The B. F. Goodrich Co.

In the Matter of THE B . F. GOODRICH COMPANY and UNITED RUBBER WORKERS OF AMERICA , LOCAL UNION No. 5 (C. I. 0.) Case No. 8-R-1761.-Dated June 8, 1945 Messrs. L. M. Buckingham and C. D. Russell, of Akron, Ohio, for the Company. Mr. Robert E. Shuff, of Akron, Ohio, of the Union. Miss Katharine Loomis, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS STATEMENT OF THE CASE Upon a petition duly filed by United Rubber Workers of America, Local Union No. 5 (C. I. 0.), herein called the Union, alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of The B. F. Goodrich Company, Akron, Ohio, herein called the Company, the National Labor Relations Board provided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice before Thomas E. Shroyer, Trial Examiner. Said hearing was held at Akron, Ohio, on April 9, 1945. 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 evi- dence 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 an opportunity to file briefs with the Board. Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following FINDINGS OF FACT I THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY The B F. Goodrich Company-is a New York corporation having its main ;office and place of business at Akron, Ohio, where it is engaged in the manufacture of rubber goods. Its operations with which we are here concerned are carried on in six plants located in various part of the city. 62 N. L. R. B, No. 35 206 THE B. F. GOODRICH COMPANY 207 Its annual volume of business exceeds $1,000,000 in value and a substan- tial portion of both its raw materials and finished products travels in inter- state commerce. We find, and the Company does not deny, that it is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED United Rubber Workers of America, Local Union No. 5, affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, is a labor organization admitting to membership employees of the Company. 111, THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION The Union, in a letter dated February 3, 1945, requested recognition as the exclusive bargaining representative of the plant-protection employees in the Company's Akron, Ohio, plants. On February 7, 1945, the Company declined to grant recognition to the Union on the ground that such employ- ees do not constitute an appropriate unit for collective bargaining purposes. A statement of a Board agent, introduced into evidence at the hearing, indicates that the Union represents a substantial number of employees in the unit hereinafter found appropriate.' We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the representation of employees of the Company, within the meaning of Sec- tion 9(c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT The Union, which already represents employees of the Company in five different units, seeks a unit of all guards, guardettes, and firemen in the plant-protection department of the Company's Akron, Ohio, plants, ex- cluding sergeants and lieutenants;' the guards and firemen are militarized, whereas the guardettes are not. The Company, however, takes the position that the plant-protection employees do not comprise an appropriate unit because they are a part of management and because of the militarization of the guards and firemen. Should the Board find, in view of their militari- zation, a separate unit appropriate for guards and firemen, the Union then seeks to represent the guardettes in another separate unit. The guards and firemen are armed and uniformed. Each has signed a 'Loyalty Agreement with the United States stating that the appropriate Articles of War have been read and explained to him and promising faith- ful performance of his duties as a civilian auxiliary to the military police 'The Field Examiner reported that the Union submitted 76 authorization cards, that the nam, of all persons appearing on the cards were listed on the Company's pay roll of January 15, 1945, which contained the names of 122 employees in the alleged appropriate unit; and that 6 of the cards were undated , 42 were dated January 1945, and 28 dated February 1945. 2 It does not appear that there are any sergeants and lieutenants among the guardettes 208 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD The Company hires and discharges guards and firemen subject to the approval of the Army's Fifth Service Command in Columbus. However, the Company's decisions in these matters have never been overruled. These employees are entitled to the various benefits accorded production employ- ees such as Workmen's Compensation, Unemployment Compensation, and Social Security, as well as hospitalization and insurance plans of the Company. Their duties are substantially the same as before they were militarized.' The guards require identification of persons entering the Com- pany's premises, patrol the various plants, and enforce rules of the Com- pany in regard to gambling, fighting, intoxication, smoking, and safety regulations among the production and maintenance employees. A guard may, on observing an employee or group of employees working in an unsafe manner, stop all such operations until the hazard to safety is eliminated. Tt is his duty to report any violation of the Company's rules to his superior officer. Such reports, however, include only a statement of facts and do not include recommendations. The firemen watch for fire hazards and perform the usual duties incident to fire fighting. There is a great deal of interchange in personnel among the guards and firemen. The. guardettes are women who act. principally as receptionists but also enforce company regulations mainly among the female production and maintenance em- ployees. They guard against violations of smoking regulations which are a part of the Company's safety program. At times they perform gate and patrol duties. The record does not uphold the Company's position that the plant- protection employees are identified with management. These employees do not formulate or determine the Company's labor policy. They are with- out authority to hire or discharge other employees or recommend such action. Nor do they have the power to excuse or penalize other employees guilty of wrongdoing. In enforcing the Company's safety regulations, as in the performance of their other duties, they are merely carrying out company orders without discretion and in accordance with specific instruc- tions. They do not in the performance of any of their duties assign or direct the work of other employees nor do they at any time exercise supervisory functions with respect to other employees. It is clear from the record that the duties of the plant-protection employees are monitorial and not super- visory, and, furthermore, that these employees are not in any manner identified with management.' Although the Union now represents other employees of the Company, a separate unit or units for plant-protection employees will, if established, insulate their collective bargaining from that of other employees. Thus, their separate problems and interests, growing out of their peculiar occu- r The guards and firemen were officially activated into the Auxiliary Military Police on July 1, 1943. 4 See Matter of Bethlehem Steel Company, 61 N. L R. B 892. THE B. F. GOODRICH COMPANY 209 pation, will be recognized, and will not be merged with or subordinated to any interests of the production and maintenance employees which may be in conflict.` In addition, we attach no importance to the implication that membership in a labor organization, and even in the same organization which represents other employees of the employer, tends to undermine the honesty of plant-protection employees or their competence to execute their duties satisfactorily. "Self-organization for collective bargaining is not incompatible with efficient and faithful performance of duty."° The paramount authority which the Army exercises over the guards and firemen in the military sphere has not deprived them of their status as employees of the Company. Army regulations introduced into evidence at the hearing indicate that the Army did not contemplate the abolition of the' existing employer-employee relationship.' Furthermore, it is clear from the record that they are hired and paid by the Company, are directly super- vised by individuals who are hired and paid by the Company, and that it exercises day to day control over their tenure of employment, their work- ing conditions, and their duties. We conclude that the guards and firemen are employees of the Company.' However, the militarization of the guards and firemen, while no obstacle to their unionization, is nevertheless significant. These employees have greater duties and obligations than have those plant-protection employees who are not militarized. To the end that the guards and firemen may be better able to function in the military sphere, and to permit the military authorities to exercise greater control over them, we shall establish a bargaining unit for all militarized plant-protection employees separate and apart from those who are not militarized! Since a separate unit is appro- priate for militarized employees, the guardettes will necessarily form another separate unit. We are persuaded that such units will effectuate the policies of the Act. In reaching this conclusion, we are not unmindful that this country is at war and the Company is engaged in war production, and we have fully considered the national welfare. The steady and unimpeded flow of com- merce which the Act is designed to maintain by the encouragement of the orderly procedures of collective bargaining is doubly essential in time of ° See Matter of Bethlehem Steel Company, supra. - 6 See Matter of Dravo Corporation, 52 N. L. R B 322, 327. 7 War Department Circular No. 15 provides: Employer-employee relationship. (1) Basically, the militarization of plant guard forces does not change the existing systems of hiring, compensation , and dismissal ; all remain primarily a matter between the guards, and the plant managements. Guards in the employ of a private employer may, as heretofore, be dismissed by that employer, and those who are Civil Service employees in the employ of the War Department may be dismissed by the local commanding officer in accordance with Civil Service Regulations . In neither case is a court martial necessary. 8 See Matter of International Harvester Company, Milwaukee Works, 61 N L. R B. 912. 9 See Matter of Dravo Corporation, supra, at 328. 210 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS 90ARD war. It is in keeping with the policies of the Act and it is in the public interest to foster and protect collective bargaining by plant-protection employees, thereby promoting a practice necessary to the amicable settle- inent of labor disputes and eliminating obstructions to commerce.10 We find that all militarized guards and firemen in the plant-protection department of the Company's Akron, Ohio, plants, excluding lieutenants, Sergeants, and all other supervisory employees with authority to hire, pro- mote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or effectively recommend such action, constitute a unit appro- priate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act. We further find that all guardettes in the plant-protection department of the Company's Akron, Ohio, plants, but excluding all supervisory employ- ees with authority to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or effectively recommend such action, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective 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 elections by secret ballot among the employees in the appropriate units who were employed during the pay-roll period imme- diately preceding the date of the Direction of Elections herein, subject to the limitations and additions set forth in the Direction. DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS 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 Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3, as amended, it is hereby DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining with The B. F. Goodrich Com- pany, Akron, Ohio, elections by secret ballot 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 Eighth 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 units found appro- priate 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 (luring said pay-roll period because they were ill or on vaca- 10 See Matter of Bethlehem Steel Company, supra. THE B. F. GOODRICH COMPANY 211 tion 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 those who have since quit or been discharged for cause and have not been rehired or reinstated prior to the date of the elections, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented by United Rubber Workers of America, Local Union No. 5 (C. I. 0.), for the purposes of collective bargaining.