New Holland Machine Co.

In the Matter of NEW HOLLAND MACHINE COMPANY and UNITED STEELWORKERS OF A3IERICA, C. I. O. Case No.4-R-129°x.Decided January 6, 1944 Stevens d Lee, by Mr. Harry W. Lee, of Reading, Pa., for the Company. ' Mr. Andrew Kondrath, of Reading, Pa., for the Union. Mr. Louis Cokin, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION STATEMENT OF THE CASE Upon petition duly filed by United Steelworkers of America, C. I. 0., herein called the Union, alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of New Hol- land Machine Company, New Holland, Pennsylvania, herein called the Company, the National Labor Relations Board provided for an ap- propriate hearing upon due notice before Geoffrey L. Cunniff, Trial Examiner. Said hearing was held at Reading, Pennsylvania, on December 10, 1943. The Company and the Union appeared, partic- ipated, and 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 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 New Holland Machine Company is a Pennsylvania corporation with its principal place of business at New Holland, Pennsylvania, where it is engaged in the manufacture, sale, and distribution of farm ma- chinery, supplies and industrial equipment. The Company pur- chases raw materials valued in excess 'of $350,000 annually, about 5 54 N. L. R. B., No. 50. 370 - NEW HOLLAND MACHINE COMPANY 371 percent of which is shipped to it from points outside the State of Pennsylvania. During the same period, the Company sells products valued in excess of $1,000,000, about 90 percent of which is shipped to points outside the State of Pennsylvania. II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED United Steelworkers of America is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, admitting to mem- bership employees of the Company. III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION On October 20, 1943, the Union requested the Company to recognize it as the exclusive collective bargaining representative of the com- pany's employees. The Company refused this request. A statement of the Regional Director, introduced into evidence at the hearing, indicates 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 National Labor Relations Act. IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT We find, in substantial agreement with a stipulation of the parties, that all production and maintenance employees at the New Holland plant of the Company, excluding office and clerical employees, execu- tives, full-time guards or watchmen, foremen, assistant foremen, non- working supervisors, and any other supervisory employees with au- thority to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or effectively recommend such ac- tion, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bar- gaining 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 means of 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. 1 The Regional Director reported that the Union presented 69 membership application cards bearing apparently genuine signatures of persons whose names appear on the Company's pay roll of December 7, 1943. There are approximately 211 employees in the appropriate unit. 372 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 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 3, it is hereby DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa- tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with New Holland Machine Company, New Holland, Pennsylvania, an election by secret ballot shall beconducted 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 Fourth 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 Regulations, among the employees in the unit found appropriate in Section IV, above, who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately pre- ceding 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 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 Steelworkers of America, C. I. 0., for the purposes of collective bargaining.