International Harvester Co.

In the Matter Of INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER COMPANY, MCCORMICS WORKS, EMPLOYER and INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS, DIE AND TOOL MAKERS LODGE No. 113, PETITIONER Case No. 13-R-4271 SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION March 16, 1949 On May 10, 1948, the National Labor Relations Board, herein called the Board, issued its Decision and Order in the above -entitled pro- ceeding, dismissing the petition herein.' In its decision, the Board found that the primary unit sought by the Petitioner , consisting prin- cipally of machinists in only two departments of the plant involved- the toolroom and experimental departments,2 comprised only a seg- ment of a craft group possessing similar skills and performing com- parable works Although the Board further found that the Petitioner was apparently also willing to represent a unit expanded to include such additional craft employees outside the two departments as the Board might deem appropriate, it concluded that, in certain important respects, the record was not sufficiently clear to enable the Board to determine the adequacy of the Petitioner 's representative interest in a more comprehensive unit , or to fix the scope of a unit enlarged to in- clude employees outside the two departments. 177 N. L. R. B. 520. 2 The Petitioner sought to include, in effect, all tool and the makers, die sinkers, lathe hands, grinders, lay-out men, shaper hands , machinists, group leaders, milling machine hands, inspectors , jig borers, tool engravers, set-up men, planer hands, tool hardeners, welders, boring machine operators , mechanics (both bench and set-up ), sawyers, and ap- prentices in Departments 5 and 7 ; it sought to exclude laborers , stockkeepers-tools and supplies, employees of the industrial truck repair section, tool crib attendants, janitors, the blacksmith, blacksmith's helper, pattern vault attendant , cut-off saw man, carpenter, learner, cotton pickers, known as mechanic bench (simple), all office, technical, and clerical employees and supervisors. (The "cotton pickers" were sought to be excluded as their activities were performed only temporarily at the McCormick Works.) 8 See in this connection footnote 4 of Matter of International Harvester Company, 79 N. L. R. B. 1452. 82 N. L. R. B., No. 20. 190 INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER COMPANY 191 On May 17, 1948, the Petitioner filed a "Motion to Reconsider" the aforementioned decision and requested that the Board remand the case for the taking of further testimony with reference to the establishment of a more comprehensive unit. On June 4, 1948, the Board granted the motion, vacated its dismissal of the petition, and directed that a further hearing be held for the purpose of adducing additional evi- dence with regard to the alternative unit sought by the Petitioner. A reopened hearing was held on July 12 and 19, 1948, and a further re- opened hearing was held on December 13, 1948. The hearing officer's rulings made in this proceeding are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed .4 At the reopened hearings the Employer adduced evidence as to those employees outside Departments 5 and 7 who possess similar skills and perform work comparable to that of the employees within those two departments. The Petitioner adduced no evidence at the reopened hearings and took no position regarding the specific inclusion or ex- clusion of the particular categories of allegedly comparable employees outside the two departments, apparently relying on its general con- tention that a craft unit of machinists in Departments 5 and 7, plus comparable employees elsewhere in the plant, is appropriate. The Employer and the Intervenor reasserted their opposition to the sever- ance of the employees sought by the Petitioner from the existing pro- duction and maintenance unit. The record now indicates the number, location, wage rate ranges,' and job descriptions of the employees out- side Departments 5 and 7 alleged by the Employer to be comparable to the employees sought by the Petitioner within those two departments, in its primary unit request. It shows further that all employees in the * The hearing officer reserved for the Board ruling on motions by the Employer and the Intervenor to dismiss the proceeding on the grounds that: (1) the unit sought is Inappro- priate; (2) the Petitioner has not defined its unit with sufficient particularity ; and (8) the Petitioner has not made an adequate showing of representative interest . As hereinafter appears in our discussion of the unit issue, the first ground is without merit . As to the other grounds it is evident that at the first reopened hearing the Petitioner indicated gen- erally the scope of its proposed alternative unit , and it is well established that the ade- quacy of a showing of representative interest is a matter for administrative determination by the Board not subject to direct or collateral attack. (Matter of O. D. Jennings cE Com- Pani/, 68 N. L. R. B. 516.) Furthermore, at the second reopened hearing , the numerical scope of the Petitioner's alternative unit was sufficiently delineated to enable the Board to determine the adequacy of the Petitioner's showing, thereby remedying the defect ad- verted to in the initial decision herein . The motions are therefore denied. 5 This information was produced by the Employer pursuant to a Board subpena issued at the request of the Petitioner. we find without merit the Petitioner's contention that the Employer has failed to comply with the subpena by producing the rate ranges of em- ployees in various classifications rather than the wage rates of individual employees. The information produced met the requirements of both the Petitioner 's request for the subpena and of the subpena itself. Moreover, in view of our findings, hereinafter, relative to variations within each rate range, information as to the wage rates of individual employees is unnecessary to a determination as to the unit placement of employees in the various classifications. 192 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD plant in any particular job classification are within the same rate range and that there is a relatively small span between the extremes of the range. Wage variations within the range are not correlative of the degrees of skill of employees; an employee's place within the range is determined by such factors as diligence, initiative, and similar criteria not directly related to his technical competence or the particular aspect of his skill currently exercised. It would also appear that the actual work situs is not a true basis for distinguishing between employees similarly classified. For, as noted in our original decision herein, certain employees of the toolroom perform their duties entirely, or at frequent intervals, in production departments. The Board has previously found that a unit composed of employees in a tool department who are engaged in installing, making and re- pairing tools, dies, and fixtures may function together for collective bargaining purposes .6 In the instant case, the construction, main- tenance and repair of tools, dies, and fixtures predominates in Depart- ments 5 and 7. There are, however, employees in production depart- ments and on production department pay rolls who have the same skills and functions as do certain of the highly skilled employees in Departments 5 and 7 who constitute part of the craft nucleus of the machinist group of those two departments. We do not believe that the circumstance of the Employer's administrative organization should here operate to separate employees who would otherwise logically belong together.7 We are of the opinion, therefore, that the employees sought by the Petitioner in Departments 5 and 7, together with the comparable skilled machinist employees in other departments, in the classifications enumerated in Appendix A, constitute an identifiable homogeneous group with interests separate from those of the other plant employees and that they may, if they so desire, constitute a separate unit. They may also constitute a part of the production and maintenance unit in which they have hitherto been included. These employees should therefore be given an opportunity to demonstrate in a Board election whether they desire separate representation or continued inclusion in E Matter of Sunbeam Corporation, 74 N. L. R. B. 976 ; Matter of Republic Flow Meters Company, 72 N. L. R. B. 296 ; Matter of Russell Electric Company, 72 N. L. R. B. 278. T Cf. Matter of John Deere Dubuque Tractor Works of Deere Manufacturing Company, 79 N. L. R. B. 1452. As to the impropriety of carving out a machine shop unit and excluding therefrom classifications of skilled employees elsewhere in the plant who have skills comparable to such classifications inside the machine shop , see Matter of Ethyl Corporation (Sodium and Tetraethyl Lead Areas ), 80 N. L. R. B. 9. Conversely, as to the propriety of setting up a toolroom or machine shop unit including semi-skilled employees in the toolroom although excluding their counterparts in other department, see Matter of International Harvester Company, supra INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER COMPANY 193 a production and maintenance unit. Under these circumstances, we shall direct an election among these employees, and shall make no unit determination pending the outcome of the election. There remain for disposition the following categories of employees : Group leaders: The Petitioner requests that group leaders be in- cluded in the unit. The Employer took no position regarding their inclusion or exclusion. The Intervenor alleged, in effect, that group leaders were not supervisory employees but took no specific position regarding their inclusion in the unit, in view of its general objection to the appropriateness of the unit sought by the Petitioner. The group leaders are skilled craftsmen who spend no time in pro- duction. Their duties consist of distributing work, materials, and sketches to other employees in their respective groups, and in some cases they do "job estimating." The group leaders, like the depart- mental foreman, may assist employees who encounter difficulty in their work but they do not have the right to perform disciplinary functions or grant time off, and the record does not indicate that they have the right to hire or discharge. Although the Employer's clas- sification manual states that the function of a "Group Leader- Machinist," for example, is to "direct the work of a number of machin- ists," it appears from the record that such direction is of a routine nature, and that responsible direction is the function of the depart- mental foreman. We shall, accordingly, include the group leaders in the unit. Tool crib attendants: The Petitioner desires the exclusion of all tool crib attendants from its proposed craft unit. The Intervenor con- tends that such exclusion would be arbitrary. There is one tool crib in each of the Employer's three toolrooms, operated by toolroom em- ployees. Ten other tool cribs are also operated by toolroom employees, under toolroom supervision, but are located in and service various other departments of the plant. There are also six tool cribs located in various departments manned by departmental employees and under the supervision of the respective departments. None of the tool crib attendants perform work requiring the exercise of any particular degree of skill. Under all the circumstances, we are of the opinion that the tool crib attendants have interests mare closely allied to those of the remaining production and maintenance employees than to the employees in the voting group which the Petitioner seeks to represent. Accordingly, we shall exclude the tool crib attendants." Welders: The Petitioner desires the inclusion of the are and gas welders in Department 5. These employees apparently are engaged in "Matter of Sunbeam Corporation, supra. 194 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD welding work only in conjunction with the machining work of the toolroom and experimental departments. We are of the opinion that their interests lie with the employees in the voting group established herein. Accordingly, we shall include them.9 We shall direct an election among the employees at the Employer's plant in Chicago, Illinois, in the following voting group : All tool and die makers, die sinkers, lathe hands, grinders, lay-out men, shaper hands, machinists, group leaders, milling machine hands, inspectors, jig borers, tool engravers, set-up men, planer hands, tool hardeners, welders, boring machine operators, mechanics (both bench and set-up), sawyers, and apprentices in Departments 5 and 7, includ- ing all employees in other departments of the Employer's plant in the classifications enumerated in "Schedule A," attached hereto, but ex- cluding laborers, stockkeepers-tools and supplies, employees of the industrial truck repair section, tool crib attendants, janitors, the black- smith, blacksmith's helper, pattern vault attendant, cut-off saw man, carpenter, learner, cotton pickers, known as mechanic bench (simple), and truck drivers in Departments 5 and 7, supervisors, and all office, technical, and clerical employees. If in this election, the employees voting in the voting group set forth above select the International Association of Machinists, Die and Tool Makers Lodge No. 113, or another representative not also selected by the employees voting in the production and maintenance unit in Case No. 13-RC-640, they will be taken to have indicated their desire to constitute a separate bargaining unit. If, however, they select the same representatives as the employees voting in the pro- duction and maintenance unit in Case No. 13-RC-640, they will be taken to have indicated their desire to be included in the production and maintenance unit and may be bargained for as part of such unit. DIRECTION OF ELECTION 10 As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining with the Employer, an election by secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than forty days from the date of this Direction, under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Region in which this case was heard, and subject to Sections 203.61 and 203.62 of National 9It does not appear from the Employer's tabulation of employees in Department 7, introduced into evidence at the reopened hearing, that any welders are carried on the pay roll of that department. As hereinafter appears, the welders outside Department 5 are excluded from the unit. The exclusion of this group , which sporadically does welding work for Departments 5 and 7 , stems from the fact that welders do not constitute part of the craft nucleus of Departments 5 and 7. 10 Any participant in the election herein may, upon its prompt request to, and approval fbeFeof by, the R,eogpAl Director, have its name removed from the ballot. INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER COMPANY 195 Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 5, as amended, among the employees described in the voting group above, who were employed during the pay-roll period preceding the date of this Direc- tion of Election, including employees who did not work during said pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation or temporarily laid off, 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, and also excluding employees on strike who are not entitled to reinstatement, to determine whether they desire to be represented, for purposes of collective bargaining, by Interna- tional Association of Machinists, Die and Tool Makers Lodge No. 113, or by United Farm Equipment and Metal Workers of America, C. 1. 0., or by neither. MEMBER GRAY took no part in the consideration of the above Supple- mental Decision and Direction of Election. SCHEDULE A Department Classification Title 67 L-81 Lay-out Men-Shop Equipment 9 L-82-B Lathe Hand-Engine-All around 9113160 M-1-C Machinist-All around 26127730 M-6-B Machinist-Repair 32, 60, 61