Raybestos-Manhattan, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Nov 14, 1946

71 N.L.R.B. 673 (N.L.R.B. 1946)

In the Matter Of MANHATTAN RUBBER MANUFACTURING DivISION OF
RAYBESTOS-MANHATTAN, INC., EMPLOYER-and UNITED RUBBER, CORK,
LINOLEUM AND PLASTIC WORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO, PETITIONER
Case No. 0,R-6894.-Decided November 14, 1946
Bailey c0 Schenck, by Mr. George B. Bailey, of Newark, N. J., for
the Employer.
Rothbard, Harris cl; Orefeld, by Messrs. Samuel Rosenthal and
Samuel L. Rothbard, of Newark, N. J., for the Petitioner.
Messrs. Irving L. Werksman and Arthur Kane, of Passaic, N. J.,
for the Independent.
Mr. Joseph J. McEntee, of Newark, N. J., and Mr. Joseph Pacsi,
of Clifton, N. J., for the I. A. M.
Mr. Melvin J. Weller, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at Passaic,
New Jersey, on September 13 and 30, 1946, before William T. Little
and Daniel Baker, hearing officers. The hearing officers' 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
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
Manhattan Rubber Manufacturing Division of Raybestos-Man-
hattan, Inc., is a New Jersey corportion, having its principal office
and place of business in Passaic, New Jersey. It is engaged in the
and sale of asbestos, rubber, and generalmanufacture, distribution,'
loom products. During the year ending August 31, 1946, the Em-
ployer purchased raw materials valued in excess of $1,000,000, of
which approximately 90 percent was shipped to it from points out-
side the State of New Jersey. During the same period the Employer
manufactured finished products valued in excess of $1,000,000, of
71 N. L R. B.. No 107.
673
674 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
which more than 90 percent was shipped to points outside the State of
New Jersey.
The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress
of Industrial Organizations, claiming to represent employees of the
Employer.
Manhattan Rubber Workers Independent Union, herein called the
Independent, is an unaffiliated labor organization, claiming to repre-
sent employees of the Employer.
International Association of Machinists, Lodge 1679, herein called
the I. A. M., is a labor organization, 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.
At the time the Petitioner requested recognition there was in effect
a 2-year maintenance of membership contract between the Independent
and the Employer which was to expire August 7, 1946, and which con-
tained a 30-day automatic renewal clause. The parties to the contract,
however, had commenced negotiations for a new agreement before
the' effective date of the automatic renewal clause. There is, therefore,
no bar to a present determination of representatives.
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 UNIT
The Petitioner and the Independent agree that the appropriate unit
should consist of all production workers, shipping and receiving clerks,
shop clerks, maintenance workers, truckmen, laboratory helpers, and
group leaders, excluding machinists, machinists' helpers working in
the machine shop or assigned to other departments, blacksmiths, weld-
ers, stock and toolroom employees working in the machine shop,
guards, office workers, executives, superintendents, department heads,
supervisors, foremen, assistant foremen, and any other supervisory em-
ployees with authority to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or other-
wise effect changes in the status of employees, or effectively recommend
such action.
The I. A. M. contends, however, that the following maintenance em-
ployees, who are encompassed by the unit upon which the Petitioner
RAYBESTOS-MANHATTAN, INC. 675
and the Independent agreed, should be merged with those employees
whom it currently represents under a collective agreement with the
Employer : All electricians and electricians' helpers and trainees, all
pipe fitters and pipe-fitter trainees, all sheet metal workers, all car-
penters, box makers, box nailers, and millwrights including all those
who work in the carpenter shop except the handyman, all painters, all
masons, all riggers, and mechanics who work in the garage.
The Employer, although it stated that it was obliged to remain
neutral, expressed a preference that the production and maintenance
unit established by previous contracts, and sought by the Petitioner
and the Independent, should continue as the basis for collective bar-
gaining.
In February 1943, consent elections were conducted among the
employees of the Employer in two separate units, a production and
maintenance unit, and a unit of machinists. The Independent won
the election in the production and maintenance unit and the I. A. M.
won the election in the machinists' unit. In May 1943, the Employer
executed a contract with the Independent covering substantially the
same unit as is sought by the Petitioner and the Independent here.
At about the same time, the Employer and the I. A. M. executed
a contract covering machinists and other employees working in the
machine shop. On May 9, 1944, the Board rejected the I. A. M.'s
contention, also made here, that the maintenance workers of the Em-
ployer be added to its contract unit,' establishing a grouping sub-
stantially the same as that requested by the Petitioner and the In-
dependent in this case.
The I. A. M. seeks here to merge many crafts into one unit, rather
than to establish a pure craft unit. Furthermore, the unit claimed
by the I. A. M. is not even a .departmental unit; most of the main-
tenance groups sought are in different departments, each of which
is separately operated under the supervision of a department fore-
man or superintendent. And although these departments operate
under the supervision of the mechanical superintendent, the I. A. M.
would exclude some employees in the various maintenance depart-
ments from the unit as unskilled employees. °
We are of the opinion that there is nothing in this record suffi-
ciently persuasive to impel us to change our determination of May
97 1944, and accede to the I. A. M.'s request.
We find, accordingly, that all production workers, shipping and
i eceiving clerks, shop clerks, maintenance workers, truckmen, lab-
oratory helpers and group leaders of the Employer, excluding
machinists, machinists' helpers working in the machine shop or as-
'Matter of Manhattan Rubber Manufacturing Div,sion of Ragbestos-Manhattan, Inc,
56 N. L. R. B. 398.
676 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
signed to other departments, blacksmiths, welders, stock and tool-
room employees working in the machine shop, guards, office worxers,
executives, superintendents, department heads, supervisors, foremen,
assistant foremen, and any other supervisory employees with au-
thority 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 meaning 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, subject to the
limitations and additions set forth in the Direction.
Inasmuch as the I. A. M. did not specifically indicate at the hearing
that it did not wish to participate in any election directed if its unit
contention were rejected, and since it made some showing among the
employees in the appropriate unit, we shall accord it a place on the
ballot. Should it wish to withdraw from the ballot, however, it may
do so upon notice to that effect given to the Regional Director within
3 days of the date of the Decision and Direction of Election herein.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the
purposes of collective bargaining with Manhattan Rubber Manufac-
turing Division of Raybestos-Manhattan, Inc., Passaic. New Jersey,
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 Second'tn
Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National Labor Rela-
tions 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 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 United Rubber,
Cork, Linoleum and Plastic Workers of America, CIO, or by Man-
hattan Rubber Workers Independent Union, or by International Asso-
ciation of Machinists, Lodge 1679, for the purposes of collective
bargaining, or by none.