foere

PATA ATPASE OR AN

84 Witness for Respondent.

A. Yes, there was one made out. That wes before I

ever went back in the mill there, but I have read the thing

over.

* * * s s

Q. Just what agreement do you have reference to that

you said you read over?

A. The one I suppose was gotten up between Mr.

1000 Day and the boys at the head of the independent

union.

Q. Weren’t you furnished with a copy of that when

you came out to the brass mili?

A. No, nothing was said directiy about that right then

at all.

Q. Did vou go over the working agreement with the

independent union—the one that was signed on June 4,

1941?

A. No, I didn’t go over that with the independent union.

T wasn’t involved in that at all. T got a copy of it.

Q. You do not know then what rights, if any, Clark

would lose by reason of his signing the quit slip?

A. No, I don’t see where he would lose any rights of

any kind to go back there and go to work.

* * * 2 @

1006 ORLAN 8S. HAMILTON, a witness, called by and on

behalf of the Respondent:

Direct Examination.

* * * e @

Q. Where are you employed?

A. Western Cartridge Company.

(Q). How long have you been with the Company?

A. Four and a half years.

Q. What is vour position?

A. Employment manager.

* e

Testimony of Orlan S. Hamilton. &5

1013 Cross-Examination,

* ° @ @ e

1016 Q. =(By Mr. Evans.) Would the signing of the

guit slip have any effect upon Clark’s rights as an

employe?

A. Not that I know of.

Q. Are you familiar with the terms of the contract be-

tween-—

A. No, lam not familiar with that. It is not pertain-

ing to my department and I am not familiar with its terms.

Q. You are the employment man?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. You have nothing to do with employes once they

are employed, is that correct?

1017) A.) «That is right.

* ° e ~

1105 Cross-Examinatior.

. o . e o

1142. Q. He would also lose his seniority?

A. No.

(). Who would reinsiate his seniority?

A. Seniority for the length of time he had been away

would not have affeeted him one way or another.

Q. Did vou check the provisions of the contract te de

termine how that would affect his status?

A. He was a comparatively new empleve.

Q. Just answer the question: Did ven or did

you?

1148 A. No.

° . s es .

1510 QQ.) Was Mr. Burdette Williams discharged solets

for the faet he was low man in production for the

months of May, June and July?

. * * * .

A. That was the principal reason, but also on account

of his defiant attitude toward the management foree or

supervisory force and inability of management or super-

visory force to get him to do what he was supposed to do.

If we permitted Williams to become insubordinate and be

PR TS

86 Witness for Respondent.

insubordinate at all times, we might as well let the rest

of the shop do the same thing.

*” * * - *

1152 Mr. McRoberts: I think that is all.

Trial Examiner Ruckel: Any re-cross-examina-

tion?

Mr. Evans: Yes.

Recross Examination.

* * * * *

1171 CHARLES ANDRUS, a witness called by and on

behalf of the Respondent:

Direct Examination.

* * * * cal

1172 QQ. Where are you employed?

A. Western Cartridge Company.

Q. How long have you been with that Company, Mr.

Andrus?

A. I started to work the 18th of April 1916.

Q. Have you been with that Company ever since?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. What is your position with the Company, Mr.

Andrus?

A. Foreman.

Q. In What department?

A. Casting shop.

How long have you been a foreman in the casting

shop, Mr. Andrus?

A. Ever since I have been here.

* * * * *

Testimony of Gale Goessman. 87

1233 EARL JONES, a witness, called by and on behalf of

the Respondent:

* * * * *

Direct Examination.

* * * * *

Q. Where are you employed, Mr. Jones?

A. Western Cartridge Company.

Q. How long have you been with the Company?

A. A little over fifteen years.

1234 Q. What is vour position with the Company, Mr.

Jones?

A. Shift foreman now.

Q. In what department?

A. Casting.

Q. How long have you been a shift foreman there?

A. Seven years.

* * * * *

1256 Q. Mr. Jones, did you have William Elliott work-

ing under your supervision in 1941?

A. Yes, sir.

* * * _ ?

1352 GALE GOKSSMAN, a witness called by and on be-

half of the Respondent :

* o oo & *

" 1353 Direct Examination.

*~ 7 « 7 *

(). Where are you employed?

A. Western Cartridge Company.

Q. How long have you been with the Company?

A. Ever since September 1925.

Q. What is your position with the Company?

A. Assistant superintendent in the casting and scrap

department.

Q. How long have you held that position?

A. I had charge of the scrap department until some-

where around six months ago, when Mr. Gerding was put

88 Witness for Respondent.

on as superintendent and I went on as his assistant in both

departments.

* * * * *

1394 CLYDE TERRY, a witness, called by and on behalf

of the Respondent:

* * * * *

Q. Where are you employed?

A. Western Cartridge Company.

(. How long have you been with the Company?

A. Iwas first employed in 1916, and I went out a couple

of times.

Q. What is your position with the Company?

A. Shift foreman.

(). How long have you held that position?

A. I would say eleven years, approximately.

Q. Did you have William Elliott working under you,

Mr. Terry?

A. Yes, sir.

* * * * &

1395 Q. Mr. Terry, what do you know about a proposed

change in shifts that was being submitted to the men

about that time?

A. There was a new schedule presented to the men for

their opinion on it.

Q. Did you have anything to do with presenting that

to the men?

A. I did.

Q. Did you submit it to Elliott?

1396 =A. I did.

Q. What did Elliott sav about it?

A. He said he would rather not say yes or no whether

he wanted the schedule or the other.

Q. Did he say why?

A. Yes, he said he didn’t think he would get as many

hours under the new one as the old one.

Q. What else did he say, if anything?

A. That is the only objection he stated to me.

Q. Did he state anything more than that?

A. Yes, sir.

Testimony of Clyde Terry. 89

Did you report that matter to Mr. Carlton?

I did.

And Mr. Carlton later talked with Mr. Elliott?

He did.

Were you present at that time?

No, I wasn’t present at that time.

You do not know anything about Elliott’s conversa-

tion with Carlton?

A. No.

Oreorere

* @ e e

Cross-Examination.

Q. (By Mr. Evans.) Who gave you instructions to

go around and question the men about this?

A. The shift foreman I relieved.

1397 =Q. Who was that?

A. Mr. Keil.

(). What did he say to you?

A. He said they would like to know whether the new

schedule, the men wanted it or wanted to work under the

one they were working under.

Q. Did he give you a list of names?

A. No. We have our men, you see, on our shift, I be-

lieve there were 28 men, and naturally when you haven "t

mo »men than that you know each one.

Q. Did you have a list you went around and asked them?

A. Yes, we had a list, because we had a clerk in the

office to make out a list for their timeeards, and we have

to have a list.

Q. Did you mark down what each one thought about it?

A. Yes.

Q. Did you turn it into the office?

A 2

Q. Did anybody except Elliott raise any questions

about it?

A. Some of them said ‘‘No.’’

Q. Some of them said they didn’t want it?

A. Yes.

Q. Did you report that to Carlton, too?

A. No. What I was doing was trying to get the opinion

ESOL EE LE RGSS MIT EET et

1398

1409

POPrOreore

1410

Witness for Respondent.

of all of the men in the group as to whether this new

schedule was satisfactory with them or not.

Q. But you mentioned Elliott particularly did you?

No.

Was it just on the paper that you turned in?

That was just regular routine.

* *

FRANK C. KRATSCHMER, a witness, called by and

on behalf of the Respondent:

Direct Examination.

* * * * *

Where are you employed?

Western Cartridge Company.

How long have you been with the Company?

Approximately 22 or 23 years.

What position do you hold with the Company?

At present I am manager of the brass mill office.

In 1937 what position did you have?

I was scrap clerk.

Q. As scrap clerk were you foreman or supervisor

there over employes?

No. They just had one clerk, and I was that.

And you were it?

Yes, sir.

Were you a member of the Western Cartridge Em-

ployes independent union?

One month.

You were a member for one month?

Yes, sir.

Do you remember what month that was?

The first month they operated; I can’t tell you the

1411 Cross-Examination.

Testimony of Frank C. Kratschner. 91

1414 Q. Did you discharge Mrs. Elliott last summer?

1415 <A. Yes, sir.

Q. The same day that Bill Elliott was discharged?

A. I don’t remember whether it was the same day

or not.

Q. On whose orders did you discharge Mrs. Elliott?

A. It was my own orders as far as orders were con-

cerned.

Q. With whom did you discuss the matter?

A. Mr. P. W. Day.

Q. What was your discussion with Mr. P. W. Day?

A. I didn’t thing she was doing her work. That was

before Bill was discharged.

* * * * *

Redirect Examination.

1416 Q. (By Mr. McRoberts.) You say you let Mrs.

Elliott out? You discharged her?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. What was the reason for her discharge?

A. In this discussion with Mr. Day I was dissatisfied

with her work.

Q. You were dissatisfied with her work?

A. I was dissatisfied.

Q. You were dissatisfied with her work?

A. That is right.

Q. You asked Mr. Day about it and he approved your

action?

A. I talked with him long before and finally it came to

a head and they had to.

* *

co)

Witness for Respondent.

1461 THOMAS WORTZ, a witness, called by and on be-

half of the Respondent herein,

. * * * -

Direct Examination.

Q. (By Mr. McRoberts.) Mr. Wortz, you have already

testified before in this case and identified yourself as su-

perintendent of the smokeless powder division, not the East

Alton Manufacturing Company?

A. That is correct.

* * * *

1480 Q. Mr. Wortz, Mr. Ellis McPherson testified that

he had different conversations with you, and in May,

the first one in your office, he testified to this effeet—

Trial Examiner Ruckel: Who was this witness?

* * * * *

1489 Q. Mr. Bunzy testified that following this meeting

in Mr. Schotters’ office about which you just testified

that you called him down to the office and he went

1490 there, that you told him to come in and sit down ‘‘and

he said ‘Bunzy, I have heard your name a lot’, he

said ‘and I was surprised to see you when you came in

the office over here. I expected a man about fifty years old,

and a rough sort of a fellow, being mixed up with a union

like you are’, and he said ‘You are a young fellow, and

you have a nice personality,’ and, I don’t know, a lot of

stuff, about a good looking fellow and the fellows like me,

and he said ‘How old are you?’ and I said ‘Twenty-eight’,

and he said I could go places with the Company if I would

make myself right with them. He said if I would come

down to school I could go to Pete Brown and he would

teach me how to handle business, or something, and T told

him I didn’t want it, and he said ‘How come we want a

union, and what did we want by it, and IT told him we

wanted working conditions, and he said ‘Well, you fellows

are intelligent. Why don’t you come in as a committee

and talk with me about it, instead of going over to Kast

St. Louis and eet a potbellied racketeer to do your busi-

ness for you?’ and he gave the union hell at great length.

Testimony of Forest Monical. _

He just said that it was no good and anyone that belonged

to it was no good, and it was a bunch of guys that were

bosses and wouldn’t work, and they would have the good

fellows carrying them through.

‘‘So he said if we would consider it he would show us a

contract that they had with other companies—that he

1491 had took part in with other companies. I believe he

mentioned Bethlehem Steel or some other steel com-

pany.

‘‘And I told him no, I didn’t care for it, and he asked

me again if I would care to come down to school, and I

said no, if I would come down to school and don’t go to

union meetings and work with the fellows, it would just

be playing both ends against the middle and it would not

last, so I would go ahead with the union, and I just thanked

him and went out.

‘*@. Did he mention anything as to what would happen

to your dues?

‘‘A. Oh, he said ‘How does them buys get the money?

How do they get to live like they do off of you fellows’

wages’, he said, ‘Why don’t you have a union of your

own?’ he said. He said ‘We know our troubles here and

our jobs. We can straighten them out ourselves instead

of having to walk the streets and striking.’ He said ‘We

would be like the Monsanto Chemical Works and the au-

tomobile companies in this locality’ ’’.

* * & * m

1516 FOREST MONICAL, a witness, called by and on be-

half of the Respondent herein,

* * * * hl

Direct Examination.

* * * * a

Q. Where are you employeed?

A. At the East Alton Manufacturing Company.

1517 Q. + Before that were you employed by the West-

ern Cartridge Company?

A. Yes sir.

Q. How long were you with the Western Cartridge

Company?

“e

“s

94 Witness for Respondent.

A. I have been with the Western since January 13th,

1941.

Q. What position did you have with the Western Car-

tridge Company then?

A. I was supervisor of production, smokeless powder.

Q. And you hold the same position at the Hast Alton

Manufacturing Company?

A. That is right.

* * * * »

1518 Q. Mr. Monical, did Ellis McPherson work under

you?

A. Yes, he did.

Q. Mr. Monical, Mr. Ellis McPherson testified, at page

639 of the transcript, that he had a conversation with you

about the A. F. of L. union, which he says took place right

outside of the hardening house, in which he testified that

you said—‘‘ He asked me’’—he is referring to you—‘ which

I thought could do the most for me, the company or the

union. Well, I told him ‘I am not in a position to say right

now, but I will tell you just exactly what I told Mr. Ar-

nold, I will stay where I am until they offer me

1519 something, or there is something else doing.’’’ Did

you have any such conversation with Mr. McPherson?

A. No, I did not.

Q. Did you ever have any conversation with Mr. Me-

Pherson in which the A. F. of L. union or any other union

was discussed?

A. I don’t remember of any.

* * *

Cross-Examination.

7 * . * *

1520 Q. Did you have any conversation with McPher-

son in which he asked you about the union?

1521 A. I don’t remember.

Q. Might you have had such a conversation?

Mr. MeRoberts: You mean just a conversation about the

union?

Mr. Evans: Yes.

Trial Examiner Ruckel: Conversation in which the

union was mentioned.

Testimony of Forest Monical. 95

A. I don’t remember of having had any with McPher-

son.

Q. Do you remember the names of any of these men

that you had discussions with about it?

A. No, I couldn’t name any individual.

* * * * *

2351 Trial Examiner Ruckel: It is so understood.

Mr. Evans: It is stipulated by and between the

parties that Mrs. Mary Elliott, wife of William Elliott, if

called to testify would testify that she was discharged by a

Mr. Kratschmer at noon on July 25, 1941, shortly after

William Elliott had been discharged; and that Kratschmer

said nothing to her at that time concerning any records or

confidential information or reports.

That she was given a check that day before leaving the

plant, which paid her up to August 1, 1941.

That she received a call on August 7, 1941, went to the

plant, at which time she was put to work in the brass mill

warehouse office, an office which she had previously worked

in before working for Mr. Kratschmer; and that hér next

check contained pay from August 1, 1941, and that she did

not divulge any production records or other confidential

information or reports to her husband.

Mr. McRoberts: It may be so stipulated; subject, how-

ever, to the objection to the materiality and competency of

the testimony, as not being covered within the complaint,

and it is not material to any of the issues in the complaint.

Subject to the further objection as to its materiality, on

which I think possibly we should ask for a ruling.

2352 Trial Examiner Ruckel: Objection overruled.

Mr. McRoberts: Subject to that ruling, we will

stipulate that the witness, if present, would so testify.

* * * * *

06 Board Exhibit No. 3-A.

BOARD EXHIBIT NO. 3-A.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Berore tute Nationa Lasor Retations Boarp

Fourteenth Region

In the matter of —

Western Cartridge Company,

East Atlon, IIL,

fou and Vase No. XIV R. 220.

Chemical Workers, Local Union

No. 22574, affiliated with the

A. F. of L.,

Petitioner. J

PETITION FOR INVESTIGATION AND CERTIFICA-

TION OF REPRESENTATIVES PURSUANT TO

SECTION 9(c) OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELA-

TIONS ACT.

Name of employer Western Cartridge Company.

Address East Alton, Illinois.

General nature of business Manufacture of cartridges

and shells and other high explosives.

Approximate total number of employees 6,000 De-

scription of the bargaining unit which petitioner claims

is appropriate Production and maintenance employees in

the smokeless powder division, including hourly-paid fore-

men, and excluding superintendents, general foremen,

watchmen, and office employees.

Approximate number of employees in such unit 368.

Number or percentage of employees in such unit who

have designated or selected petitioner to be their represen-

tative for collective bargaining 301.

Names of any other known individuals or labor organiza-

tions who claim to present any of the employees in such

bargaining unit Independent organization not functioning

in smokeless powder division.

= OORT? Oe Ee AM RTI

Board Exhibit No. 3-A, 97

The undersigned hereby alleges that a question has :

arisen concerning the representation of the employees in 1

the above bargaining unit, in that: Employer questions the :

appropriateness of the unit claimed by petitioner. f

The undersigned further alleges that said question con-

cerning representation is a question affecting commerce

within the meaning of said act. ‘

The undersigned requests that pursuant to section 9(c)

of the National Labor Relations Act, the National Labor

Relations Board investigate such controversy and certify é

to the parties the name or names of the representatives :

that have been designated or selected by said employees.

Name and address of employees or representatives filing

the petition. (If made by a labor organization, give also

the name and official position of the person acting for the

organization.)

eee

Chemical Workers, Local Union No. 22574,

affiliated with the A. F. of L.,

By Fred Olds,

Fred Olds, Organizer,

1411 N. Grand Blvd.,

St. Louis, Mo.

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 25th day of

Mareh, 1941 at St. Louis, Missouri.

Dorthea Schweinitz,

(Seal) Regional Director.

ANGERS Ca

”

PRL RMEL OM i LAE NER RED IE OP AND SAMA POV ALY QOS ERT IH ANDER

98 Board Exhibit No. 3-B.

BOARD EXHIBIT NO. 3-B.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

Berore tHE NatrionaL Lasor ReEtatTIons Boarp.

In the Matter of

Western Cartridge Company

and Case No. R-2494.

Chemical Workers, Local Union

No. 22574, A. F. L.

Mr. R. H. MeRoberts, of St. Louis, Mo., Mr. Donald

W. Ebbert, of Pittsburgh, Pa., and Mr. R. R.

Casteel, of Alton, Ill, for the Company.

Mr. Fred Olds, of St. Louis, Mo., for the Chemical

Workers.

Mr. Frederic B. Parkes, 2ud, of counsel to the

Board.

DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION.

Statement of the Case.

On Mareh 28, 1941, Chemical Workers, Local Union No.

29574, A. F. 1.., herein ealled the Chemical Workers, filed

with the Regional Director for the Fourteenth Region (St.

Louis, Missouri) a petition alleging that a question af-

fecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation

of employees of Western Cartridge Company, Kast Alton,

Illinois, herein called the Company, and requesting an

investigation and certification of representatives pursuant

to Section 9 (ec) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49

Stat. 449, herein called the Act. On April 14, 1941, the

National Labor Relations Board, herein called the Board,

acting pursuant to Section 9 (ec) of the Act and Article

III, Section 3, of National Labor Relations Board Rules

and Regulations—Series 2, as amended, ordered an in-

vestigation and authorized the Regional Director to con-

duet it and to provide for an appropriate hearing upon due

notice.

A680 SPURT RAR PAA LPT ELIE LIE E SPEEA IO LENIN SOP IR EONS LINES IEE IELTS MAD

podmece re

Board Exhibit No. 3-B. 99

On April 15, 1941, the Regional Director issued a notice

of hearing, copies of which were duly served upon the

Company and the Chemical Workers. Pursuant to notice

a hearing was held on April 21, 23, and 24, 1941, at East

Alton, Illinois, before L. N. D. Wells, Jr., the Trial Ex-

aminer duly designated by the Chief Trial Examiner. The

Company and the Chemical Workers were represented by

counsel or official representatives and participated in the

hearing. Full opportunity to be heard, to examine and

cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bear-

ing on the issues was afforded all parties. During the

course of the hearing the Trial Examiner made various

rulings on 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 com-

mitted. The rulings are hereby affirmed. On May 8 and

12, 1941, respectively, the Chemical Workers and the Com-

pany filed briefs 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.

Western Cartridge Company, a Delaware corporation,

operates a plant at East Alton, Illinois, where it is en-

gaged in the manufacture, sale, and distribution of small

arms ammunition, explosives, brass, brass specialties, traps,

and targets. The raw materials used by the Company in-

clude copper, lead, zine, steel, paper, tin, limestone, pitch,

oil, lumber, wood, coal, and chemicals. During the year

1940, the Company purehased for use at its East Alton

plant raw materials valued at approximately $9,000,000, of

which more than 50 per cent were purchased and shipped

from points outside the State of Illinois. During the same

period, the Company manufactured and sold products of

its East Alton plant valued at approximately $20,000,000,

of which over 50 per cent were delivered to points outside

the State of Illinois. The Company employs approximately

6,000 employees.

iN i i 4

POT OBO

Posen sree nearer Mat te”

100 Board Exhibit No. 3-B.

Il. The organizations involved.

Chemical Workers, Local Union No. 22574 is a labor

organization affiliated with the American Federation of

Labor, admitting employees of the Company to member-

ship.

Western Catridge Employees Independent Union, herein

called the Independent, is an unaffiliated labor organiza-

tion, admitting to membership employees of the Company.

Ill. The question concerning representation.

In January 1941 the Chemical Workers began organiza-

tional activities among the employees of the smokeless

powder division of the Company. On March 7, 1941, the

Chemical Workers requested exclusive bargaining rights

for such employees. After several conferences with the

Chemical Workers the Company refused to grant such

recognition, on the ground that the employees of the

smokeless powder division do not constitute an appropri-

ate unit.

The Company contends that a subsisting contract with

the Independent constitutes a bar to a present determina-

tion of representatives. On August 12, 1937, the Company

and the Independent entered into a written ‘‘basic’’ agree-

ment in which the Company recognized the Independent

as the exclusive bargaining representative of all employees

of the Company at its East Alton plant and provided that

the Company would bargain collectively with the Independ-

ent with respect to all matters not covered by individual

contracts of employment between the Company and its

employees.' The agreement further provided that it would

be in force for 1 year ‘‘and thereafter until terminated

by written notice given thirty days in advance by either

party to the other.’’ No such notice of termination has

1. It is the practice of the Company to enter into a contract with each

employee after he has served a 3-months probationary period. Such

contract is for a term of 6 months and is extended from year to year

thereafter. The basic agreement of August 1987 recites that “Both the

Company its employees have valuable rights under said [individual] con-

tracts of employment which they desire to preserve, and said contracts

are recognized as valid and binding upon both parties thereto.”

————

Board Exhibit No. 3-B. 101

ever been given and since the execution of the contract and

pursuant thereto, the Company and the Independent have

negotiated with respect to numerous terms and conditions

of employment. The results of these negotiations have been

embodied variously in memoranda, notices, and in the

minute books of the Independent.

We are of the opinion and find that the basic agreement

of August

This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.