General Motors Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 25, 1942

39 N.L.R.B. 1108 (N.L.R.B. 1942)

In the Matter Of FRIGIDAIRE DIVISION, GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION
and' UNITED ELECTRICAL,' RADIO & MACHINE WORKERS OF AMERICA
(CIO)
Case No. R 3.488.-Decided March 25, 1942
Jurisdiction : electiical equipment and war material manufacturing industry.
Investigation and Certification of Representatives : existence of question: re-
fusal to accord union recognition until it is certified by the Board; unnecessary
for petitioning union to make formal request for recognition when such request
has been made by an attiliate of the petitioning union, since the Company dis-
putes the right of the employees here involved to be repiesented by any union;
election necessary
Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining :-plant protective employees at the
Company's plants and warehouses in and around Dayton, Ohio, excluding
supervisors and clerks
Definitions : plant protective employees held employees within the meaning of
the Act
Mr. Henry M. Hogan and Mr. Robert C. Carson; of Detroit, Mich.,
for the Company.
Mr. Arthur L. Garfield and Mr. Lem Markland, of Dayton, Ohio,
for the U.- E. R. M.
Mr. George A. Koplow, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF TIIE CASE
On or about October 31, 1941, Local 801, United Electrical, Radio &
Machine Workers of Alnerica.'(CIO), herein called Local 801, filed
with the Regional Director for the Ninth Region (Cincinnati, Ohio)
a petition alleging that a, question affecting commerce had arisen con-
cerning the representation of employees of Frigidaire Division, Gen-
eral Motors Corporation, Dayton, Ohio, herein called the Company,
,and requesting 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 December 9, 1941, the National
1 Near the beginning of the hearing the Trial Examiner granted a motion to amend the
petition by striking the words "Local 801." The caption in the case has accordingly been
changed to correspond with the designation of the petitioner as amended ; deleting the
words "Local 801."
39 N L. R. B., No. 208.
1108
GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION, 1109
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, or-
dered an 'investigation and authorized the Regional Director to
conduct it and to provide for an appropriate hearing upon due notice.
On December 12,1941, the Regional Director issued a notice of hear-
ing, and on December 17, 1941, pursuant to the Company's motion for
adjournment, a notice of adjournment and second notice of hearing,
copies- of which notices were duly served upon the Company and
Local- 801. Pursuant to the latter notice a hearing was held on Jan-
uary 8, 1942, and January 26,'1942, at Dayton, Ohio, before Harold
Weston, the Trial Examiner duly designated by the Chief Trial Ex-
aminer. The Company and United Electrical, Radio & Machine
Workers of America (C. I. 0.), herein called the U. E. R. M., were
represented by counsel or other, representatives and participated in
the hearing. Full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-
examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues was
afforded all parties. The Company moved to dismiss the petition
on the ground that there was no question concerning representation
and that there was no showing that the petitioner was a labor organi-
zation. The Trial Examiner made no ruling but referred those mo-
tions to the Board. For reasons hereinafter stated, the motion's are
denied. During the course of the hearing the Trial Examiner made
several rulings on other 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. The Company and the U. E. R. M. filed briefs which
the Board has considered.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT I
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
General Motors Corporation, a Delaware corporation with its prin-
cipal office in New York City, for business reasons functions with
several unincorporated divisions. One of these divisions is Frigidaire
Division; which maintains plants in Dayton and Moraine, Ohio, where
it normally manufactures electrical refrigerators, stoves, other house-
hold appliances, and parts therefor. At the present time, it it also
engaged in manufacturing war material for the United States Govern-
ment. Approximately 40 percent of the productive materials, includ-
ing raw material and fabricated or partially fabricated-articles used
in the manufacturing and 'fabricating operations of Frigidaire Divi-
sion are obtained from sources outside the State of Ohio. Approxi-
1110 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
mately 90 percent of the value of the products manufactured at the
plants of the Frigidaire Division are shipped outside the State of
Ohio.
Frigidaire Division at the present time has two plants in Dayton,
Ohio, one of which is an ordnance plant, one plant completed and
another in the process of construction in nearby Moraine, Ohio, four
warehouses in Dayton, and one warehouse in Springfield, Ohio.
II. THE. ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
United Electrical, Radio & Machine `Yorkers of America, affiliated
with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, is a labor organization
admitting to membership employees of the Company.'
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING, REPRESENTATION
On October 24, 1941, Local 801 wrote to the Company requesting
"exclusive bargaining rights" for the plant-protective employees. In
November 1941 the Company replied that it would grant such recog-
nition only after a certification by the Board.
The Company moved to dismiss the petition on the ground that no
question concerning representation had arisen, since the demand for
recognition was made by Local 801 rather than by U. E. R. M. We
find no merit in this contention. Although Local 801, rather than
the U. E. R. M., requested and was refused recognition, the record
plainly shows that the Company disputes the right of the employees
here involved to be represented by any union. Under such circum-
stances, no good'purpose would be served by requiring the U. E. R. M.
to make a formal request, for recognition. Accordingly, the Com-
pany's motion is denied.
A statement of an agent of the Regional Director introduced in evi-
dence discloses that the U. E. R. M. represents a substantial number
2 Although the Company stipulated that the U E. R. M is 'a labor organization, it never---`"
theless contends that the petition should be dismissed because the employees here involved
had not established a'local organization to act in their behalf The record shows that the
plant pi otective employees, who are also called plant patrolmen, affiliated directly with
the U. E. R M, but for sometime operated under the "formal aegis" of Local 801, an
affiliate of the U E R M which we previously certified as the representative of production
and maintenance employees in certain plants of the Company's Frigidaire Division See
Matter of Prigidaiie Dit.iston, General Motors Corp , Dayton, Ohio and Local 801, United
Electrical, Radio