Interstate Machinery Co., Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 28, 1946

66 N.L.R.B. 1336 (N.L.R.B. 1946)

In the Matter of INTERSTATE MACHINERY COMPANY, INC. and
INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS, DISTRICT No. 8
Case No. 13-R-3128.-Decided March 28, 1946
Pope do Ballard, by Mr. T. C. Kammholz, of Chicago, Ill., for the
Company.
Messrs. E. J. Reid and P. L. Siemiller, both of Chicago, Ill., for
the I. A. M.
Meyers & Meyers, by Messrs. 11. E. Baker and David B. Rothstein,
of Chicago, Ill., for the U. A. W.
Mr. Phil E. Thompson, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon a petition duly filed by the International Association of
Machinists, District No. 8, herein called the I. A. M., alleging that
a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representa-
tion of employees of Interstate Machinery Company, Inc., Chicago,
Illinois, herein called the Company, the National Labor Relations
Board provided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice before
Robert T. Drake, Trial Examiner. The hearing was held at Chicago,
Illinois, on July 10, 1945. A motion to intervene filed by the Inter-
national Union, United Automobile, Aircraft and Agricultural Imple-
ment Workers of America, Local 453, C. I. 0., herein called the
U. A. W., was granted by the Trial Examiner at this hearing. Pur-
suant to a Board order, the record was reopened, and further hearing
was held upon due notice before Robert T. Drake, Trial Examiner,
at Chicago, Illinois, on January 24, 1946. The Company, the I. A. M.,
and the U. A. W. appeared and participated in both hearings, 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 hearings are free from
66 N. L . R. B., No. 160.
1336
INTERSTATE MACHINERY COMPANY, IN C. 1337
prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. All parties were afforded
all opportunity to file briefs with the Board.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Till' B b1NESS OF THE COMPANY
Interstate Machinery Conipany, Inc., is an Illinois corporation,
having its principal office and only plant in Chicago, Illinois, where
it is engaged in the production of machine stampings and the re-
habilitation and repair of metal working machinery and equipment.
A substantial portion of the raw materials purchased and machinery
received for rehabilitation and repair is shipped from outside the
State of Illinois and a substantial percentage of the Company's
finished products is shipped to points outside the State of Illinois.
The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
11. TILE ORGAN IZ.ATIONS INVOLVED
International Association of Machinists, District No. 8, is a labor
organization admitting to membership employees of the Company.
International Union, United Automobile, Aircraft and Agricul-
tural Implement Workers of America, Local 453, affiliated with the
Congress of Industrial Organizations, is a labor organization ad-
mitting to membership employees of the Company.
III. TILE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Company has refused to grant recognition to the I. A. lI.
or the U. A. W. as the exclusive bargaining representative of certain
of its employees until one or the other is certified by the Board in
an appropriate unit.
A statement of a Board agent, introduced into evidence at the
hearing over the objection of the Company, indicates that the I. A. M.
and the U. A. W. each represents a substantial number of employees
in the unit hereinafter found appropriate.'
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning
the employees of the Company, within the meaning of Section 9 (c)
and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
'The Company objected at the hearings , and in briefs filed with the Board, to the
Trial Examiner 's investigation and report on the showing of interest of the I. A. M. and
the C. I. O. The objections have no merit The Board has frequently held that the in-
vestigations and reports of Board agents with respect to showing of interest of labor
organizations in representation proceedings are administrative matters and not subject to
direct or collateral attack. Matter of Aircooled Motor Corporation , 63 N. L. R. B.
1043.
1338 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The parties generally agree that the appropriate unit should
consist of all production and maintenance employees, excluding truck
drivers and supervisory employees-they disagree as to the status of
shipping clerks, material control clerk, inspector, and Ed Olenick,
one of the maintenance mechanics.
Shipping Clerks: The Company employs four shipping clerks
who work exclusively in the machine shop and perform the customary
duties of their classification. One of these employees, designated
as the chief shipping clerk, is clearly a supervisory employee and
should be excluded. The other three shipping clerks are hourly
paid and carried on the plant pay roll. Their hours of work and
other conditions of employment are determined on the same basis
as shop employees. We shall include all shipping clerks except the
Chief Shipping Clerk?
Material Control Clerk: The Company employs one material
control clerk. He works in the machine shop where he records in-
coming shipments, keeps track of work in progress, and finished
products from material control records, and records individual ma-
chine production from machine meters. He has no supervisory duties,
is paid by the hour, and is carried on the shop pay roll. Shop rules
govern his vacations, hours of work, and general conditions of
employment. We shall include the material control clerk .3
Inspector: The Company employs one female worker designated
as a quality control inspector. She works in the machine shop and
her duties consist entirely of checking machine stampings against
blueprints. The performance of these duties in no way affects the
employment status of other employees. She is hourly paid and car-
ried on the shop pay roll. We shall include the inspector.4
Ed Olenick: During wartime production, this employee was a
maintenance foreman. At the time of the July hearing, he wore
a foreman's badge and spent almost all of his time in the performance
of supervisory duties. All parties, at that hearing, agreed to his
exclusion. After reconversion, he was called back as a maintenance
mechanic. The I. A. M. and the U. A. W. contend that his status
has changed and that he is no longer a supervisory employee. We
find ample evidence in the record to support this contention. He
no longer wears a foreman's badge, and now spends most of his
time working with tools, performing the same duties as the other
two maintenance mechanics. Supervisory authority over all the
'Matter of Kearney & Trecker Corporation, 60 N. L. R. B. 148; Matter of Goodman
Manufacturing Company, 58 N. L. R. B. 531.
B Matter of Consolidated Vuitee Aircraft Corp., 58 N. L. R. B. 300.
• Matter of Ideal Roller & Manufacturing Cc, 60 N. L. R. B. 1105.
INTERSTATE MACHINERY COMPANY, INC. 1339
maintenance mechanics is, in fact, vested in the maintenance
superintendent. We shall include Ed Olenick in the unit.
We find that all production and maintenance employees of the
Company's plant at Chicago, Illinois, including shipping clerks, in-
spectors , and the material control clerk, but excluding truck drivers
and all supervisory employees with authority to hire, promote, dis-
charge, discipline , or otherwise effect changes in the status of em-
ployees, or effectively recommend such action, constitute an appro-
priate unit for the purposes of collective bargaining within the
meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
The termination of the war and subsequent reconversion to peace-
time production have resulted in a substantial reduction in the Com-
pany's operations and personnel since the original hearing in July
1945. The number of employees and employee classifications in the
unit petitioned for has materially decreased.6 At the reopened hear-
ing, the Company urged that these changes in the unit incident to
reconversion warrant dismissal of the petition. We find to the con-
trary. The Company's operations, although substantially reduced,
have not been materially changed in character, and do not require
the utilization of new or different classifications of employees. Re-
conversion has already taken place and the record indicates that
the Company does not foresee or contemplate any further radical
changes in operations or personnel. Furthermore, all parties to the
proceeding have participated in a full and adequate hearing as to
the composition of the reconverted unit. We find no adequate reason
to deny an election.?
Accordingly, we shall direct that the question concerning repre-
sentation 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
G At the tune of the reopened hearing there were only seven maintenance employees,
including the three maintenance mechanics, under this supervisor.
G At the time of the July 1945, hearing, there were 57 employee classifications and
approximately 470 employees in the production and maintenance unit petitioned for. At
the time of the reopened hearing there were 17 employee classifications and approximately
73 employees in the unit.
7 Matter of Food Maehinem y Corporation , Sprague-Sells Division, 64 N. L. R. B. 1405;
Matter of Consolidated Vultee Aircraft Corporation , 64 N. L . R. B. 400; Matter of Inspira-
tion Consolidated Copper Co , 63 N. L. R. B. 679 ; Matter of Reliable Nut Co., 63
N. L. R. B. 357.
The instant case is to be differentiated from Matter of Fruco Construction Co., 38
N. L. R. B . 991; Matter of Fraser-Brace Engineering Co., 38 N . L. R. B. 1263; and
Matter of Triangle Publications , Inc, 59 N. L. R. B. 1190 , cited by the Company in
support of its contention . In each of these cases, the Board dismissed a petition because
it was clear at the time of its decision that the unit petitioned for was, or soon would
be, non-existent.
1340 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
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 3, as amended,
it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with interstate Ma-
chinery Company, Inc., Chicago, Illinois, 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 super-
vision of the Regional Director for the Thirteenth 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 Regu-
lations, 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 they desire to
be represented by International Association of Machinists, District
No. 8, or by International Union, United Automobile, Aircraft and
Agricultural Implement Workers of America, Local 453 (U. A. W.-
C. I. 0.), for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by neither.