Hudson Motor Car Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Sep 3, 1943

52 N.L.R.B. 399 (N.L.R.B. 1943)

In the Matter of HUDSON MOTOR CAR COMPANY and AMALGAMATED
PLANT PROTECTION LOCAL 4114, UAW-CIO
Case No. R-&511 .Decided September 3, 1943
Beaumont, Smith & Harris , by Mr. Albert E. Meder , of Detroit,
Mich ., 'for the Company.
Maurice Sugar and N . L. Smokier, by Messrs ., N. L. Smokier and
Irving E. Griffeth , both of Detroit , Mich., for the Union.
Mr. David V. Easton, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon petition duly filed by Amalgamated Plant Protection Local
#114, UAW-CIO, herein called the Union , alleging that a question
affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of em-
ployees of Hudson Motor Car Company , Detroit, . Michigan , herein
called the Company , the National Labor Relations Board provided
for an appropriate hearing upon due notice before Max Rotenberg,
Trial Examiner . Said hearing was held at Detroit, Michigan, on
June 10, 1943. The Company and the Union appeared , participated,
and 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
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Hudson Motor Car Company, a Michigan corporation, is engaged
almost exclusively in the manufacture of raw materials and equipment
for the United States Government. For this purpose the Company
owns and operates the following manufacturing and/or assembly
52 N. L. R. B., No. 59.
399
400 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONIS BOARD
plants in the State of Michigan with which we are concerned herein :
(a) Jefferson plant, located in Detroit, (b) Charlevoix plant, located
in Detroit, (c) Gratiot plant, located in Detroit, and (d) United States,
Naval Ordnance plant, located at Centerline .1
Approximately 50 percent in value of the raw materials, and finished
and partially finished materials used by the Company at the afore-
mentioned plants, and over 90 percent, in value of the finished and
partially finished products of the Company are transported in inter-
state commerce. In view of the foregoing we find that the Company
is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor
Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
Amalgamated Plant Protection Local #114 is a labor organization
chartered by International Union, United Automobile, Aircraft and
Agricultural Implement Workers of America, herein called the Inter-
national, affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations,
admitting to membership employees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
By letter dated May 10, 1943, the Union requested the Company
that it be recognized as the exclusive bargaining representative of
the Company's plant-protection employees engaged at each of the
four plants operated by the Company. The Company did not reply
to this letter. Thereafter, on May 12, 1943, the Union filed the
petition in this proceeding.
The Company is currently'operating under a collective bargaining
agreement with the International and its Local #154, which covers
"all hourly rate employees in all of the plants of the Company." In-
asmuch as the plant-protection employees receive a salary, they are
not included within the purview of the contract. The Company
contends that by reason of this contract between the Company and the
International and Local #154, the Union is estopped from seeking
to represent the employees herein involved. We do not agree with
this contention, and find that said contract between the Company and
the International and Local #154: does not estop the Union from
representing these employees if they desire that it act for them, and
that the contract does not constitute a bar to a present determination
of representatives.'
1 All the property at this plant , including the-land, buildings , equipment , and raw ma-
terial are the property of the United States Navy . However, the Company operates this
plant under prince contracts with and direct supervision of the Navy.
2 Matter of Federal Motor Truck Company, 50 N L R . B. 214, and cases cited therein.
HUDSON MOTOR CAR COMPANY 401
A statement of the Regional Director, introduced into evidence at
the hearing, indicates that the Union represents a substantial number
of employees in the unit hereinafter found appropriate.3
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 contends that a unit consisting of all plant-protection
employees, including patrolmen, patrol women, escorts, fire marshals,
and first-aid instructors at the Jefferson, Charlevoix, Gratiot, and
United States Naval Ordnance plants of the Company, excluding the
chief, captains, lieutenants, sergeants, fire chiefs, assistant fire chiefs,
investigators and confidential clerks, constitute an appropriate unit.
The Company, without disputing the scope of the unit except insofar.
as it includes first-aid instructors, contends that such a unit is not
one that is appropriate within the meaning of the Act. This conten-
tion is based upon the following arguments : (a) plant-protection
employees are part of the supervisory and management groups, and
are therefore not employees within the meaning of the Act; (b)
because they are militarized, they are not employees within the mean-
ing of the Act; (c) it is contrary to public policy to include plant-
protection employees within the protection of the Act, and a certi-
fication of a bargaining representative for these employees would not
effectuate the policies of the Act or be consistent with the national
war effort' All of these arguments have been advanced in other
cases and have been found untenable.6 No facts or arguments are
presented here which would warrant departing from our prior de-
cisions; accordingly, the Company's contentions are rejected.
There are two first-aid instructors -employed by the Company, who
are attached to the plant-protection department. Their duties are to
'instruct employees of the Company in first-aid work as outlined by the
American Red Cross, which takes up approximately 22 percent of
their time ; to read and pass on correspondence received in the form
of character references, employment references, police records, and
3 The Regional Director reported that the Union submitted 251 application cards, of
which 250 contained apparently original signatures Two hundred and twenty-seven of the
latter contained the names of persons appearing upon the Company 's pay roll of April
1943, which pay roll contained 505 names in the appropriate unit
4In addition , the Company argues that the contract hereinabove referred to estops the
Union from representing these employees we have already disposed of this argument in
Section III, above
5 Matter of Federal Motor Truck Company, supra. Matter of Drava Corporation, 52
N L R. B. 322.
1
402 DECIiS[IONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
other correspondence that passes between the Investigation Depart-
ment of the Company and the public in general which consumes 65
percent of their time; for the balance of their work week these
employees are used in other duties, such as relieving patrolmen and
assisting firemen in cases of emergency. The salary of a first-aid
instructor is $10 a month more than that of the patrolmen, but he
normally exercises no supervisory duties. The record discloses that
both these employees have, on several occasions, acted as patrol-
men, and the chief of the plant-protection department testified that
he would have no hesitancy in having these employees fill in purely
plant-protection work whenever necessary. The Company contends
that these' employees should be excluded; the Union would include
them. Although the first-aid instructors are part of the plant-
protection department and perform many duties closely related to
those of other employees in the department, we are of the opinion
that the major portion of their time is spent at work which is
functionally different from that of the usual plant-protection em-
ployee, and we shall therefore exclude them.
We find that all plant-production employees, including patrolmen,
patrol women, escorts, and fire marshals, at the Jefferson, Charlevoix,
Gratiot, and United States Naval Ordnance plants of the Company,
excluding the chief, captains, lieutenants, sergeants, fire chiefs,
assistant fire chiefs, investigators, confidential clerks, and first-aid
instructors, as well as all supervisory employees with authority to hire,
promote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status
of employees, or effectively recommend such action, constitute a unit
appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the mean-
ing 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 the em-
ployees 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 Re-
lations Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor
Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, it is
hereby
HUDSON MOTOR CAR COMPANY 403
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Hudson Motor
Car Company, Detroit, Michigan, 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 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 Regulations, among
the 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 ex-
cluding those employees who have since quit or been discharged for
cause, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented by
Amalgamated Plant Protection Local #114, affiliated with Inter-
national Union, United Automobile, Aircraft and Agricultural Im-
plement Workers of America, affiliated with the Congress of
Industrial Organizations, for the purposes of collective bargaining.
549875-44-vol. 52-27