1943 - National Labor Relations Board

48 Eighth Annual Report of the National Labor Relations Boardthe contract, has been removed to another city or has doubled itsworking force will not operate for the usual period to bar a determinationof representatives.Ordinarily the Board holds that a contract executed or renewedautomatically after the employer has received notice that a rival unionchallenges the contracting union's status as the exclusive bargainingrepresentative is no bar to an election. 27 This policy is not applicable,however, where as in the Allis-Chalmers case,28 referred to above, a"stabilized contractual relationship" of reasonable duration has beenentered into prior to notice of the rival claim, even though certain ofthe contractual obligations are not "formalized" until after notice.In that case a labor organization was recognized as the exclusivebargaining representative by virtue of an election conducted by theBoard's Regional Director. About 6 weeks thereafter it entered intoa written agreement with the employer to accept as settlement of adispute relating to wages and other basic conditions of employmentthe directive of the National War Labor Board with respect to similarissues in another case then pending before that agency. Nine monthslater, shortly after the issuance of the National War Labor Board'sfinal directive order, the parties formally executed a new contract forthe term of approximately 1 year, said term being specified in thedirective. Although the petitioning union had in the meantimepresented its claim for recognition and filed a petition for investigationand determination of representatives, the Board dismissed the petition,reasoning that to order an electionmight serve to negate the proceedings of the War Labor Board, require newproceedings before that Board, and create uncertainty and unsettled bargainingconditions for an additional indeterminate period. From the standpoint of stablelabor relations, it is undesirable to penalize a certified bargaining representative forunavoidable delays consequent upon its voluntary acceptance of orderly proceduresestablished by governmental authority for the adjustment of differences with anemployer.The situation presented in the Allis-Chalmers case is, of course, notcomparable to that in which the only contract asserted as a bar is onefor recognition, without there being any written agreement coveringterms and conditions of employment. In the latter case, the Boarddoes not regard the recognition agreement as barring a determinationof representatives.29As the foregoing discussion indicates, it is the Board's generalpolicy to hold that established collective bargaining relations shouldremain undisturbed for a reasonable period., usually 1 year." A27 Matter of General Chemical Company, 48 N. L. R. B. 988; Matter of Trailways of New England, Inc.,46 N. L. R. B. 310; Matter of Electric Auto-Lite Co., 46 N. L. R. B. 395; Matter of Paley & SO/13, 47 N. L. R. B.863; Matter of Lincoln Transit Co., Inc., 47 N. L. R. B. 1325; Matter of Basic Magnesium, Inc., 48 N. L. R. B.1310. See Matter of Dutton Company, 48 N. L. R. B. 27. Cf. Matter of Nashville Bridge Company, 48N. L. R. B. 1.le 50N. L. R. B. 306.29 Matter of Weis Mfg. Co., Inc., 49 N. L. R. B. 511.re An exception to the usual 1-year rule is recognized where it is the custom in the industry to contract for alonger period, such as 2 years. Similarly, a contract automatically renewed prior to the making of a claimby the petitioning union Is given the same effect for the renewed term as for the original terms. See supra,p. 46.