The Van Brunt Mfg. Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Nov 17, 1942

45 N.L.R.B. 634 (N.L.R.B. 1942)

In the Matter of THE VAN BRUNT MFG. COMPANY, and FEDERAL
LABOR UNION No. 23223 (AFL)
Case No. R-4441.Decided November 17, 191
Jurisdiction : farm equipment and ordnance manufacturing industry.
Investigation and Certification of Representatives : existence of question : re-
fusal to bargain until certification by'the Board; laid-off employees who had
no sufficient expectancy of reemployment held not eligible to vote.
Unit Appropriate for Collective 'Bargaining : all production and maintenance
employees, excluding all supervisory and office employees, watchmen and
guards, and shop clerks ; stipulation as to.
Mr. H. M. Pike, of Moline, Ill., for the Company.
Mr. Charles Heymanns, of Milwaukee, Wis., for the Union.
Mr. Louis A. Pontello, Jr., of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon petition duly filed by, Federal Labor Union No. 23223, affili-
ated with the American Federation of Labor, herein called the
Union, alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen con-
cerning the representation of employees of The Van Brunt Mfg.
Company, Horicon, Wisconsin, herein called the Company, the Na-
tional Labor Relations Board provided for an appropriate hearing
upon due notice before Leon A. Rosell, Trial Examiner. Said hear-
ing was held at Horicon, Wisconsin, on October 27, 1942. The
Company and the Union appeared, participated, and were afforded
full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses,
and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues. During the hearing,
the Company moved to dismiss the petition on the ground that the
Union did not represent a substantial number of employees. The
Trial Examiner reserved ruling thereon. The motion isi hereby
denied. The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are free
from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
'Upon the entire record in 'the case, the Board makes the following :
45 N. L. R. B., No. 96.
634
THE VAN BRUNT 'MFG. COMPANY
FINDINGS.OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
635
The Van Brunt Mfg. Company, a Wisconsin corporation with its
offices and plant in Horicon, Wisconsin, is engaged in the manufacture
of farm equipment, and materials for the armed forces. The. Com-
pany purchases raw materials valued in excess of $500,000, the major-
ity of which is shipped to it from points outside the State of Wiscon-
sin. It sells annually products valued at approximately $3,000,000,
of which 90 percent is shipped to points outside the State of Wis-
consin. The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce i6thin
the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
H. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
Federal Labor Union No. 23223, is a labor organization affiliated
with the American Federation of Labor, admitting to membership
employees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On September 4, 1942, the Union notified the Company that it had
filed a petition 'for investigation and certification of representatives
with the Board and requested the Company to recognize it as the collec-
tive bargaining agency for the Company's employees. On September
9, 1942, the Company declined to recognize the Union until such time
as'the Union is certified by the Board.
A report of the Regional Director, introduced into evidence, and a
statement of the Trial Examiner, disclose that the Union- represents
a substantial number of employees in the unit hereinafter found to
be 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.
'The Regional Director reported that the Union submitted 120 application cards, all
bearing apparently genuine original signatures and dated as follows • 86 in August 1942 ;
20 in September 1942 ; 12 in October 1942 ; and 2 undated Ninety-six of the signatures
are the names of persons on the Company 's "normal" pay roll of April 1, 1942, containing
331 employees in the alleged appropiiate unit. A comparison of the cards with the
Company's pay roll of September 20, 1942 , containing 209 names] reveals that 48 signa-
tures are the names of persons on such pay roll. _
At the hearing the Trial Examiner reported that the Union submitted to him 13 applica-
tion cards , 11 of which bore apparently genuine original signatuu res Eleven of the cards
were dated in October 1942 and 2 dated . in September 1942 Eleven of the signatures
are the names of persons appearing on the Company 's pay roll of April 1, 1942. Two
of the 13 signatures appear on the Company's September 20, 1942, pay roll.
636 DECISIONS . OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
We find, in accordance with a stipulation of the parties, that all
production and maintenance employees, excluding all supervisory and
office employees, watchmen and guards, and shop clerks, constitute
a unit appropriate fos the purposes of collective bargaining, within the
meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
We find that the question concerning representation which has arisen
can best be resolved by an election by secret ballot. The Union urged
that the pay roll of April 1, 1942, be used as a basis of determining
eligibility to vote in the event the Board directed an election for the
reason that such pay roll would permit certain laid-off employees to
vote in the election. The Company suggests the use of the pay roll
immediately preceding the date of the Direction of Election.
It appears that after April 1, 1942, the Company was forced to
reduce its personnel from approximately 331''employees to the present
staff of 75 employees as a result of a curtailment of production caused
by certain governmental production limitations. The Company does
hot consider these employees as temporarily laid off ;.the president of
the' Company testified that there was no foreseeable development
which would permit the rehiring of the laid-off employees. The
Company does not anticipate an increase in production as it has not
been able to secure war contracts because of the lack of necessary
machinery and equipment. So far as appears, the employees laid off
do not have any seniority or preferential rights to future jobs. Under
these circumstances, we find that persons released as a result of cur-
tailed operations do not have a sufficient employment expectancy to
entitle,them to vote as employees temporarily laid off.
In accordance with our usual practice, we shall direct that the per-
sons eligible to vote in,the election shall be those in the appropriate
unit who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately pre-
ceding 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 9, of National Labor
Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, it is
hereby.
THE VAN BRUNT MFG. COMPANY 637
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation,to ascertain represent-
atives for the purposes 'of collective bargaining with The Van Brunt
Mfg. Company, Horicon, Wisconsin, 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 Twelfth Region, acting in this mat-
ter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board and subject to
Article III, Section 10, 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 employees who did not work during such
pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation or in the' active
military service or training of the United States, or temporarily laid
off, but excluding employees who have since quit or been discharged
for cause,' to determine whether or not they desire to be represented
by Federal Labor Union No. 23223, affiliated with the American Fed-
eration of Labor, for the purposes of collective bargaining.