The Bellows Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 10, 1946

67 N.L.R.B. 1334 (N.L.R.B. 1946)

In the Matter of THE BELLOWS COMPANY and UNITED OFFICE AND
PROFESSIONAL WORKERS OF AMERICA (CIO)
Case No. 8-R-2112.-Decided May 10, 1946
Messrs. H. B. Link and H. W. Schwab, of Akron, Ohio, for the
Company.
Miss Anne Berenholo, of Cleveland, Ohio, Miss Evelyn Anderson,
of Akron, Ohio, and Miss Ruth Gash, of Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio, for
the Union.
Mr. Robert J. Freehling, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon a petition duly filed by United Office and Professional Workers
of America (CIO), herein called the Union, alleging that a question
affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of em-
ployees of The Bellows Company, Akron, Ohio, herein called the
Company, the National Labor Relations Board provided for an ap-
propriate hearing upon due notice before John A. Hull, Jr., Trial
Examiner. The hearing was held at Akron, Ohio, on April 4, 1946.
The Company and the Union appeared and participated. All parties
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 hearing are free from
prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. All parties were afforded
opportunity to file briefs with the Board.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
The Bellows Company, an Ohio corporation with its plant and prin-
cipal office located at Akron, Ohio, is engaged in the manufacture of
electric signs, pneumatic tools, and machine tool accessories. In 1945,
the Company used raw materials, consisting principally of glass and
67 N. L. R. B, No. 178.
1334
THE BELLOWS COMPANY 1335
steel parts, valued in excess of $120,000, of which more than 20 percent
was received from points outside the State of Ohio. During the same
period, the Company manufactured and distributed finished products
valued in excess of $500,000, of which in excess of 50 percent was
shipped to points outside the State.
We find that the Company is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
United Office and Professional Workers of America is a labor or-
ganization, affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations,
admitting to membership employees of the Company.
III. TIIE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Company has refused to grant recognition to the Union as the
exclusive bargaining representative of certain of its employees until
the Union has been certified by the Board in an appropriate unit.
A statement of iI Board agent, introduced into evidence at the
hearing, indicates that the Union represents a substantial number of
employees in the unit hereinafter found appropriate.'
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 Union seeks a unit of all office and clerical workers in the Com-
pany's Akron office, including secretaries to field engineers 2 but
excluding engineers, draftsmen, purchasing agent, head bookkeeper,
office manager, and all other supervisory employees. The Company
makes no specific objection to the requested unit.
We find that all office and clerical workers 3 in the Company's Akron,
Ohio, office, including secretaries to field engineers, but excluding
engineers, draftsmen, purchasing agent, head bookkeeper, office man-
' The Field Examiner reported that the Union submitted application cards, bearing the
names of 14 employees listed on the Company's pay roll of March 11, 1946, and that there
are approximately 23 employees in the appropriate unit.
The Company objected at the hearing and in its brief to the admission in evidence of
the Report of Investigation of Interest of Contending Labor Organizations , on the ground
that it was ex parte and that the Company had no opportunity to cross-examine the Field
Examiner named thereon The Tiial Examiner overruled this objection and his ruling is
hereby upheld See Matter of Jasper Chair Company, 63 N L R B 632 , and cases cited
therein
2 It does not appear that these employees are confidential within the meaning set forth in
Matter of Ford Motor Company ( Chicago Branch ), 66 N L. R B. 1317
3 Included within this category is the head of the order department , who does not appear
to be a supervisor within the Board ' s customary definition.
1336 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ager and all other supervisory employees with authority to hire, pro-
mote, 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 mean-
ing 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 among employees
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 Relations
Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor Rela-
tions 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 The Bellows Com-
pany, Akron, 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, Sections
10 and 11, of said Rules and Regulations, 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 be-
cause they were ill or on vacation or temporarily laid off, and including
employees in the armed forces of the United States who present them-
selves 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 and Professional
Workers of America (CIO), for the purposes of collective bargaining.