Chrysler Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 19, 1941

34 N.L.R.B. 482 (N.L.R.B. 1941)

In the Matter of CHRYSLER MOTOR PARTS CORPORATION DIVISION OF
CHRYSLER CORPORATION and 'UNITED AUTOMOBILE WORKERS OF
AMERICA
Case No. R-2786.-Decided August 19, 194.1
Jurisdiction : wholesale distributor of automobile replacement parts.
Investigation and Certification of Representatives : existence of question: re-
fusal to accord union recognition on the ground that it had not established a
majority; election necessary.
Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : all receiving and shipping depart-
ment employees, but excluding clerical, supervisory, and plant protection
employees.
Mr. Henry J. Miller, and Mr. Blair Foster,' of Atlanta, Ga., for the
Company.
Mr. C. H. Gillman, of Atlanta, Ga., for the Union.
Mr. Robert S. Fousek, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On June 10, 1941, United Automobile Workers of America, herein
called the Union, filed with the Regional Director for the Tenth
Region (Atlanta, Georgia) a petition alleging that a question affect-
ing commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees
of the Chrysler Motor Parts Corporation Division of Chrysler Cor-
poration, Atlanta, Georgia, herein called the Company, and requesting
an investigation and certification of representatives pursuant to Sec-
tion 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein
called the Act. On July '5,1941, the National Labor Relations Board,
herein called the Board, acting pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the
Act and Article III, Section 3, of National Labor Relations Board
Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, ordered an investiga-
tion and authorized the Regional Director to conduct it and to pro-
vide for an appropriate hearing upon due notice. On July 15 and 19,
1941, respectively, the Regional, Director issued a notice and amended
notice of hearing, which were served upon the Company and the
Union.
34 N. L. R. B., No. 69.
482
CHRYSI1R MOTOR PARTS CORPORATION 483
Pursuant to notice, a hearing was held in Atlanta, Georgia, on
July 22, 1941, before Alexander E. Wilson, the Trial Examiner duly
designated by the Chief Trial Examiner. The Company and the
Union were represented and participated in the hearing. Full oppor-
tunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to
introduce evidence bearing upon the issues was afforded all parties.
During the course of the hearing, the Trial Examiner made various
rulings on motions and on objections to the admission of evidence.
The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner and finds
that no prejudicial errors were committed. The rulings are hereby
affirmed.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Chrysler Motor Parts Corporation Division of Chrysler Corpo-
ration is an affiliate of the Chrysler Corporation having its principal
office and place of business in Detroit, Michigan. The Company oper-
ates several plants of which only Depot No.-3 in Atlanta, Georgia, is
involved in this proceeding. The Company is engaged, at Depot No.
3, in the wholesale distribution of automobile replacement parts of
which almost 100 per cent are shipped to Atlanta, Georgia, from points
without the State of Georgia. During the first 6 months of 1941
sales within the State of Georgia by Depot No. 3 averaged $24,643.82
per month. Sales to points without the State of Georgia during the
same period averaged $97,303.30 per month. The Company employs
approximately 44 employees at Depot No. 3.
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
United Automobile Workers of America is a labor organization
affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations admitting to
membership employees of the Company.
M. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
In June 1941, the Union requested the Company for recognition as
the exclusive bargaining agent of the employees of Depot No. 3. The
Company refused on the ground that the Union had not established
that it represented a majority of the employees in the alleged ap-
propriate unit.
484 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
The Trial Examiner made a statement in the record showing that
the Union represents a substantial number of employees in the unit
hereinafter found to be appropriate.'
We find that a question has arisen concerning the representation of
employees of the Company at Depot No. 3.
IV. THE EFFECT OF THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
UPON COMMERCE
We find that the question concerning representation which has
arisen, occurring in connection with the operations of the Company
described in Section I above, has a close, intimate, and substantial re-
lation to trade, traffic, and commerce among the several States and
tends to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce and
the free flow of commerce.
V. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Union requests, the Company does not oppose, and we find,.that
all receiving and shipping department employees of the Company
at Depot No. 3, excluding clerical, supervisory, and plant protection em-
ployees constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bar-
gaining and that said unit will insure to these employees of the Com-
pany the full benefit of their right to self-organization and to col-
lective bargaining and otherwise effectuate the policies of the Act.
VI. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
We find that the question which has arisen can best be resolved by
an election by secret ballot. We shall direct that an election by secret
ballot be held among the employees of the Company in the appropriate
unit who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately pre-,
ceding the date of this Direction, subject to the limitations and addi-
tions set forth in the Direction, to determine whether or not they de-
sire to be represented by the Union for. the purposes -of collective
bargaining.
Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and upon the entire
record in the case, the Board makes the following :
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. A question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the repre-
sentation of employees of Chrysler Motor Parts Corporation Division
of Chrysler Corporation at Depot No. 3, Atlanta, Georgia, within
' The Trial Examiner stated that the Union had submitted 17 authorization cards. Of
these, 12 were signed by persons listed by the Company in the alleged appropriate unit.
There are approximately 17 employees in the unit hereinafter found appropriate.
CHRYSIMU MOTOR PARTS CORPORATION 485
the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) , and (7) of the Na-
tional Labor Relations Act.
2. All receiving and shipping department employees of the Com-
pany at Depot No. 3, Atlanta, Georgia, excluding clerical, supervisory,
and plant protection employees constitute a unit appropriate for the
purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b)
of the National Labor Relations Act.
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 Relations
Act, 49 Stat. 449, and pursuant to Article III, Section 8, of National
Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended,
it is hereby
Dnn mi n that, as a part of the investigation authorized by the
Board to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bar-
gaining with Chrysler Motor Parts Corporation Division of Chrysler
Corporation, 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 of Election, under the direction and supervision of the
Regional Director for the Tenth Region, acting in this matter as agent
for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Article III,
Section 9; of said Rules and Regulations, among all receiving and
shipping department employees of the Company at Depot No. 3, At-
lanta, Georgia, who were employed during the pay-roll period im-
mediately preceding the date of this Direction of Election, including
employees who did not work during such pay-roll period because they
were ill or on vacation or in the active military service or training of
the United States, or temporarily laid off, but excluding clerical,
supervisory, plant-protection employees and employees who have since
quit or been discharged for cause, to determine whether or not they
desire to be represented by United Automobile Workers of America,
affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, for-the pur-
poses of collective bargaining.
451269-42-vol. 34-32