Athey Truss Wheel Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsSep 17, 1943

52 N.L.R.B. 683 (N.L.R.B. 1943)

In the Matter of ATHEY TRUSS WHEEL COMPANY and CONGRESS OF INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATIONS Case No. R-5991.Decided September 1'7, 1943 Montgomery, Hart, Pritchard & Harriott, by Mr. W.Ward Smith, of Chicago, Ill., for the Company. Meyers & Meyers, by Mr. Hart E. Baker, of Chicago, Ill., and Mr. Albert E. Glenn, of Chicago, Ill., for the Union. Mr. Louis Cokin, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION STATEMENT OF THE CASE Upon petition duly filed by Congress of Industrial Organizations, herein called the Union, alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of Athey Truss Wheel Company, Chicago, Illinois, herein called the Company, the National Labor Relations Board provided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice before George Freudenthal, Jr., Trial Examiner. Said hearing was held at Chicago, Illinois, on August 26, 1943. The Company and the Union appeared at and participated in the hearing 1 All parties were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues. The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. All parties were afforded opportunity to file briefs with the Board. Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following.: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY Athey Truss Wheel Company is an Illinois corporation with its principal place of business at Chicago, Illinois, where it is engaged in 'Although American Federation of Labor was served with notice of hearing, it did not appear. 52 N. L. R. B., No. 118. 683 684 DECTSSONS OF NNAirroNAL LABOR RELATTONS BOARD the manufacture of trailers. During the 12-month period ending July 1, 1943, the Company used raw materials valued in excess of $500,000, about 75 percent of which was shipped to it from points outside the State of Illinois. During the same period the Company manufactured products valued in excess of $1,000,000, substantially all of which was manufactured for the United States Government. The Company admits, for the purpose of this proceeding, that it is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED Congress of Industrial Organizations is a labor organization, ad- mitting to membership employees of the Company. III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION On July 22, 1943, the Union requested the Company to recognize it as the exclusive collective bargaining representative of the Com- pany's employees. The Company refused this request. A statement of the Regional Director, introduced into evidence at the hearing, indicates that the Union represents a substantial number of employees in the unit hereinafter found to be appropriate.2 We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the representation of employees of the Company, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT We find, in agreement with a stipulation of the parties, that all pro- duction and maintenance employees of the Company, including fac- tory clerks, janitors, janitresses, and group leaders, but excluding watchmen, guards, R. Jobe, Mary Culich, foremen, assistant foremen, and any other supervisory employees with authority to hire, promote, - discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of em- ployees, or effectively recommend such action, constitute a unit appro- priate for the purposes of collective bargaining, within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act. V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES We shall direct that the question concerning representation which has arisen be resolved by means of an election by secret ballot among the employees in the appropriate unit who were employed during the :The Regional Director reported that the Union presented 246 membership application cards bearing apparently genuine signatures of persons whose names appear on the Company's pay roll of August 7, 1943. There are approximately 369 employees in the appropriate unit. AIPHEY TRUSS WHEEL COMPANY 685 pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of the Direction of Election herein, subject to the limitations and additions set forth in the Direction. DIRECTION OF ELECTION By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National Labor Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Rela- tions Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, it is hereby DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa- tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Athey Truss Wheel Company, Chicago, Illinois, an election by secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than thirty (30) days from the date of this Direction, under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Thirteenth Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Article III, Sections 10 and 11, of said Rules and Regulations, among the employees in the unit found appropriate in Section IV, above, who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of this Direction, including employees who did not work during said pay-roll period because they were ill or on vaca- tion or temporarily laid off, and including employees in the armed forces of the United States who present themselves in person at the polls, but excluding any who have since quit or been discharged for cause, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented by Congress of Industrial Organizations, for the purposes of collective bargaining. C$AJRMAN MILLIS took no part in the consideration of the above Decision and Direction of Election.