Ferry Cap and Set Screw Co.

In the Matter of FERRY CAP AND SET SCREW CO., EMPLOYER and DIS- TRICT 54, INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS, PETITIONER Case No. 8-RC-355.-Decided March 29, 1949 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before a hearing officer of the National Labor Relations Board. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-man panel.* Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds : 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. 2. District 54, International Association of Machinists, herein called the Petitioner, is an unaffiliated labor organization claiming to rep- resent employees of the Employer. Federal Labor Union, Local 19468, herein called the Intervenor, is a labor organization affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, claiming to represent employees of the Employer. 3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the represeitt;- tion of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.' 4. The appropriate unit : The Petitioner seeks a unit composed of all the production and main- tenance employees at the Employer's Cleveland, Ohio, plant, excluding office and clerical employees, guards, professional employees, and supervisors. The Intervenor seeks to represent a unit of the em- ployees in the shipping and receiving, packing or stockroom, inspec- .Chairman Herzog and Members Houston and Murdock. I At the hearing, the Intervenor moved to dismiss the petition , alleging that the Peti- tioner was fronting for its Lodge No. 233 , which was not in compliance with Section 9 (f), (g), and ( h) of the Act. This motion was referred to the Board. As evidence of such compliance is an administrative , matter, and as we are satisfied that both the Petitioner and Lodge No. 233 are at present in compliance , the motion is hereby denied. 82 N. L. R. B., No. 54. 479 480 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD tion, heat treat, and general labor departments, as well as sweepers, truckers, and clean-up men who are assigned to various departments in the plant .2 The Employer takes no position on the unit question. The Intervenor contends that it has for several years represented the majority of the employees 3 in the departments and categories set forth in its proposed unit, and that the unit it seeks is a homogeneous, identifiable group composed of all the unskilled employees in the plant. However, the sweepers, truckers, and clean-up men work throughout the plant in various departments, such as heading, trim- ming, punch press, pointing, shaving, roller, cut thread, and milling, drilling, and grinding, and they are responsible to the foremen of their respective departments. In most departments of the plant, there are a few skilled employees and a larger number of unskilled or semi- skilled machine operators and helpers. There is one basic hourly rate of pay for all unskilled employees. They all have a similar vacation program, and, in the event of a reduction in force, both departmental and plant-wide seniority is taken into consideration. The depart- ments sought by the Intervenor are unrelated in themselves, but are integral parts of the Employer's production process. There is some interchange of personnel between departments. We find no basis.for separating the employees sought by the Intervenor from the remaining employees in the plant, and accordingly find the unit sought by the Intervenor to be inappropriate. The Petitioner contends that assistant foremen should be included in the production and maintenance unit. The Employer and the Intervenor contend that assistant foremen are supervisors and should be excluded from any unit found appropriate. There are 5 assistant foremen in the plant. They are paid 20 to 25 percent more than the most skilled employees in their departments. Although they are paid on an hourly basis, as are production workers, they do not receive incentive bonuses, as do the production employees. It was estimated that they spend approximately 20 percent of their time doing production work. The foreman and assistant foreman in the milling, drilling, and grinding department are in charge of ap- proximately 75 employees. The assistant foreman in this department assigns work and may make effective recommendations with regard to transfers or discharges. In the heat treating department, there is an assistant foreman in charge of the 20 employees on the second shift, 8 The Intervenor requested that its name be placed on the ballot for the production and maintenance unit in the event the Board finds that to be the only appropriate unit. 7 The Employer had recognized and bargained with the Petitioner and the Intervenor for their respective members since 1933, and had executed joint union -shop contracts with them, but with no clearly defined jurisdictional lines. The last of these contracts was tolled in April 1948 by communications from both organizations to the Employer. FERRY CAP AND SET SCREW CO . 481 and an assistant foreman in charge of the 12 employees on the third shift. Both of these assistant foremen have discharged employees. In the inspection department there are 25 employees supervised by a foreman and an assistant foreman. The assistant foreman in this department assigns work, prechecks it, advises the inspector what to watch for, and makes effective recommendations to the foreman with regard to the transfer of employees. The assistant foreman in the acorn nut department was acting foreman at the time of the hearing, the foreman having retired. From the foregoing facts, we find that assistant foremen responsibly direct, and make effective recommenda- tions concerning the employment status of, the employees in their respective departments, and we shall therefore exclude them from the unit as supervisors. All the parties stipulated that any unit found appropriate should include factory clericals in the departments covered by the unit, but should exclude the outside truck driver and the spot laborer. Ac- cordingly, we find that all the production and maintenance employees at the Employer's Cleveland, Ohio, plant, including factory clericals, but excluding the outside truck driver, the spot laborer, office and clerical employees, guards, professional employees, assistant foremen, and all other supervisors, constitute a unit appropriate for the pur- poses of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act. DIRECTION OF ELECTION As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the purpose of collective bargaining with the Employer, an election by secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than 30 days from the date of this Direction, under the direction and super- vision of the Regional Director for the Region in which this case was .heard, and subject to Sections 203.61 and 203.62 of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 5, as amended, among the employees described in paragraph numbered 4, above, who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of this Direction of Election, including employees who did not work during said pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation or tem- porarily 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 District 54, International Association of Machinists, or by Federal Labor Union, Local 19468, or by neither.