United Insurance Company of America v. NLRB, 12577.

Decision Date11 December 1959
Docket NumberNo. 12577.,12577.
Citation272 F.2d 446
PartiesUNITED INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, a Corporation, Petitioner, v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit

Bernard G. Segal, Philadelphia, Pa., E. B. McGuinn, Chicago, Ill., Teschke, Burns, Maloney & McGuinn, Chicago, Ill., Schnader, Harrison, Segal & Lewis, Philadelphia, Pa., Almore H. Teschke, Chicago, Ill., Irving R. Segal, Josephine H. Klein, Philadelphia, Pa., for petitioner.

Stuart Rothman, General Counsel, Marion L. Griffin, Thomas J. McDermott, Associate General Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. General Counsel, Frederick U. Reel, Attorney, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D. C., for respondent.

Isaac N. Groner, Washington, D. C., for amicus curiæ.

Before DUFFY, KNOCH, and CASTLE, Circuit Judges.

DUFFY, Circuit Judge.

This is a petition to review a decision and order issued by the National Labor Relations Board (Labor Board) under § 10(f) of the Labor Management Relations Act, 1947, 61 Stat. 136, 29 U.S.C.A. §§ 141-166, and a cross-petition by the Labor Board for enforcement of that order.

The instant case was designated before the Labor Board as No. 4-CA-1576. The Board issued an order requiring United Insurance Company of America (United) to bargain collectively with Insurance Agents' International Union, AFL-CIO (Union) as the collective bargaining agent for the "Licensed Debit Agents" who serve United in Pennsylvania.

On July 22, 1953, Local No. 5, Insurance Workers of America, CIO, filed a petition with the Labor Board seeking certification as collective bargaining agent for United's debit agents operating in Philadelphia. This proceeding was designated Case No. 4-RC-2052. On August 26, 1953, Insurance Agents' International Union, AFL, filed a petition seeking certification as collective bargaining agent for United's debit agents in Harrisburg, Pittsburgh and Hanover, Pennsylvania. The designation of this proceeding was Case No. 4-RC-2110. These two petitions were consolidated for a hearing which was held on October 12 and 13, 1953.

In a decision dated May 11, 1954 (108 NLRB 843) the Board held that the debit agents were employees of United rather than independent contractors. The Board further held that the appropriate bargaining unit consisted of all debit agents serving United throughout the state of Pennsylvania. Since the CIO Union did not wish to appear on a ballot for a state-wide unit, its petition for certification was dismissed by the Board. On May 28, 1954, the AFL Union withdrew its petition for certification. No election was held. No further proceedings were had in these cases.1

Two and a half years after the original certification petitions were voluntarily dismissed and withdrawn respectively, the present Union filed a petition seeking certification as collective bargaining agent for all the debit agents serving United in Pennsylvania. An agreement was entered into between United and the Union for a consent election.2

An election and a re-run election were held. The Union won the re-run election and on May 7, 1957, the Acting Regional Director of the Labor Board certified the Union as collective bargaining agent for all debit agents serving United's industrial insurance policies in Pennsylvania. United refused to bargain, claiming it was under no obligation to bargain with the Union because the "licensed debit agents who work in Pennsylvania * * were and are independent contractors and not employees within the meaning of the Act."

United is an Illinois corporation engaged in the insurance business. It issues commercial and industrial life, health and accident, and hospitalization insurance policies. By Pennsylvania law, industrial life insurance is sold in policies of less than $1000 on a weekly premium basis. Debit agents are engaged primarily in selling and collecting premiums on industrial life insurance policies issued by United. However, they, at times, collect premiums on other types of insurance policies issued by United.

In order to sell insurance, an agent must be licensed by the state. The license authorizes him to sell specific types of insurance for a specific company. However, some agents are licensed to sell insurance for more than one company.

The principal issue litigated at the hearing before the Labor Board was whether the debit...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Insurance Workers International Union v. NLRB
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — District of Columbia Circuit
    • 28 Febrero 1966
    ...principal office in Chicago. It has represented that the same parties and the same issues were involved in United Insurance Company of America v. N.L.R.B., 272 F.2d 446 (7 Cir. 1959), and United Insurance Company of America v. N.L.R.B., 304 F.2d 86 (7 Cir. 3 Cf. International Union, United ......
  • Klamath County v. Laborers Intern. Union of North America, Local No. 915
    • United States
    • Oregon Court of Appeals
    • 5 Mayo 1975
    ...future PERB actions. See Connecticut Light and Power Company v. Leedom, 174 F.Supp. 171 (D.C. Cir. 1959); United Insurance Company of America v. N.L.R.B., 272 F.2d 446 (7th Cir. 1959). The Oregon Administrative Procedures Act contains no definition of a final order. In the general law, 'fin......
  • United Insurance Company of America v. NLRB, 13500.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit
    • 2 Julio 1962
    ...for enforcement of that order. This case is here for the second time. On the first occasion, we set aside the Board's order (272 F.2d 446), holding the Board had not afforded United procedural due process. We remanded the case "for a full hearing and decision based upon a consideration of a......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT