Thordarson Electric Manufacturing Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 31, 1944

55 N.L.R.B. 976 (N.L.R.B. 1944)

In the Matter of THORDARSON ELECTRIC MANUFACTURING COMPANY
and UNITED ELECTRICAL , RADIO & MACHINE WORKERS OF AMERICA,
C.1.O.
Case No. 13-R-2290.-Decided March 31, 1944
Mr. H. R. Robinson, of Chicago, Ill., for the Company.
Messrs. Ernest DeMaio and Robert Kirkwood, Miss Charlotte High,
of Chicago, Ill., for the Union.
Mr. William Whitsett, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon a petition duly filed by United Electrical, Radio & Machine
Workers of America, C. I. 0., herein called the Union, alleging that
a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representa-
tion of employees of Thordarson Electric Manufacturing Company,
Chicago, Illinois, herein called the Company, the National Labor
Relations Board provided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice
before Francis X. Helgesen, Trial Examiner. Said hearing was
held at Chicago, Illinois, on February 23 and 24, 1944. 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 an opportunity to file briefs
with the Board.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
The'Company, an Illinois corporation and a subsidiary of Burgess
Battery Company, is engaged at its plant in Chicago, Illinois, in the
manufacture and distribution of transformers, amplifiers , and elec-
55 N. L . R. B., No. 175.
976
THORDARSON ELECTRIC MANUFACTURING COMPANY 977
tronic equipment. During 1943 the Company purchased raw mate-
rials consisting of steel, copper wire, and insulating materials, valued
in excess of $1,000,000, 66 percent of which was shipped to the Com-
pany from points outside the State of Illinois. During the same
period, the Company produced finished products, valued in excess of
$1,000,000, approximately 2 percent of which was sold and shipped
to purchasers outside the State. The Company admits that it is
engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor
Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
United Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers of America, affiliated
with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, is a labor organiza-
tion admitting to membership employees of the company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On January 28, 1944, Robert Kirkwood, field organizer for the
Union, telephoned the president of the Company and requested rec-
ognition of the Union as the exclusive representative of its employees.
The Company refused this request; whereupon Kirkwood confirmed
the conversation in a letter dated January 28, 1944, which letter was
received by the Company.
A statement of a Field Examiner of the Board, introduced into
evidence at the hearing, indicates that the Union represents a sub-
stantial 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 mean-
ing of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
C
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The parties agree that all production and maintenance employees
and plant clerical employees should be included in the bargaining
unit. They also agree to the exclusion of watchmen and guards, all
employees of the production engineering department, engineers and
technicians in the inspection department, foremen, assistant foremen,
and supervisors with authority to hire, promote, discharge, discipline,
or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or effectively
recommend such action. The parties disagree as to the inclusion or
exclusion of the office clerical staff and inspectors; the Union would
' The Field Examiner reported that the Union submitted 625 cards, all bearing apparently
genuine oiiginal signatures , out of 675 employees in the appropriate unit; and that the
cards weie all dated prior to May 1, 1943.
578129-44-vol 55-63
978 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
exclude the office clerical staff and include the inspectors in the unit,
whereas the Company would include the former and exclude the latter.
The record shows that the office clerical employees work in the
Company's main office, which is physically separated by a fire wall
from the manufacturing operations; that they are paid a monthly
wage, whereas production and maintenance employees are paid by
the hour; that the supervisory personnel of the office clerical staff
is distinct and exclusive; that they are carried on a pay roll separate
from that of factory workers; and that the Union does not normally
organize or include office clerical employees in production units and
has made no attempt to organize, and claims no members among, them.
Upon these facts, we shall exclude the office clerical employees from the
unit. We shall likewise exclude expediters, whom the Union sought to
exclude and who, the Company agrees, should be excluded if office
clerical employees are excluded.
The Company contends that inspectors are "an integral part of
management" through whorl it controls production and eliminates
mistakes, and that, therefore, they should not be included in the unit
with production and maintenance employees. Although it is the duty
of inspectors to detect and reject substandard work, they do not keep
a record of rejections or investigate to determine the production
employees responsible therefor; nor do they have authority to effect
or recommend changes in the employment status of production or
maintenance employees. There is no showing that they have, any
voice in determining or shaping labor relations and policies, or that
they represent management in the eyes of employees.2 For these
reasons , there is no merit in the Company 's contention that inspectors
are a part of management.
Inspectors fall into three categories : line inspectors, who require no
technical knowledge and perform their duty under close supervision;
junior inspectors, who are periodically supervised in the performance
of their duties; and senior inspectors, who set up testing equipment for
other inspectors, possess technical knowledge, and generally ,work with-
out immediate supervision. Because of their greater experience, senior
inspectors at times instruct other inspectors. The chief inspector testi-
fied that senior inspectors might make recommendations with reference
to the work and ability of junior and line inspectors. However, he
testified further that it was the duty of any employee engaged in in-
spection to make recommendations aimed at the increased efficiency of
the department.3 While the testimony is not entirely clear, it appears
2 See Matter of United Wall Paper Factories , Inc, 49 N L. R B 142i , Matter of Gardner-
Dew,er Company, 44 N L P. B 1192
a'Ihe chief inspector also testified that senior inspectors had "the right " to recommend
the discharge or transfer of line inspectois It does not appear that such recommenda-
tions were ever made or that they would be green any effect
THORDARSON ELECTRIC MANUFACTURING COMPANY 979
that such recommendations as are made by senior inspectors relate pri-
marily to the technique of inspection. We find that senior inspectors
are not supervisors such as we normally exclude from bargaining
Units 4
The Union claims that it represents a majority of the inspectors and
desires their inclusion in the unit. Except that the supervisory per-
sonnel of the inspection department is distinct and exclusive, there is
a sufficient unity of interest between inspectors and production and
maintenance employees to include them in the same unit. They are
carried on the same pay roll; have the same vacation programs and
wage base; work alongside and among production workers; and at
times are recruited from production and maintenance employees. For
the above reasons, we shall include the inspectors, including two who
work outside the plant inspecting equipment produced by subcon-
tractors, in the appropriate unit.
We shall also include in the unit the three clerical employees in the
inspection department since their duties correspond closely to that of
the plant clerical employees who, the parties agree, should be included
in the unit.
We find that all production and maintenance employees, senior in-
spectors, junior inspectors, line inspectors, clerical employees in the
inspection department, and plant clerical employees, but excluding
office clerical employees, expediters, salesmen, employees of the pro-
duction engineering department, guards, watchmen, engineers and
technicians in the inspection department, foremen, assistant foremen,
and supervisors with authority to hire, promote, 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 meaning of Section 9 (b) of the
Act.
V. TILE 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 Relations Act,
and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor Relations
Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3, it is hereby
I See Matter of United Wall Paper Factories, Inc., supra.
980 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
DIRECTED that , as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Thordarson
Electric Manufacturing Company, 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 Relations Board,
and subject to Article III, Sections 10 and 11, of said Rules and Regula-
tions , among the 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 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 Electrical, Radio & Machine `Yorkers of America, C. I. 0., for
the purposes of collective bargaining.