The George W. Borg Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 16, 1940

25 N.L.R.B. 481 (N.L.R.B. 1940)

In the Matter of THE GEORGE W. BORG CORPORATION and UNITED
CLOCK WORKERS UNION
Case No. R-1879.-Decided July 16, 1940
Jurisdiction : electric automotive clock manufacturing industry.
Investigation and Certification of Representatives : existence 'of question : re-
fusal to accord recognition to union ; request tlo t certification be obtained ;
conflicting claims of rival representatives; contract renewed after institution
of proceedings expressly subject to termination upon subsequent designation
of other representatives, no bar to; election necessary.
Where following the petition, practically all employees of the Company
executed cards wherein they reaffirmed a prior designation of the rival
union as their collective bargaining agency, and repudiated any designa-
tion of the petitioning union as their bargaining agency, held the execution
of such cards cannot be taken as conclusive of the desires of the employees
regarding representation in view of contracts compelling membership of
these employees in rival union.
Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : all production and maintenance
employees, and working foremen, exclusive of supervisor y, clei ical, and tool-
room employees, agreement as to.
Definitions
Where a number of employees retained an attorney, organized themselves
into a body, drafted and discussed a proposed constitution and bylaws for
an organization, elected temporary officers, and adopted a name, and where
a substantial number of employees signed cards designating this organization
to represent them in collective bargaining, held sufficient to establish a
labor organization within the meaning of the Act
Mr. Stephen M. Reynolds, for the Board.
Mr. Robert G. Graham of Moline, Ill., for the Company.
Cllr. Jerome L. Fels of Chicago, Ill., for the United.
Mr. Daniel D. Carmell of Chicago, Ill., for the I. B. E. W.
Mr. S. G. Lippmanz, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
A1D
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On April 19, 1940, United Clock Workers Union, herein called
the United, filed with the Regional Director for the Thirteenth Re-
gion, (Chicago, Illinois), a, petition alleging that a question affecting
25 N. L R. B., No 58.
481
482 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of
George W. Borg Corporation, Clock Division,' Chicago, Illinois, here-
in called the Company, and requesting an investigation and certi-
fication of representatives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the. National
Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act. On May
22 the National Labor Relations Board, herein called the Board, act-
ing pursuant to Section '9 (c) of the Act, and Article III, Section 3,
of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series
2, as amended, ordered an investigation 'and authorized the Regional-
Director to conduct it and to, provide for an appropriate hearing upon'
due notice.
On May 31 the Regional Director issued a notice of hearing, copies
of which, together with copies of the petition, were duly served upon
the Company, upon the United, and upon Local Union No. B-713
of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, herein called
the I. B. E. MT., a labor organization claiming to represent employees
directly affected by the investigation. Pursuant to the notice a
hearing was held on June 6 and 7 at Chicago, Illinois, before Stephen
M. Reynolds, the Trial Examiner duly designated by the Board.
The Board, the Company, the United, and the I. B. E. W., were
represented by counsel and participated in the hearing. Full oppor-
tunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses and to
introduce evidence bearing on the issues was afforded all parties.
During the course of the hearing the Trial Examiner made various
rulings on motions and objections to the admission of evidence. The
Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner and finds that
no prejudicial errors were committed. The rulings are hereby af-
firmed. The I. B. E. W. submitted a brief and the United a reply
brief which have been considered by the Board.
'Upon the entire record of the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
George W: Borg Corporation, Clock Division, is a Delaware Cor-
poration, with its principal office at Chicago, Illinois, and with plants
at Chicago and at Delavan, Wisconsin. It is engaged in the manu-
facture, sale, and distribution of electric automotive clocks for motor
cars.2 These proceedings concern only the Chicago plant, where ap-
proximately 234 persons are employed.
During the year ending April 1, 1940, the Company manufactured
in the Chicago plant approximately 500,000 electric automotive clocks,
At the hearing the name of the Company was amended to read as thus set forth
It does not appear from the record whether the manufacture of automotive clocks is
limited to the Chicago plant.
GEORGE W. BORG CORPORATION - 483
which it sold for $1,400,000. Over 99 per cent of these products were
sold and shipped- from the Chicago plant to purch'asers ' outside the
,State-of Illinois. In that same period the Company purchased for
use in the 'course of production at its Chicago plant various raw mate-
rials, including brass, steel , bronze, nickel silver, Armco magnet iron,
flexible varnish tubing, and copper magnet wire, as well as various
parts and other material and supplies, valued at $579,800. Of this
amount $214,978 worth were purchased and transported to the Chicago
plant from outside the State of Illinois.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
United Clock Woikers Union is an unaffiliated labor organization
admitting to membership persons employed by the Company at its
Chicago plant.3
Local Union No. B-713 of the International Brotherhood of Elec-
trical Workers is a local of International Brotherhood of Electrical
Workers, a labor organization affiliated with the American Federation
of Labor with city-wide jurisdiction in Chicago. It admits to mem-
bership persons employed by the Company in its Chicago plant.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On May 15, 1939, the Company and International Brotherhood of
Electrical Workers entered into a collective labor contract covering
wages, hours of services, and other working conditions of employees
at the Chicago plant, substantially within the collective bargaining-
unit hereinafter found to be appropriate, and requiring all such em-
ployees to be members of the I. B. E. W. as a condition of employ-
ment. In effect the International and its Local, the I. B. E. W., were
recognized as sole bargaining agency of these employees. The agree-
ment was to continue until June 1, 1940, and thereafter unless termi-
nated by either party upon 60 days' prior notice.
E The Company contends , contrary to its own stipulation entered into at the hearing, that
the United is not a labor organization , within the meaning of the Act We are satisfied
and find that at all times material heiein , and at the present, the United was and is a labor
organization , within the meaning of Section 2 ( 5) of the Act and the Rules and Regulations
thereto applicable. From January 1940 to about April 23, 1940, employees of the Com-
pany-held a number of meetings for the purpose of devising means of terminating their
membership in the I B . E. W. which, as stated below, had a closed-shop contract with
the Company, and of forming it new labor organization They retained an attorney to
assist them , organized themselves into a body, drafted and discussed a proposed constitu-
tion and bylaws for the organization , elected temporary offices s, and adopted the name
of United Clock Workers Union Plainly, the United was established as a labor organiza-
tion, within the meaning of the Act Thereafter , as, hereinafter appears, a substantial
number of the Company' s employees signed cards designating the United to represent them
in collective bargaining with the Company See Matter of Universal Match Corporation and
United Match. Workers ' Local Industrial Union x$180, affiliated with Committee for Indus-
trial Organization, 23 N. L. R B 226 , in which the Board -held that failure to adopt
a constitution or bylaws does not preclude the formation or existence of a labor organiza-
tion, where in fact an organization participated in by employees for the purposes defined
in Section 2 (5) of the Act exists See also Matter of Aeolian-American Corporation and
Amalgamated Piano Workers of America, 8 N. L It. B. 1043, 1045
484 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
On March 30, 1940, and shortly thereafter, the United advised the
Company of its claim to representation, as collective bargaining agent,
of 60 per cent of the production workers employed in the Chicago
plant, and requested the Company to recognize it as the exclusive bar-
gaining agency of all such workers. It also requested the Company to
terminate the above-mentioned contract with the International and
not to enter into any new collective labor contract with that union.
The Company refused to recognize the United as statutory repre-
sentative unless and until the Board determined that the United
and not the I. B. E. W. was such representative. On May 9, subse-
quent to the filing of the petition herein, the Company concluded a
new contract with the International which was similar, so far as here
material, to the 1939 contract. It contained an addendum, however,
which provided that in the event the Board should determine that the
I. B. E. W. was not the "bona fide bargaining agency" of employees
of the Company the agreement would "immediately become null and
void."
As hereinafter set forth a substantial number of employees at the
Chicago plant, in the collective bargaining unit hereinafter found
appropriate, designated the United to be their bargaining agency on
and after June 1, 1940. Also, on April 23, 1940, upon the direction
of the I. B. E. W., practically all employees at the Chicago plant in
said unit executed certain cards wherein they reaffirmed a prior desig-
nation of the I. B. E. W. as their collective bargaining agency, and
repudiated any designation of the United as their bargaining agency.
Neither the 1939 contract, which has terminated, nor the new 1940
contract entered into after the filing of the petition, constitutes a
ground for our not proceeding to an investigation and determination
of the question concerning representation which has arisen.' We also
are of the opinion that the execution of the above-mentioned cards,
which the I. B. E. W. directed employees to sign, does not warrant a
stay of such investigation and determination. In view of the terms
of the 1939 and 1940 contracts compelling membership of these em-
ployees in the 1. B. E. W. as a condition of their employment, the
execution of such cards cannot be taken as conclusive of the desires
of the Chicago plant employees regarding representation. Our find-
ing and holding in this respect are confirmed by other circumstances
noted in the margin.,'
4 flatter of 7Ptcktctre Spencer Steel Co and Federated Industrial Union, 18 N L It B 372
SA few days prior to April 23, five employees of the Company were call('(] before the
Executive Board of the I B E w and charged with forming the United Four of the
employees denied the charge and the I B E W took no action with respect to them The
fifth person , who assumed a "defiant attitude ," was suspended from the Union and as a
consequence thereof was discharged by the Company
GEORGE W. BORG CORPORATION
I I
485
IV. THE EFFECT OF THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION UPON
COMMERCE
We find that the question concerning representation which has
arisen, occurring in connection with the operations of the Company
described in Section I above, has a close, intimate, and substantial
relation to trade, traffic, and commerce among the several States,
and tends to,lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing com-
merce and the free flow of commerce.
V. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Company, the United, and the I. B. E. W. agreed at the hear-
ing, and we find, that all production and maintenance employees and
working foremen of the Company at the Chicago plant, exclusive of
supervisory, clerical, and toolroom employees, constitute a unit ap-
propriate for the purpose of collective bargaining and that said unit
will insure to employees of the Company the full benefit of their
right to self-organization, and to collective bargaining and otherwise
effectuate the policies of the Act.
VI. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
On April 27, 1940, the Company employed about 166 persons within
the unit which we have found to be appropriate. It appears from a
statement and report of the Regional Director that on or about
March 30, 1940, 100 of these employees designated the United as
their collective bargaining agency on and after June 1, 1940, and
that on April 23, 1940, 164 of these same employees designated the
I. B. E. W. as their bargaining agency and repudiated any prior
designation of the United as bargaining agency. Under the circum-
stances, and in view of what we have heretofore stated concerning
the probative value of the April 23 instruments, we are of the opinion,
and find, that the question concerning representation, which has arisen
can best be resolved by the holding of an election by secret ballot to
determine the employees' choice of bargaining representatives. Ac-
cordingly we shall direct that an election by secret ballot be held
among the employees in the appropriate unit subject to. such limita-
tions as are set forth in the Direction of Election.
The parties stipulated at the hearing that, if an election is directed
by the Board, the Company pay roll of June 1, 1940, should be used
for the purpose of determining eligibility of employees to vote. We
see no reason for not following the agreement of the parties.
On the basis of the above findings of fact and on the entire record
of the case, the Board makes the following :
2S1OSG-42-vo1 25-32
486 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. A question affecting commerce has arisen concerning representa-
tion of employees of George W. Borg Corporation, Clock Division,
Chicago, Illinois, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section
2 (6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act.
2. All production and maintenance employees and working fore-
men of the Company at its Chicago plant, exclusive of supervisory,
clerical, and toolroom employees, constitute a unit appropriate for
the purposes of collective bargaining, within the meaning of Section
9 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act.
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 ordered by the Board to
ascertain representatives for the purpose of collective bargaining with
George W. Borg Corporation, Clock Division, Chicago, Illinois, 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 Thirteenth
Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National Labor Rela-
tions Board, and subject to Article III, Section 9, of said Rules and
Regulations, among all production and maintenance employees and
working foremen of the Company at its Chicago plant who were
employed during the pay-roll period of June 1, 1940, including
employees who did not work during such pay-roll period because
they were ill or on vacation and those who were then or have since
been temporarily laid off, but excluding those who have since quit
or been discharged for cause, and further excluding supervisory,
clerical, and toolroom employees, to determine whether they desire to
be represented by United Clock Workers Union or by Local Union
No. B-713 of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers,
affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, for the purposes
of collective bargaining, or by neither.
MR. WILLIAM M. LEISERSON took no part in the consideration of the
above Decision and Direction of Election.