Ford Motor Co.

In the Matter of FORD MOTOR COMPANY and MECHANICS EDUCATIONAL -SOCIETY OF AMERICA, AFFILIATED WITH CONFEDERATED 'UNIONS OF AMERICA - Case No. R-4700.Decided February 1, I943 Jurisdiction : ordnance manufacturing industry Practice and Procedure : petition, dismissed when no appropriate unit within its scope; proposed unit comprised of a designated group,of employees in the engineering laboratory building of one plant of Company held inappropriate, when they constituted an integral and indistinguishable, part of the entire plant's operations and petitioner's original organizational campaign was one which embraced all employees of the plant in a`single unit Mr. I. A. Capizzi ,and,Mr. Malcolm L. Denise, of Detroit, Mich., for the Company. Mr. Lewis F. Brady, of Detroit, Mich., for the MESA. Cllr. Maurice Sugar and Mr. Ernest Goodman, of Detroit, Mich., for the UAW-CIO. 'Miss Melvern R. Krelow, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND ORDER STATEMENT OF THE CASE Upon amended petition duly filed by Mechanics Educational So- ciety bf America, affiliated with Confederated Unions of America, herein called the MESA, alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of Ford Motor Company, Dearborn, Michigan, herein called the Company, the Na- tional Labor Relations Board provided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice before Robert J. Wiener, Trial Examiner., Said hear- ing Was held at Detroit, Michigan, on December 28, 1942. The Com- pany, the MESA, and International Union, United Automobile, Aircraft and Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW- CIO), herein called the UAW-CIO, appeared, participated, and Were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evideiice bearing'on the issues. The Trial 47N.L R B,No 19 ' 209 513024-43-vol 47-14 210 DECIS-ION T S OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. At the hearing the UAW-CIO made a motion to dismiss the petition on the ground that the unit requested by the MESA is inappropriate. For reasons hereinafter set forth, the motion is hereby granted.1 On January 11 and 12, 1943, the UAW-CIO, the Company, and the MESA filed briefs which the Board has considered. On January 14, 1943, a stipulation to correct the transcript of record, entered into between the parties on January 12, 1943, was filed with the Board.' The stipulation is hereby'made a part of the record. Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following : FINDINGS OF FACT I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY Ford Motor Company, a Delaware corporation having its principal executive offices in Dearborn , Michigan , was until February •1942, principally engaged in the manufacture ,. assembly, sale , and distri- bution of automobiles and automobile trucks and various types of automobile parts and accessories . The Company owns, operates, and maintains assembly plants in many States throughout the United States. The West Dearborn plant is the only plant here involved. Since February 1942, the Company has been engaged at all of its plants in Detroit, highland Park, and Dearborn , Michigan, and at its new plant, known as the Willow Run Bomber plant situated near Ypsilanti, Michigan, principally in the manufacture and/or assembly of ordnance and other materials for the armed services of the United States. Between 10 and 80 percent in value of the productive materials used in the manufacturing or assembly operations conducted in the above- mentioned plants, the total value of which exceeds $1 ,000,000 monthly, is shipped to said plants from points outside the State of Michigan. The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National- Labor Relations Act. II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED Mechanics Educational Society of America is a labor organization affiliated with Confederated Unions of America, admitting to mem- bership employees of the Company. 1 The UAW-CIO further contended that the employees here involved are covered by a collective bargaining contract between the Company and the UAW-CIO, executed on November 4, 1942, which contract it asserts is a bar to a determination of representatives. In view of our finding, hereinafter set forth, we deem it unnecessary to make a determina- tion of this contention. 2 The Company filed a letter with the Board in lieu of a brief. FORD MOTOR COMPANY 211 International Union, United Automobile , Aircraft and Agricultural Implement Workers of America is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations , admitting to membership employees of the Company. III. THE ,ALLEGED APPROPRIATE UNIT At the hearing the MESA contended that a unit consisting of all hourly rated employees in the Dearborn engineering laboratory build- ing of the West Dearborn Plant, the garage attached to that building by an arcade, and the nearby main powerhouse building, but excluding supervisory employees, salaried office clerks, farm employees, students, pay-roll department and plant-protection employees, former farm- maintenance employees now appearing upon the Dearborn engineer- ing laboratory pay roll, and all men working within the alleged unit who retain identification badges from other plants of the Company, is appropriate.3 The UAW-CIO contended that the, unit sought by the - MESA is inappropriate, and as stated heretofore, requested dismissal of the petition. It further contended that if the Board did not dismiss the petition, the appropriate unit should comprise all production, ai'id maintenance employees of the West Dearborn and the River Rouge Plants of the Company, or in the alternative, all production and main- tenance employees of the West Dearborn Plant. The Company took no position with respect to the appropriate unit. - The principal issue which this case presents is whether a designated group of employees in the engineering laboratory building of the West Dearborn Plant of'the Company constitutes a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Sec- tion 9 (b) of the Act. The West Dearborn Plant of the Company consists of the engineer- ing laboratory, and airframe, airport, and fiber processing buildings, which form a compact geographical unit. The functions performed at the West Dearborn Plant are varied. In the main powerhouse, power is produced for all the West Dearborn operations. In - the engineering laboratory building are located the executive offices and the pay-roll department for the West Dearborn Plant. The cafeteria for the entire plant personnel is also located in the engineering lab- oratory building. There is a large group of maintenance employees at the Plant who work throughout the'Plant, and in addition do all 3It appears that the unit finally alleged by the MESA as appropriate , at the hearing, is considerably smaller than the one originally alleged to be appropriate The original petition set forth the unit as all hourly rated employees at the laboratory , airport, and auframe buildings wearing Dearborn badges, and farm -maintenance employees wearing farm badges,' excluding supervisors , pay-roll and set vice-department employees. That unit was twice amended prior to the hearing. 212 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL . LABOR RELATIONS BOARD the maintenance work on the Henry Ford Farms. Some of these employees are stationed at the engineering laboratory building, and some in buildings other than the engineering laboratory building. The maintenance superintendent at the engineering laboratory build- ing is maintenance superintendent for the entire West Dearborn Plant. In addition to the garage attached to the engineering laboratory build- ing,'there are garages attached to each of the other buildings. The bulk of the work performed at the engineering laboratory building is closely integrated with work performed in the airframe laboratory building. Thus iroducts are developed and formulated into clay models in the engineering laboratory building, and the wood models are made at the airframe building where test assembly lines- are run before products go into mass production in the manufacturing units of the Company. Employees who work in the pattern shop at the airframe building sometimes work in the pattern shop at the engineer- ing laboratory building. It is clear, therefore, that the nature of the ,work of the group of employees whom the MESA seeks to set apart as an appropriate unit is indistinguishable from that of the other employees in the West Dearborn Plant. Moreover, the MESA's origi- nal organizational campaign was one which embraced all employees of the West Dearborn Plant of the Company in a single unit. The employees of the engineering laboratory building constitute an integral and indistinguishable part of the entire West Dearborn Plant of the. Company. We are of the opinion that, under the cir- cumstances, the unit sought to-be established by the MESA is inap- propriate for'the purposes of collective bargaining.' I\'. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION Since the bargaining.' unit sought to be established by the petition is inappropriate, as stated in' Section III, above, we find that no question has arisen concerning the representation of employees of the Company in an appropriate bargaining unit. ORDER Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that the petition for investigation and certification of representatives of employees of Ford Motor Company, Dearborn, Michigan, filed by Mechanics Educational Society of-Amer- ica, affiliated with Confederated Unions of America, be, and it hereby is, dismissed. ' At the hearing the MESA indicated that it did not desire to participate in an election in a unit other than that which it alleged as appiopiiate a 1