Brown Fence and Wire Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 20, 1944

57 N.L.R.B. 485 (N.L.R.B. 1944)

In the Matter of-BROWN FENCE AND WIRE COMPANY and INTER-
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS, LODGE 1819
Case No. 7-R-1751.-Decided July 20, 1944
Mr. H. H. Foster, of Adrian, Mich., for the Company.
dlr. Henry J. Murphy, of Detroit,, Mich., for the, I. A. M.
Mr. S. P. Tobin, of Detroit, Mich., for the Iron Workers.
Mr. David P. Easton, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon a petition duly filed by International Association of 'Ma-
chinists, Lodge 1819, herein called the I. A. M., alleging that a q ies-
tion affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation-of
employees of Brown Fence and Wire Company, Adrian, Michigan,
herein called the Company, the National Labor Relations Board pro-
vided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice before Robert J.
Weiner, Trial Examiner. Said hearing was held' at Adrian; Michi
gan, on June 13, 1944. The Company, the I. A. M., -and International
Association of Bridge, Structural and Ornamental Iron Workers,
herein called the Iron Workers, appeared, participated and 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 an oppor-
tunity 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
Brown Fence and Wire Compaiiy, an Ohio corporation , is engaged
in the manufacture and sale of seamless steel tubing, aluminum sheet,
and woven iron fence. For, tliis purpose it operates a plant located
,it Adrian , Michigan , with which we are concerned in this proceeding.
57 N. L. R B., No 88..
i
485
486 DECISIONS, OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
During the 3 months',period ending March 31, 1944, total purchases
of raw materials for use at this plant were valued at approximately
$793,000, of which about 99 percent originated in States other than
the State of Michigan. During the same period, total sales of prod-
ucts finished at this plant amounted in` value to -approximately
$916,000, of which approximately 662/3 percent represents - shipments
to points outside the State of Michigan.
We find that the Company is 'engaged in commerce within ,the
meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
U. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
International Association of Machinists, Lodge 1819,, is a labor
organization affiliated with the American Federation of Labor,
admitting to membership employees of the Company.
International Association of Bridge, Structural and Ornamental
Iron Workers, is a labor organization, affiliated with the American
Federation of Labor, 'admitting to membership 'employees of the
Company. '
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
By letter dated March'22, 1944, the I. A. M. requested recognition
from the Company as the collective bargaining representative of cer'
tain of,its employees. The Company replied by letter dated March,
25, 1944, refusing in effect, to grant such recognition, in the' absence
of evidence that the I. A. M. represents a substantial majority of its
employees. , '
On September 1, 1942, the' Company, the Iron Workers, and its
Local 641, executed a collective bargaining agreement covering, gen-
erally, the Adrian plant's production and maintenance' employees.
This contract provides for a term of 1 year and automatic renewal
from year to year in the absence of a 4 months' notice to amend or
terminate given by either party 1 prior to any anniversary date. In,
1943 the contract was renewed for another year. The Iron Workers
contends that it is a bar to the instant proceeding. In view of the
fact that the I. A. M. apprised the Company of its claim to' repre-
sentation prior to the operative date of the renewal clause for the
current year, we find the contention of the Iron Workers to be with-
out merit.2
3 The Iron Workers and its Local 641 were considered in this contract as a single party,
• although both were separate signatories. . F
2 We note from the record that the Adrian plant's employees who were members of
Local 641, voted unanimously on April, 12,,:i944, 'to dissolve that organization and to
affiliate with the I. A. M.
I
-BROWN, FENCE AND! WIRE COMPANY' '487
, A statement of the Regional Director, introduced . into, evidence, at
.the. hearing, indicates that'the I..A. M. represents a substantial num-
ber of employees in the 'unit hereinafter found appropriate.'
' , 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.
I
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The parties agree that all production and maintenance employees
,of the Company's Adrian plant, excluding foremen, supervisors who
do not use tools, instruments, or machinery, clerical. employees, tech-
nicians, and erection, installation, and construction employees, con-
stitute an appropriate unit. A disagreement exists with respect to
employees classified by the Company as, Supervisors, and shop time-
keepers (dispatchers). Both labor organizations desire to include
Supervisors, whereas the Company desires to exclude them. The
I. A. M. seeks the inclusion of shop timekeepers (dispatchers),
whereas the Iron Workers desires that they be excluded from the unit;
the Company takes no position with respect to these employees.
The record indicates that Supervisors normally have charge' of
groups ranging from 10 to 25 employees and that they are expected
to make recommendations affecting the status of such employees' We
find that Supervisors are supervisory employees within the meaning
of our customary definition, and we shall exclude them.
'Shop timekeepers (dispatchers) record the starting and finishing
time of various jobs performed in certain of the Adrian plant's-
de-partments, as well as the quantity of work produced in these depart-
-ments. In addition to these duties, these employees make and keep
other records, all of which are directed toward the determination of
costs. Besides preparing these records, they are expected to see that
work flows through the various departments to which they are assigned
in a certain prescribed order. Although their work is clerical in
nature, most of their time is spent among the production' and main-
tenance employees, and their duties have nothing to do with fixing
the rates of compensation for such employees. We shall include shop
timekeepers (dispatchers) within the unit.5 • '
We find that all production and maintenance -employees at the
Adrian plant of 'the Company, including `shop timekeepers (dis-
patchers), but excluding all other clerical employees; technicians, erec--
8 The Regional Director reported that - the I . A. M. submitted 207 designation cards, of
which 109 contained names identical with'names appearing upon the Company 's pay roll of
May 2, 1944. , This pay roll contained 310 narn , ' . . ,
The Iron Workers relies upon its contract as evidence of its interest in this proceeding.
The weight these recommendations are given depends upon the' Company's appraisal
of the jud'gment of the particular supervisor concerned . However, it is clear that the
making of recommendations is part of the duties : of, supervisors , r ' I ,
0 Matter of Kaiser Company, Inc., Iron and Steel Division, 53 N. L. R. B. 880, and cases
cited therein. '
488, • DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
i
tion, installation, and construction employees, foremen, supervisors
who do not use tools, instruments,' or machinery, Supervisors, and ,all
other supervisory employees with authority to hire, promote, dis-
charge, discipline; or' otherwise effect changes''in the status of em-
ployees, or effectively recommend such action, constitute a unit ap-
propiiate 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 an election by secret ballot among the
employees in the appropriate unit who were employed during the
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 3, it is hereby
,DIRECTED, that as part of the investigation to ascertain represent-
atives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Brown Fence
and Wire Company, Adrian, Michigan, 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 super-
vision of the Regional Director for the Seventh Region, acting in
this matter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and sub-
ject to Article HI, 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
-vc cafion 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 who have since quit or been discharged for
cause and have not been rehired or reinstated prior to the date of the
election, to determine whether they desire to be-represented by Inter-
national Association of Machinists, Lodge 1819, affiliated with the'
American Federation of Labor, or by International Association of
Bridge, Structural and Ornamental Iron Workers, affiliated with the
American Federation of Labor, for the purposes of collective bar-
gaining, or by neither.
MR. GERARD D. REIu Y took no part in the consideration of the
above Decision and Direction of Election.