The American Coach & Body Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Dec 6, 1946

71 N.L.R.B. 946 (N.L.R.B. 1946)

In the Matter of THE AMERICAN COACH & BODY COMPANY, EMPLOYER
and UNITED OFFICE & PROFESSIONAL WORKERS OF AMERICA (C. I. 0.),
PETITIONER
Case No. 8-R-.267.Decided December 6, 1946
Messrs. S. H. Hazelrwood and James P . Miller, both of Cleveland,
Ohio, for the Employer.
Bliss Anne Berenholz , of Cleveland , Ohio, for the Petitioner.
Miss Irene R. Shriber , of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at Cleveland,
Ohio, on August 2, 1946, before John S. Hull, hearing officer. The
hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial
error and are hereby affirmed. At the hearing, the Employer made
two separate motions to dismiss the petition. The first motion was
grounded on the fact that no evidence of the Petitioner's representation
among the employees in the unit had been introduced into evidence.
The second motion was based on the contention that foremen are not
employees within the meaning of the Act and that the Petitioner is
incompetent to 'rep'resent the foremen. The hearing officer referred
both motions to the Board. As to the initial motion, the Board no
longer requires or permits evidence of representation to be introduced
into evidence.' Accordingly, this motion is hereby denied. For rea-
sons stated hereinafter the second motion is also denied.
Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations
Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF TIIE EMPLOYER
The American Coach Sc Body Company, an Ohio corporation, oper-
ates its general offices and plants in Cleveland, Ohio, where it is engaged
1 See Matter of 0. D. Jennings & Company, 68 N I. R B 516.
71 N. L. R. B., No. 154.
946
THE AMERICAN COACH & BODY COMPANY 947
in the manufacture of special metal bodies and appurtenances for
trucks of general utility. During 1945, the Employer's net sales of
its products exceeded $4,000,000 in value, of which 74 percent repre-
sented shipments to points outside the State of Ohio. During the
same period, the Employer received from out-of-State sources approxi-
mately $1,900,000, worth of lumber, sheet metal and prefabricated
parts.
The Employer admits and we find that it engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress
of Industrial Organizations, claiming to represent supervisory em-
ployees of the Employer.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On or about June 19, 1946, the Petitioner requested the Employer to
meet with it for the purpose of recognition and the negotiation of
a collective bargaining contract. On or about June 24, 1946, the Em-
ployer refused the request.
In support of its motion to dismiss the petition, the Employer con-
tends that the foremen involved in this proceeding are not "employees"
within the meaning of Section 2 (3) of the Act, and that therefore,
the Board is without jurisdiction to entertain this petition. The
question of the status of foremen under the Act was discussed in all its
aspects in the Soss I and Packard 2 cases wherein we held that foremen
in relation to their employer are "employees." This conclusion has
been reaffirmed in subsequent cases 3 and has received judicial support.'
In accord with our previous determinations, we find that the foremen
involved in this proceeding are "employees" within the meaning of the
Act.
As a further ground in support of its motion to dismiss the petition,
the Employer contends that the Petitioner is incompetent to repre-
sent foremen because, as its name indicates, it organizes office and
professional employees. For the reasons stated in the Jones cC^ Laugh-
lin 5 case, we find no merit,in this contention.
1 Matter of Soss Manufacturing Company, et al , 56 N. L R. B. 348
2 Matter of Packard Motor Car Company , 61 N. L. R. B. 4, and 64 N . L. R. B. 1212.
8 Matter of L. A Young Spring & Wire Corporation , 65 N. L. R. B. 298; Matter of The
B. F. Goodrich Company, 65 N L R. B 294; Matter of Simmons Company, 65 N L R B.
984; Matter of Jones if Laughlin Steel Corporation, Vesta-Shannopin Coal Division, 66
N. L R B 386.
4N. L. R. B. v. Packard Motor Car Company, 157 F. (2d) 80 ( C C. A. 6 ), rehearing
denied 18 L. R R Al 2432; N. L. R. B. v. Armour & Co., 154 F. (2d) 570, 574 (C. C. A.
10) ; N. L. R . B. v. Skinner & Kennedy Stationery Company, 113 F. (2d) 667 ( C. C. A 8).
SMatier of Jones & Laughlin Steel Corporation, Vesta-Shannopin Coal Division, supra.
948 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
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 seeks a unit of all foremen and acting foremen ex-
cluding the works manager, the general superintendent and chief
mechanics . The Employer stipulated that such a unit would be ap-
propriate if evidence were furnished that the acting foremen had
withdrawn their membership from Local 755 of the UAW-CIO. the
bargaining representative of its production and maintenance workers.
Pursuant to a further stipulation of the parties, the Petitioner sub-
mitted such evidence in the form of withdrawal cards, after the close
of the hearing.
We find that all foremen and acting foremen, excluding the works
manager, the general superintendent, and chief mechanics, constitute
a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within
the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
i
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the
the purposes of collective bargaining with The American Coach &
Body Company, Cleveland, 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 Sections
203.55 and 203.56, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and
Regulations-Series 4, among the employees in the unit found appro-
priate 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 or not they
desire to be represented by United Office & Professional Workers of
America (C. I. 0.), for the purposes of collective bargaining.
MR. JAMES J. REYNOLDS, JR., took no part in the consideration of
the above Decision and Direction of Election.