John Deere Dubuque Tractor Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Feb 14, 1947

72 N.L.R.B. 656 (N.L.R.B. 1947)

In the Matter Of JOHN DEERE DUBUQUE TRACTOR COMPANY, EMPLOYER
and UNITED FARM EQUIPMENT AND METAL WORKERS OF AMERICA,
C. I. O., PETITIONER
Case No. 18-R-1714.-Decided February 14, 1947
Mr. S. M. Lyman, of Moline, Ill., and Mr. M. A. Fraher, of Dubuque,
Iowa, for the Employer. -
Mr. W. O. Sonnemann, of Milwaukee, Wis., and Mr. G. Volrath,
of Dubuque, Iowa, for the Petitioner.
Mr. James Ashe, of St. Paul, Minn., and Mr. L. Mattson, of
Dubuque, Iowa, for the I. A. M.
Mr. A. J. Trizna, of Joliet, Ill., and Mr. C. Davis, of Dubuque, Iowa,
for the Molders.
Messrs. G. H. Rose and Ray Blett, of Dubuque, Iowa, for the
U. A. W.
Mr. G. Hallstrom, of Chicago , Ill., and Mr. Howard Smith, of
Dubuque, Iowa, for the Pattern Makers.
Mr. Martin Sacks, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
Upon a petition duly filed , hearing in this case was held at Dubuque,
Iowa , on December 5, 1946, before Stephen M. Reynolds , hearing
officer. The hearing officer 's rulings made at the hearing are free
from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations
Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
John Deere Dubuque Tractor Company, an Iowa corporation with
its plant and principal offices located at Dubuque, Iowa, is engaged
in the manufacture of engines for agricultural tractors and combines.
During the year 1946, the Employer caused to be shipped to its plant
from sources outside the State of Iowa materials valued in excess
72 N L R B, No 126
656
• JOHN DEERE DUBUQUE TRACTOR COMPANY 657
of $100,000. During the same period, finished products valued in
excess of $25,000 were shipped from this plant to points outside the
State.
The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
H. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress
of Industrial Organizations, claiming to represent employees of the
Employer.
International Association of Machinists, Local 1706, herein called
the I. A. M., is a labor organization, claiming to represent employees
of the Employer.
International Molders and Foundry Workers Union of North Amer-
ica, Local 263, herein called the Molders, is a labor organization affili-
ated with the American Federation of Labor, claiming to represent
employees of the Employer.
Pattern Makers League of North America, Dubuque Association,
herein called the Pattern Makers, is a labor organization aflliated
with the American Federation of Labor, claiming to represent em-
ployees of the Employer.
International Union, United Automobile, Aircraft, and Agricul-
tural Implement Workers of America, herein called the U. A. W.,
is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Or-
ganizations, claiming to represent employees of the Employer.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Employer refuses to recognize the Petitioner as the exclusive
bargaining representative of employees of the Employer until the
Petitioner has been certified by the Board in an appropriate unit.
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning
the representation of employees of the Employer, within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNITS; THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
The contentions of the parties
Petitioner seeks a unit of all production and maintenance employees,
including tool and die makers, foundry employees, pattern makers
and pattern makers' apprentices, set-up men, plant-protection employ-
ees, and inspection department employees, but excluding professional
workers, office and factory clericals, all salaried employees, and all
supervisory employees.
658 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
The U. A. W. is in substantial agreement with Petitioner's position,
but would include both office and factory clericals in the unit.
The I. A. M. urges as appropriate a production and maintenance
unit, excluding professional, technical and clerical employees, foundry
employees and pattern makers.
The Employer contends that the appropriate bargaining unit should
consist of all hourly and incentive paid employees, excluding pro-
fessional, technical, experimental, plant-protection, administrative
personnel,l clerical employees, and set-up men.
The Molders seeks a separate unit of foundry employees, including
molders, core makers, grinders, chippers, and employees of the cupola
force, excluding clerical and supervisory employees.
The Pattern Makers desires a separate unit for pattern makers and
pattern makers' apprentices.
The Employer's operations
There has been no collective bargaining history affecting these
operations. The Employer's newly organized Dubuque plant, the
only one involved herein, is presently engaged in the production of
motors for use in the farm machinery produced by its affiliates. The
plant has been organized "for continuous operations"; so that the
foundry produces engine castings which are utilized by the machine
shop in fabricating the complete motor. The maifl divisions of the
plant are the foundry and the factory or machine shop, each having
its own superintendent, with the general superintendent in charge of
both. The plant engineer, who oversees the plant maintenance and
plant-protection forces, and the master mechanic, who supervises the
activities of the toolroom and the machine maintenance foremen, are
both responsible to the general superintendent.
The office group consists of the Methods Department, the Engineer-
ing Department, and the Metallurgical Plant. The employees of this
group are largely salaried professional, technical, and clerical per-
sonnel. The Employer maintains a separate Experimental Depart-
ment which tears down, assembles, and tests prospective models of
farm machinery motors.
The separate unit requests of the Molders and Pattern Makers
As noted above , the Petitioner , the U. A. W., and the Employer
desire the inclusion of foundry workers and pattern makers in the
production and maintenance unit . while the Molders and Pattern
Makers seek to establish the foundry workers -and pattern makers,
respectively, in separate units. With respect to the foundry work-
'Although the Employer also requests the e'cclucton of administrative personnel, it
appears that such employees are embraced within the other stated exclusions
JOHN DEERE DUBUQUE TRACTOR COMPANY 659
ers the record discloses that they work in a separate building, located
about 300 feet from the machine shop and that° they constitute a
homogeneous group of employees, most of whom are skilled crafts-
men. Upon the completion of the foundry processing, castings are
trucked to the Storage Department, where they remain until needed
by the machine shop. The nature of the work performed and skills
required in the foundry are essentially different from the duties and
skills required in the machine shop, and, consequently, there is very
little interchange between the employees of the two departments.
As to the pattern makers, it appears that there were four full-time
pattern makers and pattern makers' apprentices in the Employer's
plant at the time of the hearing. Although these employees have not
yet been assigned to their permanent segregated location, there is no
degree of interchange or contact with the production and maintenance
employees. They perform functions typical of the pattern makers'
craft and have their own foreman.
While the evidence discloses that the Employer's manufacturing
process is a highly integrated operation, and that organization on
the part of the Petitioner, the U. A. W., and the I. A. M., has pro-
ceeded on a plant-wide basis, it is evident that the units sought by the
Molders and the Pattern Makers are basically craft in character within
the traditional craft jurisdiction of these labor organizations.2 Ac-
cordingly, notwithstanding the high degree of integration and coordi-
nation of these operations, we are of the opinion that, in the absence of
any history of collective bargaining, the employees "sought by the
Molders and the Pattern Makers, respectively, may properly consti-
tute separate bargaining units,' or may be merged into a single unit
of production and maintenance employees. In these circumstances,
we shall permit the scope of the bargaining unit or units to be deter-
mined in part by the results of separate elections among the groups
represented by the Molders and Pattern Makers.4
The composition of the production and maintenance group
With respect to the composition of the residual voting group of
production and maintenance employees, the Petitioner, the I. A. M.,
the U. A. W., and the Employer are in dispute with respect to plant-
protection employees, experimental employees, professional and tech-
nical employees, clerical employees, and set-up men. They will be
considered seriatim.
2 Matter of National Lead Company, Magnus Metal Division, 66 N L R B 496; awl
platter of Landis Tool Company, 65 N L R B 1279
' See footnote 2, supra.
4 The I. A. M does not desire to participate in any elections among the foundry workers
or the pattern makers.
660 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Plant-protection employees
The Petitioner, the I. A. M., and the U. A. W. would include the
plant-protection employees in the production and maintenance unit,
whereas the Employer seeks to exclude them. The plant-protection
employees, numbering 12 at present, are classified as guards and watch-
men, and are under the supervision of the superintendent of plant
protection. The guards, who are about to be deputized, are regularly
assigned to night patrol duty at which time they` carry arms, as dis-
tinguished from the unarmed watchmen who are regularly assigned to
a definite location on the day shift. Contrary to the contention of the
Petitioner, the plant-protection employees perform no maintenance
work on production equipment. It appears, however, that the guards
and watchmen have no monitorial functions, and that they perform
essentially custodial duties. Under these circumstances, we shall, in
accordance with our usual practice in such cases, include the plant-
protection employees in the voting group of production and mainte-
nance employees.
The experimental employees
The Petitioner, the I. A. M., and the U. A. W. take the position, in
effect, that the experimental employees should be part of the produc-
tion and maintenance unit. The Employer opposes this unit con-
tention on the grounds that the experimental employees perform dis-
tinct and unrelated duties in a physically separate location from the
production and maintenance group, and that they are confidential
employees by virtue of their work on prospective models. The record
indicates that, under the supervision of the chief engineer, the experi-
mental employees tear down, assemble, and test motors, tractors, and
experimental machines for the purpose of making corrections and
improvements. Much of the work in question is clone on a field outside
the plant proper, so that the experimental employees have little con-
tact with the production and maintenance employees. As to their
alleged confidential status, it is clear that, while they may have access
to secret business data, they have no connection with labor relations
matters, and are consequently not confidential employees within our
customary use of the term.5
We have previously considered similar unit contentions with respect
to similar employees at comparable operations of affiliates of this
Employer. In those cases we have excluded experimental employees
from production and maintenance units, and, instead, have established
a separate unit for these employees. Accordingly, we shall establish
5 See Matter of Brown & Sharpe Manufacturing Company, 70 N. L R B. 709.
JOHN DEERE DUBUQUE TRACTOR COMPANY 661
a separate unit for these employees herein. As in our previous
decisions,6 we hold further that, in the event the same union is selected
as the exclusive bargaining representative in both the experimental
unit and the production and maintenance voting group, it will not be
inappropriate for that union and the Employer to consolidate the two
groups.
Upon the foregoing, we find that all employees of the Employer's
Experimental Department, excluding 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 bar-
gaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
The professional and technical employees
The I. A. M. and the Employer would exclude these employees from
the production and maintenance unit, whereas the U. A. W. refused to
take any definitive position with respect to professional and technical
employees. The position of the Petitioner is not clear, although it
specifically sought the inclusion within the production and maintenance
unit of tool and die makers whon-i the Employer classifies as technical
employees.
Although the record is not complete with regard to tool and die
makers, no evidence has been adduced which persuades us to depart
from our usual practice of treating these employees as part of the
production group., We shall, accordingly, include tool and die makers
in the production and maintenance voting group.
With respect to technical and professional employees, in general, it
appears that the technicals have less scientific or academic background,
and perform more routine tasks than the professionals. The em-
ployees in both groups are largely employed on a monthly salary basis
in the Methods Department, Engineering Department, Metallurgical
Plant, and Foundry Engineering Department, and have little or no
contact with the production and maintenance employees. Apparently
the parties all agree that engineers, metallurgical workers, draftsmen,
medical personnel, and tool designers are either professionals or
technicals.
Because no substantial community of interest exists between the pro-
fessional and technical employees, on the one hand, and the production
and maintenance employees, on the other, and because the training,
supervision, and work situs of the professional and technical employees
are separate and distinct, we shall, in accord with our usual custom,
a Matter of John Deere Harvester Works , 66 N L R B. 1078 ; and Matter of John Deere
Spreader Works of Deere & Co , 57 N. L. R B 411.
7 Matter of The Chase -Shawmut Company, 71 N L . R B. 610
662 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
exclude the professional and technical employees from the production
and maintenance group 8
The clerical employees
The U. A. W. would include all clerical employees, while the Em-
ployer, which classifies its clericals into office and factory groups,
would exclude all of them from a production and maintenance unit.
None of the other parties seeks the inclusion of clericals.
All clericals receive monthly salaries and are on the office pay roll.
Those employees whom the Employer designates as factory clericals
differ from the office clericals only in that they are located in a
separate room in the production area of the plant. Under the super-
vision of the production control supervisor, rather than foremen of
production departments, these clericals compile production records,
and work in close relationship with the clericals located in the office.
None of the clericals are stock chasers, nor have they any substantial
contact with the production and maintenance employees. Despite the
fact that one group of clericals is physically separate from the office
proper, the record clearly indicates that all the Employer's clerical
workers form a homogeneous office clerical group which is separate
and distinct from the production and maintenance group. Accord-
ingly, we shall exclude all clerical employees from the production and
maintenance voting group.°
The set-up men
The Employer , contrary to the position of the Petitioner, the
I. A. M., and the U. A. W., as stated above, would exclude set-up inen
from the production and maintenance unit on the ground that their
duties are supervisory in nature . The Employer 's 25 set-up men are
under the supervision of the same foremen and assistant foremen as
the other production employees of the machine shop. In addition to
their regular assignment of making the required adjustments on their
machines, the set-up men advise and assist the machine operators and
occasionally operate the machines themselves . The set-up men have
no authority effectively to recommend hiring, discharge or disciplinary
-action, and any report of misconduct they make is subject to an inde-
pendent investigation . Accordingly , inasmuch as the set-up men
exercise no supervisory authority within -the -customary definition of
that term , and because they are an integral part of the production
group, we shall include them in the production and maintenance
voting group.
e See Matter of Electronic Laboratories. Inc . 65 N L R B 840
° See Matter of Ameriean Optical Company 63 N. L. R. B. 924.
JOHN DEERE DUBUQUE TRACTOR COMPANY 663
On the basis of the entire record, and in accordance with the findings
stated above, we shall direct a separate election by secret ballot among
the employees in the unit found appropriate above and in the voting
groups, appearing below, excluding from such voting groups all
professional, technical, and clerical employees, and all supervisory
employees with authority to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or
,otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or effectively
recommend such action :
Group 1. All foundry department employees, including molders,
coremakers, cupola force, foundry helpers, and foundry maintenance
inen.
Group 2. All pattern makers and pattern makers' apprentices.
Group 3. All remaining production and maintenance employees,
including inspection department employees, plant-protection em-
ployees, tool and die makers and set-up men.
As indicated above, there will be no final determination of the ap-
propriate production and maintenance unit and/or craft units pending
the results of the election in the above voting groups.
At the hearing, the Employer contended that, in view of its expand-
ing operations, no election should currently be directed among its
employees. The Employer pointed, in this connection, to the fact,
that, on the date of the hearing, its staff consisted of 700 employees,
of whom approximately 600 were within the units or voting groups
set forth above, and that its plans envisaged adding approximately
100 employees a month, so that its total personnel complement will
reach 1200 by April 1947. While there is some indication that there
may be further increases in the size of the staff after April 1947, the
Employer's plans, in this respect, appear to be entirely speculative.
On the basis of the above figures, the Employer had attained, at the
time of the hearing, 58 percent of the anticipated full complement.
The record establishes further that these employees constitute a repre-
sentative group of the contemplated full complement, and that finished
products are now being produced. Moreover, it is apparent that by
the time this Direction of Elections issues, the Employer's complement
will, in all probability, have increased by several hundred employees.
Upon these facts, we shall adhere to our usual policy 10 in such cir-
cumstances of directing an immediate election.
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the
purposes of collective bargaining with John Deere Dubuque Tractor
Company, Dubuque, Iowa, separate elections by secret ballot shall be
conducted as early as possible, but not later than thirty (30) days
"' Matter of Pioneer Tool and Engineering Company , 62 N L R. B. 1435.
664 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
from the date of this Direction, under the direction and supervision
of the Regional Director for the Eighteenth Region, acting in this
matter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject
to Sections 203.55 and 203.56, of National Labor Relations Board
Rules and Regulations-Series 4, among the employees in the appro-
priate units and voting groups described 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 tempo-
rarily 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 elections:
a. The employees in the experimental department unit, to determine
whether they desire to be represented by United Farm Equipment
and Metal Workers of America, C. I. 0., or by International Associa-
tion of Machinists, Local 1706, or by International Union, United
Automobile, Aircraft, and Agricultural Implement Workers of
America, C. I. 0., for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by none.
b. The employees in voting group 1, to determine whether they
desire to be represented by United Farm Equipment and Metal
Workers of America, C. I. 0., or by International Molders and Foun-
dry Workers Union of North America, Local 263, A. F. .of L., or by
International Union, United Automobile, Aircraft, and Agricultural
Implement Workers of America, C. I. 0., for the purposes of collective
bargaining, or by none.
c. The employees in voting group 2, to determine whether they desire
to be represented by United Farm Equipment and Metal Workers of
America, C. I. 0., or by Pattern Makers League of North America,.
Dubuque Association, A. F. of L., or by International Union, United
Automobile, Aircraft, and Agricultural Implement Workers of
America, C. I: 0., for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by none.
d. The employees in voting group 3, to determine whether they
desire to be represented by United Farm Equipment and Metal
Workers of America, C. I. 0., or by International Association of
Machinists, Local 1706, or by International Union, United Automo-
bile, Aircraft and Agricultural Implement Workers of America, C. I-
0., for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by none.
CHAIRMAN HERZOG took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Direction of Elections.