Foote Bros. Gear and Machine Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 12, 1946

67 N.L.R.B. 318 (N.L.R.B. 1946)

In the Matter of FOOTE BROS. GEAR AND MACHINE CORPORATION and
UNITED FOREMEN OF AMERICA
Case No. 1.3-R-3008.-Decided April 12, 1946
Me88rs. Winston, Strawn & Shaw, by Mr. G. B. Christensen, of
Chicago, Ill., and Mr. Arthur W. Coppin, of Chicago, Ill., for the
Company.
Me88r8. Meyers & Meyer.,s by Mr. Ben Meyers, of Chicago, Ill., 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 United Foremen of America; herein
called the Union, alleging that a question affecting commerce had
arisen concerning the representation of employees of Foote Bros.
Gear and Machine Corporation, Chicago, Illinois, herein called the
Company, the National Labor Relations Board provided for an ap-
propriate hearing upon due notice before J. G. Evans, Trial Exam-
iner. The hearing was held at Chicago, Illinois, on various dates
between June 3 and 13, 1945, inclusive. The Company and the Union
appeared and participated. All parties were afforded full oppor-
tunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to
introduce evidence bearing on the issues. The Company moved at
various times during the hearing for dismissal of the petition. In
each instance, the Trial Examiner reserved ruling upon the motion
for the Board. For reasons stated in Section III, infra, the motions
are hereby denied. The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hear-
ing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. All par-
ties 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
Foote Bros. Gear and Machine Corporation, a Delaware corpora-
tion, is engaged in the manufacture of gears of various types at 4
67 N. L R. B., No. 43
318
FOOTE BROS . GEAR AND MACHINE CORPORATION 319
plants located in Chicago, Illinois, with which we are hereby con-
cerned. The principal raw material used by the Company is steel,
and its principal manufactured product is finished gears. The Com-
pany annually receives from points outside the State of Illinois
shipments of raw materials valued at more than $1,000,000. The
Company annually ships in interstate commerce finished products
valued in excess of $1,000,000.
The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
United Foremen 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
exclusive bargaining representative of certain of its supervisory
personnel.
In support of its motion to dismiss the petition, the Company
contends that the supervisory personnel sought to be represented by
the Union are not "employees" within the meaning of Section 2 (3)
of the Act. The Company has set forth no argument in justification
of its contention which was not fully considered by us in the Packard 1
and Soss 2 cases, wherein we held that foremen are "employees." We
find, in accordance with our determinations in those and subsequent
cases," that the supervisory personnel involved herein are "employees"
within the meaning of Section 2 (3) of the Act .4
A statement of a Board agent, introduced into evidence at the hear-
ing, indicates that the Union represents a substantial number of
employees in the unit hereinafter found appropriate.5
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.
' Matter of Packard Motor Car Company, 61 N L. R. B. 4, and 64 N. L. R. B. 1212.
2 Matter of Soss Manufacturing Company, et al., 56 N. L. R. B. 348.
6 See Matter of L. A. Young Spring & Wire Corporation, 65 N. L. R B. 208; Matter of
The R. F. Goodrich Company, 65 N. L R B 294; Matter of Simmons Company, 65
N L R B 984; Matter of The Midland Steel Products Company, Parrish & Bingham
Division, 65 N. L. R B. 997.
4 See N. L. R. B. v. Armour and Co., 154 F (2d) 570 (C C. A. 10) ; Jones & Laughlin
Steel Corporation v. N. L. It. B, 146 F. (2d) 833 (C C. A 5) ; N. L. R. B. v. Skinner &
Kennedy Stationery Company, 113 F. (2d) 667 (C. C. A 8).
6 The Field Examiner reported that the Union submitted 150 designations and that the
cards were all dated April 1945, He further reported that there are 205 employees in
the appropriate unit.
320 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Union seeks a unit of all assistant plant production managers,
general foremen, foremen, assistant foremen, working foremen, pro-
duction supervisors, foreladies, and female supervisors engaged in
the Chicago plants of the Company, excluding all other employees.
The Company contends, in effect, that, except for the female super-
visors who exercise no supervisory authority, none of the persons
sought to be represented by the Union are employees and, conse-
quently, cannot be included within a collective bargaining unit.
Apart from this contention, the Company takes no position regarding
the appropriate unit.
Inasmuch as we have already found in Section III, above, that
the persons sought herein are "employees" within the meaning of
Section 2 (3) of the Act, it is clear that they may comprise an ap-
propriate collective bargaining unit.
However, the record indicates that the female supervisors sought by
the Union are engaged in doing "administrative work and are not
part of the operating management." The record contains no evidence
indicating that they exercise supervisory functions within the mean-
ing of our customary definition, and, accordingly, we shall exclude
them.
We find that all assistant plant production managers, general fore-
men, foremen, assistant foremen, working foremen, production super-
visors and foreladies engaged at the Chicago plants of the Company,
excluding female supervisors and all other employees, constitute a
unit appropriate for the purpose 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 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 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 representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Foote Bros. Gear
and Machine Corporation, Chicago, Illinois, an election by secret
FOOTE BROS. GEAR AND MACHINE CORPORATION 321
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 Seventh 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 Regula-
tions, among 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 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 election, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented
by United Foremen of America, for the purposes of collective
bargaining.
MR. GERARD D. REILLY, dissenting :
For the reasons stated in my dissenting opinion in Matter of Pack-
ard Motor Car Company, 61 N. L. R. B. 4, I am constrained to dissent
from the majority opinion in this case.
682148-46-vol. 67-22