General Machinery Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 14, 1942

39 N.L.R.B. 779 (N.L.R.B. 1942)

In the Matter of GENERAL MACHINERY CORPORATION and INTL. ,
,UNION, UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AIRCRAFT, AND AGRICULTURAL IMPLE-
MENT WORKERS OF AMERICA, (U. A. W.-C. I. 0.)
Case No. R-94191.-Decided ?larch 14, 1942
Jurisdiction : steam and Diesel engine and machine tool manufacturing industry.
Investigation and Certification of Representatives : existence of question : refusal
to accord petitioning union recognition ; consent election held nearly four
years prior to filing of petition, and contract executed after petitioner's re-
quest for recognition, held no bar to ; three unions affiliated with A F. of L.
desiring single industrial unit placed on ballot as joint representatives of
A. F. of L.; Election necessary.
Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : all production and maintenance
employees, excluding office and administrative workers and persons having
right to hire and discharge.
Maurice Sugar and Ernest Goodman, by Mr. Ernest Goodman, of
Detroit, Mich., for the U. A. W.
Thorndyke and Becker, by Mr. William Thorndyke and Mr. Ralph
Becker, of Cincinnati, Ohio, and Mr. Paul R. Hutchings, of Wash-
ington, D. C., for the I. A. M.
Mr. Arthur Randhoff, of Hamilton, Ohio, and Mr. Paul A. Gareis,
of Pittsburgh, Pa., for the Pattern Makers.
Taft, Stettinius and Hollister, by Mr. John H. Clippinger, of Cin-
cinnati, Ohio, for the Company.
Mr. Robert C. Moore, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On November 12, 1941, International Union, United Automo-
bile, Aircraft and Agricultural` Implement Workers of America
(U. A. W.-C. I. 0.), herein called the U. A. W., filed with the
Regional Director for the Ninth Region (Cincinnati, Ohio) a peti-
tion alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen con-
cerning the representation of employees of General Machinery Cor-
poration; Hamilton, Ohio, herein called the Company, and request-
39 N. L. R. B., No. 149.
779
780 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ing an investigation and certification, of representatives pursuant to
Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449,
herein called the Act. On January 9, 1942, the National Labor Rela-
tions Board, herein called the Board, acting pursuant to Section
9 (c) of the Act and Article III, Section 3, of National Labor Rela-
tions Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, ordered
an investigation and authorized the Regional Director to conduct it
and to provide for an appropriate hearing upon 'due notice.
On January 13, 1942, the Regional Director issued a notice of
hearing, copies of which, together with copies of the petition, were
duly served upon the Company, upon the U. A. W., and upon the
following labor organizations, each of which claims representation
of employees of the Company: (1) International Association of
Machinists, Local '241. A. F. L., herein called the I. A. M.; (2)
Pattern Makers League of North America, A. F. L., herein called
the Pattern Makers; and (3) International Moulders and Foundry
Workers Union, Local 68, A. F. L., herein called the Moulders. Pur-
suant to notice a hearing was held at Hamilton, Ohio, on January
29-and 30, 1942, before Harold Weston, the Trial Examiner duly
designated by the Chief Trial Examiner. The Company, the
U. A. W., the I. A. M., and the Pattern Makers appeared; were,
represented by counsel and participated in the hearing. Although
the Moulders did not appear, the I. A. M. and the Pattern Makers
presented evidence with respect to the interest of the Moulders. Full
opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses,
and to introduce evidence bearing upon the issues was afforded all
parties. During the hearing the Trial Examiner made 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.
Subsequent to the hearing the Company, the U. A. W., and the
I. A. M. filed briefs, which the Board has considered.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
General Machinery Corporation, a Delaware corporation having
it's principal office and plant in Hamilton, Ohio, is engaged in manu-
facturing Diesel engines, steam marine engines, and machine tools of
various types, • including gun boring, turning and rifling equipment
and armor-plate planers. All its products at the present time are
produced for military purposes. During the year 1941 the Company
purchased from sources outside the State of Ohio more than 50 per-
GENERAL MACHINERY CORPORATION 781
cent of the raw Iriaterial's used. These purchases consisted mainly
of coal, coke,' pig. iron, and bar-steel forgings and were valued at
.about $7,000,000. ; In the same year substantially, all the Company's
products, valued at about $25,000,000, were shipped to points outside
the State - of" Ohio. '
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
International Union, United Automobile, Aircraft and Agricul-
tural Implement Workers of America, affiliated with the Congress of
Industrial Organizations, herein called the C. I. 0., is a labor organ-
ization admitting to membership employees of the Company.-
•International Association of Machinists, Local 241, Pattern Makers
League 'of North-America, and International Moulders and Foundry
Workers Union, Local 68, all affiliated with the American Federation
of Labor, herein, called the A. F. of L., are labor organizations
admitting to membership employees of the Company.'
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION .
On November 3, 1941, the U. A. W. requested of the Company
recognition as exclusive bargaining agent for the employees within
the,unit alleged by the U. A. W. to be appropriate, as set out here-
inafter.. The Company refused to accord such recognition. The
Company contends that the three A. F. of L. unions are-the exclusive
bargaining, representatives of the Company's employees by virtue
of an ,election held in 1937, and that it is bound by existing -contracts
to give exclusive recognition to the A. F. of L. unions.
. On June 25, 1937, pursuant to an agreement among (1) the Com-
pany; (2) 'the Committee for Industrial Organization;,' (3) the
American Federation of Labor; and (4) the Regional Director, dated
June 11', 1937, 'an` election under the supervision of the Regional
Director was held among the Company's employees to determine
whether they desired to be represented by. the C. I. O. or by the
A. F. ' of L. No local union's name appeared on the ballots. In this
election the A. F. of L. received 719 votes, and the C. I. - 0. received
706 votes .2 ,
Since the election in June 1937, and prior thereto, the Company
has bargained collectively with a Works Council composed of repre-
sentatives of, the I. A. M., the Pattern Makers, and the Moulders, and
in separate contracts has recognized these three organizations as the
1 Now the , Congress of Industrial Organizations. At that time the local union of the
U. A W. here involved was affiliated with the Steel Workers Organizing Committee, C: I 0
On September 21, 1941, the local voted to affiliate with the U. A. W.
2 A ,petition similar to that filed in the instant case bad been filed by the Steel Workers
Organizing Committee on June 1, 1937 ; however , this election did not result in a certifi-
cation by the Board , since the parties had agreed to abide by the results thereof.
782 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
exclusive representatives of employees in the machine shops, pattern
shops, and foundry, respectively. It has executed written contracts
with the I. A. M. for each calendar year from 1938 to 1942, inclusive,
and with the Pattern Makers for the years 1939, 1940, and 1941. In
addition it has negotiated oral contracts with the Moulders for each
year since 1937. Written contracts for the year 1942 between the
Company and the Pattern Makers, and between the Company and
the Moulders have been negotiated, but at the time of the hearing
these contracts had not been executed. The Company and the I. A. M.
contend in effect that these contracts, providing for exclusive recog-
nition of the three A. F. of L. affiliates, executed pursuant to the
aforementioned election, bar the present proceedings. The U. A. W.,
however, requested recognition of the Company on November 3, 1941,
and on November 12, 1941, it filed its petition herein. The 1941
contracts between the Company and the A. F. of L. affiliates expired
on December 31, 1941. Negotiations concerning the 1942 contract
between the Company and the I. A. M. were begun in October 1941;
however, the contract was not executed until after the petition of
the U. A. W. had been filed. Negotiations with reference to the pro-
posed contracts for 1942 with the Pattern Makers and the Moulders
were begun in December 1941.
Nearly 4 years have elapsed since the consent election was held.
Moreover, the number of employees has almost doubled since 1937
and the U. A. W. has presented evidence that a substantial number
of them desire to be represented by it. For these reasons, we are of
the opinion that the results of the 1937 election do not preclude a
present determination of representatives. With respect to the con-
tracts with the A. F. of L. unions, it is clear that they do not consti-
tute a bar to this proceeding. The 1942 contract with the I. A. M.
was entered into following the request of the U. A. W. for recog-
nition, and there are at present no existing contracts with the Pattern
Makers and the Moulders. We find that the agreements with the
A. F. of L. unions constitute no bar to an investigation. The record
shows that the U. A. W. represents a substantial number of employees
in the unit hereinafter found appropriate.3
We find that a question has arisen concerning the representation
of employees of the Company.
8 Prior to the hearing the U. A. W. submitted to the Regional Director a total of 1,246
applications for membership , purportedly obtained from employees of the Company. Of
these applications 1,149 bore apparently genuine original signatures , while on the remaining
97 the names of employees were handprinted . A spot check of the U. A. W. cards against
the January 7, 1942, pay roll , conducted by an attorney for the Board , disclosed that out
of 528 names selected at random from the said pay roll 232 appeared on cards submitted
by the U. A. W. At the hearing the U A. W. offered 215 additional applications. The
testimony disclosed that the unit requested by the U. A. W. contained about 2,700 employees,
while the total of all employees was about 3,200.
GENERAL MACHINERY CORPORAITON 783
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
relation 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
In its petition the U. A. W. alleged that an appropriate collective
bargaining unit consisted of all "production and maintenance workers,
including machinists and machinists' helpers, crane operators,
hookers, maintenance men, fitters, lathe hands and lathe operators,
but excluding pattern makers, foundry workers, office employees,
supervisors, foremen, and any person having, the power to hire and
discharge employees. In its brief, however, the U. A. W. pointed
out that pattern makers and foundrymen are eligible for member-
ship in the U. A. W. and, on the basis of the substantial showing
of membership made by if, alleged, in substance, that it should be
accorded the opportunity to be designated as the representative of
the employees in a larger industrial unit, including pattern makers
and foundry workers. It requested, therefore, that in the event
the Board'found that the unit described in the petition was inappro-
priate and that an industrial unit was proper, an election should be
directed to determine representatives in such unit. The Company,
the I. A: M., and the Pattern Makers contend that a plant-wide
industrial unit is appropriate, including all production and main-
tenance workers, but excluding office and administrative 'employees
and persons having the right to hire and discharge.
The Company's plant is located on a single tract of land, approxi-
mately 40 acres in area. The plant consists of several large and
several smaller buildings. - The evidence discloses that, while there
is in general a separation of the three basic types of employees
(i. e., machinists, pattern makers, and foundrymen), in some in-
stances two or more of these types are employed in the same build-
ings. The record contains much evidence showing the highly inte-
grated nature of the Company's operations. It manufactures all of
the patterns and castings used in its manufacturing operations and
makes none of these for sale. In the production of large machine
tools and complicated steam and Deisel engines the utmost of coor-
dination in maintaining intra-plant delivery schedules is imperative.
Workmen in the three basic groups all work from the same engineer-
448105-42-vol. 39-51
784 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ing drawings which are maintained in a central engineering office,
and conferences among members of the three groups must frequently
be held.
The Company and the I. A. M. point to the agreement of June
11, 1937, signed by the American Federation of Labor and the Com-
mittee for Industrial Organization, establishing a plant-wide unit
as the basis for collective bargaining and argue, in effect, that the
U. A. W. is estopped thereby from claiming a unit excluding certain
crafts. It is unnecessary for us to decide whether or not this agree-
ment is binding on the U. A. W., inasmuch as, in our opinion, the
considerations set forth above and the history of collective bargain-
ing in the Company's plant establish the appropriateness of an
industrial unit. °
As stated above, the Company has bargained collectively with a
Works Council, composed of representatives of the three A. F. of L.
unions here involved. Both before and since 1937 the Company has
settled with this single representative group all collective bargaining
issues which were plant-wide in scope and which affected the mem-
bers of each of the three basic groups. Although the Company has
negotiated separate written and oral contracts with the I. A. M., the
Pattern Makers, and the Moulders, the record shows that substan-
tially all terms of these separate contracts, except those pertaining
to wages,' were first discussed and settled with the Works Council.
Only on provisions as to wages to be paid each group were separate
negotiations held.
We find that all production and maintenance employees of the
Company, excluding office and administrative workers and persons
having the right to hire and discharge employees, constitute a unit
appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining and that said
unit will insure to employees of the Company the full benefit of
their right to self-organization and to collective bargaining and
otherwise will effectuate the policies of the Act.
VI. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
The Company and the I. A. M. point to the urgent necessity, for
military reasons, of maintaining maximum uninterrupted produc-
tion at the Company's plant. They argue that an election should not
beheld at this time because of asserted adverse effects' on production.
We find no merit in this contention. We are of the opinion that
the purposes and policies of the Act, as well as the demands of the
military program, will be effectuated and advanced by resolving the
existing representation dispute by means of an election by secret
ballot, and we shall so direct.
Inasmuch as the three unions affiliated with the A. F. of L. desire
an industrial unit, and the U. A., W. has requested an election in such
GENERAL MACHINERY CORPORATION 785
unit, we shall direct that the organizations to appear upon the ballot
shall be (1) the U. A. W. and (2) the I. A. M. and the Pattern
Makers and the Moulders, all affiliated with the A. F. of L.4 Any
organization desiring not to appear on the ballot shall notify the
Regional Director to that effect within five (5)' days after the re-
ceipt of this Decision and Direction of Election; thereupon its name
shall be omitted from the ballot.
Pursuant to our usual practice we shall direct that those eligible
to vote in the election shall be employees within the appropriate
unit who were employed by the Company during the, pay-roll period
immediately preceding the date of our Direction of Election herein,
subject to the additions and limitations set forth in the Direction.
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 General Machinery Corporation, Hamil-
ton, Ohio, within the meaning of Section 9' (c) and Section 2 (6)
and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act.
2. All production and maintenance employees of the Company,
excluding office and administrative workers and.persons having the
right to hire and discharge, 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 Rela
tions Act and pursuant to Article III, Section 8, of National Labor
Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended it is
hereby -
DIRECTED that, as a part of the investigation ordered by the Board
to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargain-
ing with General Machinery Corporation, Hamilton, Ohio, an elec-
tion 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 Ninth
Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National Labor Rela-
tions Board and subject to Article III, Section 9, of said Rules and
* See Matter of Pan American Refining Corporation and International Association of
Machtinists, Local No. 1¢y6, of Distract 37, affiliated with the A . F. of L., et al , 38 N. L. R. B.
985.
786 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Regulations, among all production and maintenance employees of
the Company who were employed during the pay-roll period 'imme-
diately 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 in the active military service or training of the
United States, or temporarily laid off, but excluding office and ad-
ministrative workers, persons having the right to hire and discharge,
and employees who have since quit or have been discharged for
cause, to determine whether they desire. to be represented by Inter-
national Union, United Automobile, Aircraft and Agricultural Im-
plement Workers of America (U. A. W.-C. I. 0.) or by International
Association of Machinists, Local 241, and Pattern Makers League of
North America, and International Moulders and Foundry Workers
Union, Local 68, all affiliated with the American Federation of Labor,
for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by neither.
MR. WM. M. LEIsERsoN took no part in the consideration of the
above Decision and Direction of Election.