Sensenich Brothers

In the Matter of HARRY M. SENSENICH, MARTIN M. SENSENICH, FANNIE M. SENSENICH, AND HETTIE M. SENSENICH, TRADING AND DOING BUSINESS AS SENSENICH BROTHERS and INTERNATIONAL Asso- CIATION OF MACHINISTS, A. F. OF L. Case No. 4-R-1289.-Decided March 17,1944 Mr. Paul A. Mueller, of Lancaster, Pa.,* for the Company. Mr. Stanley N. Lentz, of Philadelphia, Pa., and Mr. George R. Co ffroad, of Lancaster, Pa., for the Union. Mr. Armin Uhler, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND ORDER STATEMENT OF THE CASE Upon a petition duly filed by International Association of Machinists, A. F. of L., herein called the Union, alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of Harry M. Sensenich, Martin M. Sensenich, Fannie M. Sensenich, and Hettie M. Sensenich, trading and doing business as Sensenich Brothers, herein called the Company, the National Labor Relations Board provided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice before Fred G. Krivonos, Trial Examiner. Said hearing was held at Lititz, Pennsylvania, on January 21, 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 Ex- aminer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. The Company and the Union filed briefs which the Board has considered. Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following : FINDINGS OF FACT I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY Sensenich Brothers is a partnership composed of Harry M. Sen- senich, Martin M. Sensenich, Fannie M. Sensenich, and Hettie M. 55 N L. R. B., No. 102. 566 SENSENICH BROTHERS 567 Sensenich. The Company has its principal office at Lititz, Pennsyl- vania, and it maintains two plants, one at Lititz and one at Lancaster, Pennsylvania, for the manufacture of wooden airplane propellers. During the past year, 75 percent of the raw materials used by the Company, valued at more than $250,000, was shipped to its plants from outside the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. During the same period, 95 percent of the Company's finished products, which exceeded $1,000,000 in value, was shipped to points outside the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The Company admits that it is en ;aged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. U. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED International Association of Machinists, affiliated with the Amer- ican Federation of Labor, is a labor organization admitting to mem- bership employees of the Company. III. THE ALLEGED APPROPRIATE UNIT The Union contends that a unit limited to employees of the Com- pany's Lititz plant is appropriate. The Company is opposed to such a unit and alleges that the close integration of its Lititz and Lancaster plants requires the inclusion of both in a single unit. The record shows that prior to 1942 all of the Company's manufac- turing operations were carried on at Lititz where the Company has been permanently established since 1940. In September 1942 orders from the United States Government brought about a substantial in- crease in business necessitating an expansion of facilities. Additional factory space was leased for this purpose at Lancaster to which several departments were then transferred.' The Company considers the present arrangement as a temporary measure and it contemplates the return of these departments to the Lititz plant as soon as Government orders decline and business contracts to its normal proportions. Under present conditions the Company's operations and manufac- turing processes begin at the Lititz plant. Lumber is received at Lititz and is stored at the Company's lumber yard. It is then moved to the assembly department for processing. After the lumber has been kiln-dried, laminations are laid out, provided with hub borings and inspected. This is followed by joining, planning, and gluing opera- tions. In the next department the propellers are profiled, seasoned, and then stored. From there they move successively through the carv- ing and finishing departments. In the latter, the propellers are pro- 1 The second yearly term of the lease of the Lancaster establishment expires in September 1944. 568 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD vided with fabric, painted, and varnished. A final inspection com- pletes the operations performed at the Lititz plant. The partially fil- ished propellers are transported by truck 2 to Lancaster. There, after being again inspected, they enter, in the order mentioned, the metal tipping, balancing. finishing,' anti hub installation departments. The finished propellers undergo final inspection and are then sent to the packing and shipping department. The several departments of the Lititz and Lancaster plants have their individual foremen and assistant foremen. However, produc- tion is under the over-all supervision of the Lititz production manager from whom the Lancaster production manager receives his orders. While the various operations of which the continuous manufactur- ing process consists are divided between the Company's two plants as outlined above, certain of the departments overlap and there is a steady interchange of Lititz and Lancaster employees in classifica- tions within the alleged unit.' The repair sales department which is located in the Lancaster plant includes several skilled carvers who are stationed in the Lititz carving department and who are sent to Lan- caster whenever repair operations call for their services.' The situa- tion in the case of the maintenance department is similar. This de- partment has its location and supervision at the Lititz plant and it services the Lancaster plant either through an employee who is sta- tioned there, or by sending employees from Lititz when needed. The finishing department also is dig-ided and is partly located in the Lititz and partly in the Lancaster plant, operations in the two sections being substantially identical .13 The evidence indicates that labor shortages at the Lititz plant are generally supplied by temporary transfers of excess personnel which periodically becomes available at Lancaster. Transfers at the request of the Lititz department heads are made for periods varying in length from several hours to 3 weeks. Employees are frequently requisi- tioned from Lancaster for the purpose of unloading materials at the Company's Lititz siding and transporting them to the Lititz plant. Other temporary transfers are occasioned by the constantly changing needs for inspectors at various points in the production line. While both Lititz and Lancaster have separate staffs of inspectors, the uneven flow of production often necessitates the shifting of inspectors from 2 The Compain's ti tick makes from one to three trips per day to maintain a constant flow of p1opelleis from Lititz to Lancaster I Finishing opeiatnons at the Lancaster plant include varnishing, sanding, application of decalcomania, and spray varnishing The parties me in agreement that, whatever its geognaphscal scope, the unit should include all production and maintenance employees, excluding foremen, assistant foremen, supervisors, office aid clerical employees, engineers, draftsmen, guards, and janitors. The repair depanlment comes under the sales department which is located at Lititz The record does not refer to any specific instances of mteachange of finishing employees between the two sections SENSENICH BROTHERS 569 one plant to the other. In the aggregate, operations during the 6- month period preceding the hearing required approximately 75 tem- porary transfers of the above types. The Company carries the employees at the two plants on a single pay roll. The record does not disclose any differences in the employ- ment policies, working conditions, and wage scales applicable re- spectively to the Lititz and Lancaster plants.' As to the present state of organization of the, Company's employees the evidence indicates that the Union, in September 1943, commenced and subsequently carried on organizational activities exclusively at the Lititz plant.' It appears that the Union was successful in secur- ing at least 27 designations during the first month, and that during the following 4 months organization progressed steadily at the rate of from 2 to 9 additional designations per month. At the time of the hearing the purported membership of the Union was slightly in excess of 30 percent of the employees at the Lititz plant. On the other hand, there is nothing in the record to indicate that organization of the employees at the Lancaster plant would not succeed and progress similarly if attempted.9 Under all the circumstances, and particularly in view of the inter- relation of the Company's Lititz and Lancaster plants as exemplified by the extent and complexity of the interchange of employees between them,70 as well as the inconclusive state of organization, Ave find that the unit proposed by the Union is inappropriate. We shall, therefore, dismiss the petition herein without prejudice. Our finding concern- ing the unit alleged in the present petition, however, does not preclude the reinvestigation by the Board of the appropriateness of a similar unit upon a new petition supported by a showing of material changes in the circumstances which underlie our Decision herein." Cf Matter of Metal Office Furniture Company, 51 N L 11 n 991 8In support of its petition the Union, as iepol ted by the Regionau Dneetor, submitted 76 application and designation cards, 49 of which bole the appaienLly genuine original signa- tures of employees whose names appeal on the Company's pay ioll of Decenibei 11, 1.943. This pay roll contains the names of 175 emplovecs in the .1 leged appiopi i.ite unit Of the 49 cards, 27 were dated in September, 7 in October, 2 in November, and 9 in Decenibei 1943. Four cards were undated At the hearing the Union submitted four additional applIation cards bearing like signa- tures of employees in the unlit claimed and listed on the Company's Decmuboi 11, 1,943, pay roil These cards weIe dated in .lanoniy 1044 9Cf Matter of Metal Office Fm nntuic Coinpan , sap1a; Matter of Standard Oveiall Com- pany, 53 N L It B 960 10 Cf Mattci of Standard Overall Company, sapia n while a pnor dot ernunation ht the i'o,ird chat a ceitanr and is of is not appiopuale will be given great iseight by the hoard in a lati'i iepresentation proceeding intolriig the same industry, such a detm9uuintion is not couclusne, especutlly iiliere it his not laconic the basis of a certification or of collective halgannng Sce Matter of Keituefy Fluorspar Company, 52 N L 11 B 227 570 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD IV. THE ALLEGED QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION Since the bargaining unit sought to be established by the petition is not appropriate as found in Section III, above, we find that no question has arisen concerning the representation of employees of the Company, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act. ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for investigation and certifi- cation of representatives of employees of Harry M. Sensenich, Martin M. Sensenich, Fannie M. Sensenich, and Hettie M. Sensenich, trading and doing business as Sensenich Brothers, Lititz, Pennsylvaia, filed herein by International Association of Machinists, A. F. of L., be, and it hereby is, dismissed. MR. JOHN M. HOUSTON took no part in the consideration of the above Decision and Order.