Berglund Tractor and Equipment Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Dec 29, 1945

65 N.L.R.B. 74 (N.L.R.B. 1945)

In the Matter of BERGLUND TRACTOR AND EQUIPMENT COMPANY and
OPERATING ENGINEERS LOCAL UNION No. 3, OF TIIE INTERNATIONAL
UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS , A. F. OF L.
In the Matter of BERGLUND TRACTOR AND EQUIPMENT COMPANY
and INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS , LOCAL 1419,
A. F. of L.
Cases Nos. 10-R-1354 and 20-R-1388, respectively.-Decided Decem-
ber 29, 1945
Brobeck, Phieger & Harrison, by Mr. Gregory A. Harrison, of San
Francisco, Calif., for the Company.
Mr. K. C. Apperson, of Oakland, Calif., for the Machinists.
Mr. C. F. Mathews, of San Francisco, Calif., for the Operating
Engineers.
Mr. John A. Nevros, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon separate petitions duly filed by Operating Engineers Local
Union No. 3, of the International Union of Operating Engineers,
A. F. of L., herein called the Operating Engineers, and International
Association of Machinists, Local 1419, A. F. of L.,1 herein called the
Machinists, each alleging that a questioii affecting commerce had
arisen concerning the representation of employees of Berglund
Tractor and Equipment Company, Napa, California, herein called
the Company, the National Labor Relations Board provided for an
appropriate consolidated hearing upon due notice before Robert E.
Tillman, Trial Examiner. The hearing was held at San Francisco,
California, on August 6, 1945. The Company, the Operating En gi-
neers, and the Machinists, appeared and participated. All parties
were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-ex-
amine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues.
The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are free from
1 The names of the petitioning unions appear as amended at the hearing.
65 N L. R. B., No. 18.
74
BERGLUND TRACTOR AND EQUIPMENT COMPANY 75
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
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Berglund Tractor and Equipment Company, a California corpora-
tion, having its principal office and place of business at Napa, Cali-
fornia, and additional places of business at Santa Rosa, Rio Vista,
Dixon, and Willits, California, is engaged in the sale, rental, and
repair of new and used tractors and farm equipment. During the
year 1944 the Company purchased machinery, materials , and supplies
valued in excess of $500,000, of which approximately 25 percent rep-
resented shipments to the Company from sources outside the State
of California. During the same period the Company sold both new
and used equipment and parts, valued in excess of $1,137,000, of
which more than 35 percent represented shipments to points outside
the State of California.
The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
Operating Engineers Local Union No. 3, of the International
Union of Operating Engineers, is a labor organization affiliated with
the American Federation of Labor, admitting to membership em-
ployees of the Company.
International Association of Machinists, Local 1419, is a labor
organization, admitting to membership employees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTIONS CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Company has refused to grant recognition to the Operating
Engineers and the Machinists as the exclusive bargaining repre-
sentatives of certain of its employees at the Santa Rosa and Napa
shops, respectively.
A statement of a Board agent, introduced into evidence at the
hearing, indicates that the Operating Engineers and the Machinists
each represents a substantial number of employees in the units here-
inafter found appropriate in Cases Nos. 20-R-1354 and 20-R-1386,
respectively.2
2 The Field Examiner reported that in Case No. 20-R-1354 the Operating Engineers sub-
mitted authorization cards bearing the names of 7 of the 11 employees in the alleged appro-
priate unit at the Company 's Santa Rosa shop, and that the cards were dated March 23,
1945. He also reported that in Case No. 20-R-1386 the Machinists submitted a petition
76 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
We find that questions affecting commerce have 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 UNITS
The Machinists petitions for a unit of all machinists, heavy duty
mechanics, welders, apprentices, helpers, and utility men in the Com-
pany's Napa shop, excluding parts men and supervisory employees.
The Operating Engineers seeks a virtually identical unit comprising
all heavy duty repair men,3 helpers and welders, at the Company's
Santa Rosa shop, but excluding parts men and supervisory employees.
N either the Operating Engineers nor the Machinists asserts any inter-
est in the unit claimed by the other. The Company objects to any sep-
aration of the Napa and Santa Rosa employees from its other employees
for purposes of collective bargaining and contends that the only appro-
priate unit is one composed of the employees of all its five shops, includ-
ing the parts men.
As already indicated, the Company operates five shops in the State
of California, one in each of the following towns: Napa, Santa Rosa,
Rio Vista, Dixon, and Willits. Each shop does service and repair work,
and serves the surrounding area. The service and repair work is done
either in the shop proper or on the customer's premises, as the job re-
quires. The shops are widely separated, with Santa Rosa, Rio Vista,
Dixon, and Willits being 34, 42, 44, and 99 miles distant, respectively,
by the shortest routes from the main shop in Napa. The shortest
approximate road distances from the Rio Vista shop to the others are :
34 miles to Dixon, 76 miles to Santa Rosa and 100 miles to Willits; and
it is about 84 miles from Dixon to Santa Rosa and 149- miles from
Dixon to Willits. At its five shops the Company employs approx-
imately 34 mechanics, machinists, welders and their helpers,4 and 11
parts men, distributed as follows : 14 machinists and 4 parts men at
Napa, 9 machinists and 5 parts men at Santa Rosa, 5 machinists and 2
parts men at Rio Vista, and 3 machinists each at Dixon and Willits,
respectively.
There is support in the record for the Company' s position that a
multiple-plant unit is appropriate. Thus, managerial control over all
bearing the names of 9 of the 11 employees in the alleged appropriate unit at the Com-
pany s Napa Shop.
At the hearing there was testimony that there were, in fact, 9 employees in the alleged
appropriate unit at the Santa Rosa Shop and 14 in the appropriate unit sought at the
Napa Shop.
3 While the Operating Engineers adverts in its petition to "heavy duty repairmen," the
record indicates that the Company has no such classification of employees , but that the
employees so identified at Santa Rosa are machinists who perform similar work to the
machinists at the Napa shop.
4 Hereinafter collectively referred to as machinists.
BERGLUND TRACTOR AND EQUIPMENT COMPANY 77
the shops is centralized in the Napa office at which the Company main-
tains all records including its pay rolls, handles all its purchasing, and
approves all its sales and orders . The Company 's general manager in
the Napa office has authority over all five shops , and the sales manager,
assistant manager in charge of the parts department , and the service
manager likewise have authority over their respective departments in
all five of the Company's shops. The general manager in Napa deter-
mines the hiring , retention , transfer , or discharge of employees at all
five shops . The hours , wage scales , working conditions , qualifications,
and duties of the Company 's machinists are the same throughout all five
shops.
On the other hand, there are many factors in the record which sup-
port the position of the petitioners for separate units of the Company's
employees in the Napa and Sang Rosa shops . Thus, the Company
has had no history of collective bargaining , either on a multiple -plant,
or any other unit basis . Each shop has its own separate immediate
supervision . The distances separating the shops constitute substan-
tial barriers to general contact between employees of the several shops
as respects union activities ; and such contact cannot be maintained
through employee interchange . In this connection , the record indi-
cates that during the year preceding the hearing there were only two
employee transfers on a temporary basis from the main shop at Napa
to the Willits shop and none to any of the other three shops ; that two
employees transferred from Santa Rosa to Napa and one to Willits;
that one employee from Willits and one from Dixon transferred to the
Rio Vista shop; and that there were apparently no transfers between
Willits and Dixon , Santa Rosa and Dixon, or Santa Rosa and Rio
Vista. The record also reveals that the Machinists has jurisdiction
over the Napa shop only, and, accordingly , has not attempted to or-
ganize any of the other shops . While the Operating Engineers has
jurisdiction over all five shops and has attempted to organize the four
shops of the Company not claimed by it , it has apparently been unsuc-
cessful at these shops and makes no claims of membership in any shop
except Santa Rosa. Nor is any other labor organization presently
attempting to organize the five shops in a single unit. From the fore-
going facts , we are of the opinion that the employees of the Napa and
Santa Rosa shops should not be deprived at this time of their rights
to bargain collectively under the Act , and we find that the employees
at each plant may comprise a unit appropriate for collective bargaining
purposes.
There remains, for consideration the question whether parts men
should be included in, or excluded from, the appropriate units. The
5 See Matter of Mine Safety Appliances Co., Gallery Plant, Gallery, Pa., 55 N. L. R B.
1190.
78 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Company's machinists, who are under the immediate supervision of
the shop foreman, do all the repair and service work. The parts men
work in a room apart from the machinists at each shop. These em-
ployees are under separate immediate supervision from that of the
machinists, and devote their time to locating, laying out, and issuing
parts to the machinists. Although a machinist is also qualified to
hunt parts, a parts man is not necessarily qualified to perform the
work of a machinist. Both groups of employees are paid hourly,
work the same hours, and have the same holidays. However, the
parts men receive a maximum of 85 cents an hour and 2 weeks' vaca-
tion with pay annually, while the machinists receive a maximum of
$1.10 per hour, and 1 week's vacation with pay. The Machinists does
not admit parts men to membership while the Operating Engineers
admits them but does not solicit their membership. Because the ma-
chinists in the units sought by the Unions are highly skilled employ-
ees who perform specialized functions whereas the parts men have
none of the skills of these employees and are engaged in entirely
different work, we are of the opinion that the interests of parts men
are dissimilar to those of the other employees. Under all the cir-
cumstances, we shall exclude parts men from the units.`'
We find that (1) all machinists and mechanics at the Company's
Napa Shop, including welders, apprentices, helpers, and utility men
but excluding parts men, and all or any supervisory employees with
authority to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect
changes in the status of employees, or effectively recommend such
action, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective
bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act; and
(2) all machinists and mechanics at the Company's Santa Rosa Shop,
including welders, apprentices, helpers and utility men, but exclud-
ing parts men and all or any supervisory employees with authority to
hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in
the status of employees, or effectively recommend such action, con-
stitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining
within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.'
V. TILE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
We shall direct that the questions concerning representation which
have arisen be resolved by elections by secret ballot among the em-
ployees in the appropriate units who were employed during the pay-
"See Matter of Arqus Manafacturang Company , 63 N L. R. B.°1159; Matter of Butler
Motors, Inc., 28 N L . R B 1254.
See Matter of West Kentucky Coal Co.. 54 N L. R B 358; Matter of Howard Aircraft
Corpooation, 51 N L 11 B. 386, Matter of Brown Paper Goods Co., 34 N. L. R. B. 743.
BERGLUND TRACTOR AND EQUIPMENT COMPANY 79
roll period immediately preceding the date of the Direction of Elec-
tions herein, subject to the limitations and additions set forth in the
Direction.
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National Labor
Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act,
and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor Relations
Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3, as amended, it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part' of the investigation to ascertain 'repre-
sentatives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Berglund
Tractor and Equipment Company, Napa, California, elections ' by
secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than
sixty (60) days from the date of this Direction, under the direction
and supervision of the Regional Director for the Twentieth 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 Regu-
lations, among the employees in the units 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 vacation
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 those employees who have since quit or been discharged
for cause and have not been rehired or reinstated prior to the date of
the elections, to determine (1) whether or not the employees at the
Napa shop desire to be represented by International Association of
Machinists, Local 1419, for the purposes of collective bargaining, and
(2) whether or not the employees at the Santa Rosa shop desire to be
represented by Operating Engineers Local Union No. 3, of the Inter-
national Union of Operating Engineers, A. F. of L., for the purposes of
collective bargaining.
Mx. JOHN M. HOUSTON took no part in the consideration of the
above Decision and Direction of Elections.
679100-46-vol. 65-7