Dreis & Krump Manufacturing Co.

In the Matter of DREIS & KRUMP MANUFACTURING COMPANY and IN- TERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION' OF MACHINISTS, DISTRI4r No., 8, AFFIISATED WITH THE A. F. OF L. Case No. R-5036.-Decided April 9,194.3 Jurisdiction': machinery manufacturing industry. Investigation and Certification of Representatives : existence of question: refusal to accord petitioner recognition ; election necessary. Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : all employees excluding executives, superintendents, foremen, assistant foremen, supervisory employees, office employees, cost department employees, engineering department employeesy truck drivers, and armed guards. Mr. Sidney J. Hess, Jr., of Chicago, Ill., for the Company. Mr. Daniel D. Carmell, of Chicago, Ill., for the A. F. L. Messrs. Louis Torre end John T. Bernard, of Chicago, Ill., for, the C. I. O. Mr. Wallace E. Royster, of counsel to the Board. DECISION - AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION SATEMENT OF THE CASE - Upon a petition duly filed by International Association of Machin- ists, District No. 8, affiliated with the A. F. of L., herein called the A. IF. L., alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen con- cerning the representation of employees of Dreis & Krump Manufac- turing Company, Chicago, Illinois', herein called the Company, the National Labor Relations Board provided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice before William W. Ward, Trial Examiner. Said hearing was held March 2-92,1943, in Chicago, Illinois. The Company, the A. F. L., and United. Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers of America, affiliated with the C. 1. 0., herein called the C. 1. 0., appeared, participated, and were afforded ,full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to, introduce evidence bear- ing on the issues. The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. 48 N. L. R. B, No. 125. 1035 1036 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATION BOARD Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY, Dreis & Krump Manufacturing Company, an Illinois -corporation, has its main office and only plant in Chicago, Illinois, where it is en- gaged in the manufacture of tools, dies, power brakes, and other machinery. The principal raw materials used by the Company, are steel and aluminum. During 1942, the Company used raw materials valued in excess of $500,000, of, which approximately 20 percent was shipped to the Company from points outside Illinois. During the same period, the Company manufactured finished products valued in excess of $500,000, of which approximately 90 percent was shipped by the Company to points outside Illinois. The Company concedes for the purpose of this proceeding that it is engaged in commerce within, the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED International Association of Machinists, District No. 8, , affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, is a labor organization ad- mitting to membership employees of the Company. United Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers of America, affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, is a labor organization admitting to membership employees of the Company. III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION On February 3, 1943, the A. F. L. requested recognition as the exclu- sive bargaining agent of the Company's employees. The. Company refused such recognition and asserted that the A. F. L. does not rep- resent a majority of such employees. ` At the hearing the C. I. O. was permitted to intervene on its allegation that it represents a substantial number of employees in the unit claimed by the A. F. L. A statement of the Regional Director, introduced in evidence, indi- cates that the A. F. L. and the C. I. O. each represents a substantial number of employees in the unit hereinafter found appropriate.' 1 The Regional Director stated that the A. F. L. submitted 117 designations, of which 116 bore apparently genuine, original signatures . Eighty-eight designations were dated variously from September 1942 to February 1943 and 5 were undated; all of these bore the names of persons whose names appear on the Company 's pay roll of February 5, 1943. The pay roll contains the names of 328 persons in the appropriate unit. The C. I. 0 submitted 1 08 designations , of which 107 bore apparently genuine, original signatures Sixty-two designations were dated variously from, July 1942 to February 1943 , and 23 were undated : all of these bore the names of persons whose names appear on the Company 's pay roll of February 5, 1943: DRESS & FRUMP MANUFACTURING COMPANY, 1037 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 parties are in general agreement as to an appropriate unit but there is a dispute concerning the inclusion of certain categories of employees and individuals. The A. F. L. and the C. I. 0. would exclude from the unit, and the Company would include the following : Cost department employees. There are two cost department clerks, also described as time clerks or factory clericals. They work apart from the regular office force and keep cost, production, and time rec- ords. They do no manual work, handle no materials, and report directly to the plant superintendent. We find no reason to differ- entiate between these employees and office employees and shall exclude them from the unit. Engineering department employees. There are four non-super- visory employees in this department. All are engaged in drawing and designing plans of machines used or manufactured by the Company. Most of them have college training in drafting or engineering. Their working place is separate from the production and maintenance de- partments of the Company. It is our practice to exclude such employees from a unit of production and maintenance employees at the request of the unions involved and, under the present circum- stances, we shall exclude them here. Armed guards. Three employees are carried on the pay roll as armed guards. They do not wear uniforms and have not been 'deputized. As the designation 'implies, they carry arms. They are engaged wholly in protecting the property of the Company and checking employees and visitors in and out of the plant. They report directly to the plant superintendent. In accordance with our usual policy as to such employees, we shall exclude them from the unit. The A. F. L. requests the exclusion of certain individual employees 2 and the C. I. 0. of others,3 each alleging that the employees it names have supervisory authority. The testimony at the hearing indicates clearly that all of these employees are employed in the production and maintenance departments and are under the supervision of the foremen in these departments. Each of them by virtue of seniority and skill receives a higher hourly wage than those working with him. None receives the bonus allowed to foremen nor is any one of them carried on the pay roll as a supervisory employee. It does not appear 2 Viz, Joseph Eckl and George Ott., $ Viz, Henry, Hespen, Vito Macmo, Frank Niehoff, Robert Roberts, Andy Stumpf, Herbert Tartar, David Van Bevern,.Alex Zauga, and Emil Gardes. 1038 DECISIONS' OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD that any of them'has supervisory authority or is a representative of management. 'Accordingl'y, we shall include them in the unit. In accordance with the foregoing'and the stipulation of the parties, we find that the employees of the Company at its plant in Chicago, Illinois, including those named in footnotes 2 and 3, above, but exclud- ing executives of the Company, superintendents, foremen, assistant foremen, supervisory employees, office' employees, cost department e^inployees, engineering department employees, truck drivers, and armed guards, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of col- lective bargaining within the meaning 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 the 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 2, as amended, it is hereby DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa- tives for'the purposes of collective bargaining with Dreis & Krump. Manufacturing Company, Chicago, Illinois, an election by secret bal- lot 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, Section 10, of said Rules and Regulations, among the employees of the Company 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 any who have since quit or been discharged for cause, to determine whether they desire to be represented by Inter- national Association of Machinists, District No. 8,'affiliated with the A. F. of L., or by United Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers of America, affiliated with the C. I. 0., for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by neither.