Conmar Products Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 30, 1946

67 N.L.R.B. 1021 (N.L.R.B. 1946)

In the Matter of CONMAR PRODUCTS CORPORATION and CHAPTER 262,
FOREMAN'S ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA
Case No. 2-R-5956.Decided April 30,1946
Mr. Herman Mayer, by Mr. Irwin Panken, of New York City; and
Messrs. Henry H. Eskay and Herman Blume, both of Newark, N. J.,,
for the Company.
Mr. Herman B. Sekutzer, of New York City; Mr. William Vallanwe,
of Detroit, Mich., and Mr. Irving Tannenbaum, of Newark, N. J., for
the Union.
Mr. David V. Easton, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon a petition duly filed by Chapter 262, Foreman's Association
of America, herein called the Union, alleging that a question affecting
commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of
Conmar Products Corporation, Newark, New Jersey, herein called
the Company, the National Labor Relations Board provided for an
appropriate hearing upon due notice before Jack Davis, Trial Ex-
aminer. The hearing was held at New York City on various dates
between January 8 and 18, 1946. The Company and the Union ap-
peared and participated. 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
Conmar Products Corporation, a New Jersey corporation with
it plant located at Newark, New Jersey, is engaged in the manufacture,
sale, and distribution of zippers. The principal raw materials used
67 N. L . R. B., No. 126.
1021
1022 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
by the Company in the manufacture of its product are tape, wire,
thread, and cord. During the past year, the Company purchased raw
materials for use at its Newark, New Jersey, plant, valued in excess
of $500,000, of which approximately 75 percent was obtained from
sources outside the State of New Jersey. During the same period,
the Company manufactured, sold, and distributed finished products
valued at more than $1,000,000, of which approximately 75 percent
was shipped from its Newark, New Jersey, plant to points outside the
State of New Jersey.
The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
H. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
Chapter 262, Foreman's Association of America, is an unaffiliated
labor organization admitting to membership supervisory employees
of the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Company has refused to grant recognition to the Union as the
exclusive bargaining representative of certain of its supervisory em-
ployees until the Union has been certified by the Board in an appro-
priate unit.
A statement of a Board agent, introduced into evidence at the
hearing, indicates that the Union represents a substantial number of
employees in the unit alleged by it to be appropriate 7
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
The Union seeks a unit of supervisory employees comprised of all
foremen, group leaders, and trainers employed in those departments
of the Company's manufacturing division who are engaged in per-
forming production, inspection, and training work, excluding the
foreman of the training department, and J. Adams, a foreman in
the scoop and coining department.2 The Company maintains that this
unit is inappropriate in that it fails to include the foremen engaged
in all departments of its manufacturing division. Thus, in addition
to the foremen sought by the Union, the Company would include
Adams, the foreman of the training department, and seven foremen
1 The Field Examiner reported that the Union submitted 20 designation cards , all dated
September 1945. Be further reported that there are approximately 22 employees in the
unit alleged by the Union to be appropriate.
2 This department is engaged in production work.
CONMAR PRODUCTS CORPORATION 1023
engaged in the following departments : toolroom, plant maintenance,
machine maintenance, spare parts stores, raw material and component
parts stores and receiving, and finished fastener stock and shipping.
Moreover, the Company contends that group leaders and trainers are
non-supervisory personnel who should not be included within the unit.
The Company has had no prior history of collective bargaining
with reference to its supervisory employees.' However, its rank and
file production and inspection employees are currently represented by
United Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers of America, Local #424,
CIO, herein called the U. E., and its maintenance employees are pres-
ently represented by International Association of Machinists, Dis-
trict #47, herein called the I. A. M.4 Contracts between the Company
and these two labor organizations indicate that the U. E. represents, in
addition to the non-supervisory subordinates of the employees sought
by the Union herein, the rank and file workers in the finished fastener
stock and shipping department, and the raw material and component
parts stores and receiving department, and that the I. A. M. represents
the non-supervisory employees in the plant maintenance, toolroom,
and machine maintenance departments.
Inasmuch as it appears that the Union seeks, generally, to represent
supervisory personnel of the grade of foremen or below who supervise
the rank and file employees currently represented by the U. E., we
shall, in accordance with our decision in the Westinghouse case,'
include within the unit hereinafter found appropriate such employees
in the finished fastener stock and shipping department, and the raw
material and component parts stores and receiving department,6 but
shall exclude all employees in the plant maintenance, toolroom, ma-
chine maintenance, and spare parts stores departments.'
Group Leaders. These employees work under conditions of em-
ployment, some of which are applicable to foremen and others to non-
supervisory personnel. They are hourly paid workers in charge of
groups of employees within a department. As in the case of foremen.
the group leaders in the departments included within the unit perform
little or no manual labor, and are concerned with the production ,:iid
efficiency of their particular groups. The Company asserts that these
employees are not supervisory personnel, but are part of the unit of
rank and file workers currently represented by the U. E. The record
contains no documentary evidence indicating that they are part of
3In 1942 , the Company and United Office & Professional Workers of America, Local
#7, C. I O , executed a consent election agreement providing for an election among the
Company's foremen in the various production departments , the receiving department, the
stock and shipping department , end the inspection department ( Case No 2-R-2956)
However, no bargaining representative was chosen by the employees at this time
4 Trainers are specifically excluded from the unit represented by these two organizations.
566N L R B,1297
According to the record each of these departments has a single foreman.
7 It does not appear that the non-supervisory employees in the spare parts stores depart-
ments are represented in the U. E 's production and inspection unit.
1024 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
this unit or that the U. E . has bargained collectively on their behalf.
On the contrary , the U . E. makes no claim to represent these employees,
and the record indicates that they have authority to censure their
subordinates and to recommend effectively their discharge to the fore-
men. Under these circumstances , we are of the opinion that the
group leaders engaged in the departments included within the unit
possess supervisory authority within the meaning of our customary
definition , and we shall include them.
The training department . This department consists of a foreman
and approximately four trainers . The foreman enjoys a salary, bene-
fits, privileges , and authority over the trainers commensurate with
those of the foremen of other departments of the Company. The
Union maintains , however, that this employee is on a higher super-
visory level than the foremen whom they seek to represent. The
record discloses that the foreman of the training department reports
directly to the assistant factory manager , and that, as part of her
duties, tours the entire factory area for the purposes of informing
higher management of any existing irregularities . The record does
not indicate , however, that this employee possesses any supervisory
authority over other foremen. Under these circumstances , we are of
the opinion that her additional duties do not warrant a finding that
she is on a higher supervisory level than other foremen sought by the
Union. We shall include the foreman of the training department.
The trainers are responsible for instructing new employees during
their probationary period with respect to their duties and the Com-
pany's routine, system, and procedures ; for retraining operators trans-
ferred from one operation to another ; and for making and keeping
records on employees whom they instruct. During the probationary
period of trainees the trainers may effectively recommend their re-
tention or dismissal to the foreman of the department in which they
are engaged . In addition , there is some evidence that they may
effectively recommend the disciplining of both new and old employees.
We note, further , that trainers are specifically excluded from the rank
and file units represented by • the U. E. and the I. A. M., and the
record indicates that they enjoy many of the working privileges
possessed by admittedly supervisory personnel . Under these cir-
cumstances , we find, contrary to the Company' s assertion , that trainers
are supervisory employees within the meaning of our usual definition
and we shall include them.
J. Adams. The Union and the Company agree that Adams is now
a foreman in the scoop and coin department . The Union , however,
contends that Adams is on a higher supervisory level than the foremen
whom it seeks to represent . The record does not contain any evidence
CONMAR PRODUCTS CORPORATION 1025
indicating that Adams possesses any more authority than other fore-
men sought herein by the Union. Accordingly, we shall include him.
We find that all foremen, group leaders, and trainers employed in
the departments of the Company's manufacturing division performing
production, inspection and training work, including such employees
engaged in the finished fastener stock and shipping department, raw
material and component parts stores and receiving department, and
training department, but excluding all employees in the plant main-
tenance, toolroom, machine maintenance, and spare parts stores de-
partments, and all other employees of the Company, constitute a unit
appropriate 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 shall be resolved by an election by secret ballot. The Com-
pany and the Union agree that September 28, 1945, shall be the date
determining eligibility to participate in the election. However,
neither party advanced sufficient reason which, in our opinion, war-
rants any departure from our customary practice. We shall, there-
fore, direct that the employees eligible to participate in the election
shall be those in the appropriate unit who were employed during the
pay-roll period immediatly preceding the date of the Direction of
Election herein, subject to the limitations and additions set forth in
the Direction.8
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, as amended, it is
hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Conmar Products
Corporation, Newark, New Jersey, 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 Second 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 em-
8 Upon the assumption that the Board would adopt the September 28, 1945, eligibility
date, some question arose at the hearing concerning the voting eligibility of J. Adams and
J. Tupay. In view of the fact that we are adhering to our customary eligibility policy,
no problem exists with respect to these employees , and it is clear that they are eligible
to participate in the election.
692148-46-vol 67-66
1026 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ployees 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 Qr 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 any
employees who have since quit or been discharged for cause and have
not been rehired or reinstated prior to the date of the election, to deter-
mine whether or not they desire to be represented by Chapter 262,
Foreman's Association of America , for the purposes of collective
bargaining.
M.R. GERARD D. REILLY, dissenting :
For the reasons stated in my dissenting opinion in Matter of Packard
Motor Car Company , 61 N. L . R. B. 4, I am constrained to dissent from
the majority opinion in this case.