Steiner Brothers

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Sep 15, 1942

43 N.L.R.B. 1384 (N.L.R.B. 1942)

In the Matter of A. P. STEINER, MRS. RUTH STEINER GRIGGS, JOSEPH
STEINER, MRS. KATHERINE STEINER STEVENSON, PETER STEINER,
HENRY STEINER, MRS. ALICE K. BUSHONG, JOHN STEINER, MRS.
NAOMI B. STEINER, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS CO-PARTNERS D/B/A STEINER
BROTHERS AND/OR THE LENOX FURNACE, COMPANY 1 and INTER-
NATIONAL UNION, UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AIRCRAFT & AGRICULTURAL
IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA (U. A. W.-C. I. 0.)
Case No. R-4154.-Decided September 15, 1940
Jurisdiction : machinery, tool, and die manufacturing industry.
Investigation and Certification of Representatives : existence of, question; re-
fusal to accord petitioner recognition until certified by the Board; election
necessary
Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : production and maintenance em-
ployees at one of Company's plants, including watchmen, but excluding super-
visory and clerical employees.
Definitions : corporation which had succeeded partnership originally named as
employer in proceedings as owner of the business involved, held an employer
within the meaning of the Act; association of employees formed for the pur-
pose of collective bargaining held a labor organization within the meaning of
the Act although its formal organization ` had not been completed.
Practice and Procedure : petition dismissed as to partnership found not to be
an employer within the meaning of the Act.
Mr. C. M. Cable, of Lima, Ohio, for the partnership.
Meredith & Meredith by Mr. Harry R. Meredith, of, Lima, Ohio, for
the Company.
Mr. Lowell Goerlich, of Toledo, Ohio, for the U. A. W.
Mr. Robert J. Kuhn, of Lima, Ohio, for the,Independent.-
Mr. A. Sumner Lawrence, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
AND
ORDER
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon an amended petition duly filed by International Union, United
Automobile, Aircraft & Agricultural Implement Workers of America,
1 The record discloses that since the beginning 'of the hearing the original employers
sold the business here involved to The Lenox Furnace Company, an Iowa corporation,
iihich appeared and agreed to adopt the record theretofore made with respect to the original
employers. The caption has accordingly been corrected
43 N. L. R B., No. 222.
1384
A. P. STEINER,, ET AL. , 1385
(U. A. W.-C. I. O.), herein called the U.A. W, alleging that a question
affecting. commerce had arisen concerning the_ representation of em-
ployees of A. P. Steiner, Mrs. Ruth Steiner Griggs, Joseph Steiner,
Henry Steiner, Mrs. Naomi B. Steiner, individually and as co-partners
doing business as Steiner Brothers,2 Lima, Ohio, herein called' the
partnership, the National Labor Relations Board provided for, an
appropriate hearing upon due notice before George H. O'Brien, Trial
Examiner. Said hearing was held at Lima, Ohio, on August 6, 7,
and 14, 1942. The partnership, The Lenox Furnace Company, herein
called the Company, Steiner Employees Association, herein called the
Independent, and the U. A. N., appeared, participated, and were af-
forded 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 aflirined.
Upon-the entire record in the case, the Board mitkes'• the following :
FINDINGS or FACT
I. ,THE BUSINESS OF,THE PARTNERSHIP AND THE COMPANY
Steiner Brothers is a partnership which until recently has been
engaged in business with its office and principal place of business at
Lima, Ohio. Prior to August 6, 1942, it had been engaged since 1915
in the manufacture of machinery, tools, and dies. Sometime between
August, 6 and August 14, 1942, the partnership sold all its interest in
the business to the Company which proposes to carry on the business
in substantially the same way and to manufacture the same articles
as the partnership did. The employees here involved are now em-
ployed solely by the Company. During the past 2 years the business
has produced annually finished products valued at approximately
$500,000, of which 50 percent has been shipped from Lima, Ohio, to
points outside the State of Ohio.
Inasmuch as it appears that the Company has succeeded the part-
nership as owner of the business described above, we find upon the
state of the present record that the partnership is not an employer,
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act, of the em-
ployees herein involved, and we shall accordingly dismiss the petition
as to it.3
2 The partnership originally consisted of three individuals and was so described in the
petition On July 1 , 1912, a new partnership agreement added a number of partners
upon whom service was subsequently made and whose names were included by appropriate
amendment '
3 See Matter of S A Kendall, Jr, H E Ream, Stanley Ashby, and Lester Yutzy , Stanley
Coal Company, Krzy Coal Company or whatever name doing business and J P. Wright
et at and United Mine Workers of America , District ' # 31, affiliated with C I O , 38 N. L.
R It 1071 ; Greenway Wood Heel Co , Inc. and/or Silver J . Lalumiere, Mary M. Lyons
and Henry J. Lalumiere, d/b/a S ct L Wood Keel Company and Heel Makers Federal
Labor Union No. 2271¢ (A. F. of L), 43 N. L . R. B. 752
1386 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
We find that The Lenox Furnace Company is the employer of the
employees herein involved, within the--meaning of Section 2 (2) of
the Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
International Union, United Automobile, Aircraft & Agricultural
Implement Workers of America is a labor organization affiliated with
the Congress of Industrial Organizations, admitting to membership
employees of the Company.
Steiner Employees Association is an unaffiliated labor organization,
admitting to membership employees of the Company 4
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On or about June 15, 1942, the U. A. W. requested that the partner-
ship bargain collectively. The partnership declined to bargain until
the U. A. W. had been certified by the Board.
A statement of a Field Examiner, introduced in evidence at the
hearing, together with a statement by the Trial Examiner as to claims
of authorization presented at the hearing, show that the U. A. W. and
the Independent each represents a substantial number of the Com-
pany's employees in the unit hereinafter found appropriate .5
4 The U. A. W. claimed that the Independent is not a labor organization . The record
shows however , that the Independent was organized on August 3, 1942 , at a meeting,
the purpose of which as stated in the minutes thereof was "to organize Steiner Employees
Association , a labor organization for the purpose of promoting the social, economic,'and
industrial welfare, of the members, and to provide an organization for the collective
bargaining for wages , hours, and conditions of employment , and for the betterment of
general working conditions and living conditions of its members and to do all things that
may be possible or assist in carrying out the same" ; that the internal organization of the
Independent provides for dues and induction fees ; and that subsequent to the organiza-
tional meeting, steps were taken toward completing the organization by the appointment
of temporary officers and a committee to foiimilate rules and bylaws While the organi-
zation of the Independent was not complete on the date of the hearing, it appears from
the statement of the Trial Examiner hereinafter referred to that a substantial number of
employees of the Company have associated themselves under the name of Steiner Em'
ployees Association for the purpose of collective bargaining and have taken concerted
action to effect their purpose The organization so formed plainly falls within the statu-
tory definition of a labor organization and we so find See Matter of Atlas Powder Com-
pany, Zapon Division and Local 12083, National Council of Gas, Coke cf Chemical Workers,
43 N. L. R. B.'757.
I The, Field Examiner reported that the U. A. W had submitted 97 cards, of which 2
were dated May 1942, 84 dated June 1942, 9 dated July 1942, and 2 undated ; that of the
cards submitted , 93 bore seemingly valid original signatures ; 2 cards bore printed signa-
tures and 2 cai ds were unsigned ; that the Company submitted its pay roll for the period
of June 22, 1942, containing the names of 206 employees , 6 of which names bore the
designation "clerical " , that checked against the Company's pay roll, the evidence sub-
mitted by the U. A. W. indicated that 91 of the names which appear on said cards are
listed on the Company ' s pay roll and that 6 of the names signed on the cards do not
appear on the Company 's pay roll.
The Trial Examiner stated that the Independent had submitted to him 62 signed caids,
of which 59 bore names which appear on the same pay roll used in the card check of the
U A W ; that of these cards , 2 were dated August 3, 1942 , 12 dated August 4, 1942,
35 dated August 5, 1942, 3 dated August 6, 1942, 2 dated August 7, 1942, and 2 undated,
A. P. STEINER, ET AL. 1387
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 U. A. W. contends, and the Independent agrees, that the ap-
propriate unit should consist of all production and maintenance
employees, including watchmen, but excluding supervisory and clerical
employees. The partnership contended that the appropriate unit
should consist of all employees, including supervisors; the Company
did not state a position with respect,to the appropriate unit.
It appears that the employees involved include a clerical office force
of approximately 15 employees who work in the main office-which is
in a separate building though connected with the plant. In addition;
there is a supervisory force of approximately 10 foremen and assistant
foremen, all of whom have the power to hire and discharge, though
subject to the direction of the works manager and the general manager
of the plant'- In accordance with our usual practice, we shall exclude
clerical and supervisory employees from the appropriate unit, since
their interests are substantially different from those of production
and maintenance employees.6
With respect to the two watchmen, concerning whom there is no
dispute with regard to their inclusion in the appropriate unit, it ap-
pears that they perform the duties of ordinary watchmen together
with certain maintenance duties. The evidence is clear that neither
is armed or deputized by any official agency, and they exercise no
supervision over the other workers. Under the circumstances, we find
that the watchmen have substantial interests in common with the
production and maintenance employees. We shall, therefore, include
them in the unit herein found appropriate for purposes of collective
bargaining.
We find that all production and maintenance employees of the
Company at its Lima, Ohio, plant, including watchmen, but excluding
supervisory and clerical employees, constitute a unit appropriate for
the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9
(b) of the Act.
making a total of 56 cards bearing apparently genuine original signatures ; that in addition
to the 56 cards bearing names which appear on the'pay roll and which bear apparently
genuine authentic signatures, there were 3 cards bearing the printed names of individuals
whose names appear on the pay roll.
° We find that the following employees , among others not listed herein, are either
clerical or supervisory employees , and are, therefore , excluded from the unit : Paul Rhein-
meyer, one Kundert , Wesley Meyers, Glen Lay, Roderick Ross, Franklin Kahler, and Art
Stevich.
1388 DECISIONS OF .NATIONAL' LABOR, RELATIONS BOARD
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 Rela-
tions Act , and pursuant to Article III, Section 8, of National Labor
Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, it is
hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with The Lenox Fur-
nace Company , Lima, Ohio, 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 Eighth Region, acting in this matter
as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to
Article III, Section 9,, of said Rules and Regulations , among the em-
ployees 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 any such employees who did not work
during said pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation or in
the active military service or training of the United States , or tem-
porarily laid off, but excluding any who have since quit or been
discharged for cause , to determine whether they desire to be repre-
sented by International Union, United Automobile, Aircraft & Agri-
cultural Implement Workers of America (U. A. W.-C. I. 0.), or by
Steiner Employees Association , for the purposes of collective
bargaining , or by neither. °
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition be, and it hereby is, dismissed,,
insofar as it alleges that a question affecting commerce has arisen
concerning the representation of employees of A. P. Steiner, Mrs. Ruth
Steiner Griggs, Joseph Steiner, Mrs. Katherine Steiner Stevenson,
Peter Steiner, Henry Steiner, Mrs. Alice K. Bushong, John Steiner,
Mrs. Naomi B. Steiner, individually and as co-partners doing business
as Steiner Brothers.
MR. GERARD D. REILLY took no part in the consideration of the
above Decision Direction of Election and Order.