Whittet-Higgins Co.

In the Matter Of WHITTET-HIGGINS COMPANY and INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS Case No. 1-R-2985.-Decided July 25, 1946 Greenough, Lyman, and Cross, by Mr. Owen P. Reid, of Providence, R. I., for the Company. Mr. Harold F. Reardon, of Boston, Mass., and Mr. Peter Stuart, of Esmond, R. I., for the I. A. M. Mr. Martin T. Camach,o, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES STATEMENT OF THE CASE Upon a petition duly filed by International Association of Ma- chinists, herein called I. A. M., alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of Whittet-Higgins- Company, Providence, Rhode Island, herein called the Company, the National Labor Relations Board on May 14, 1946, conducted a prehearing election pursuant to Article III, Section 3, of the Board's Rules and Regulations , among employees of the Com- pany in the.alleged appropriate unit, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented by the I. A. M. for the purposes of collective bargaining. At the close of the election a Tally of Ballots was furnished the parties. The Tally shows that there were approximately 90 eligible voters and that 88 of these eligible voters cast valid ballots, of which 72 were for the I. A. M., 7 were against, and 9 were challenged. Thereafter, pursuant to Article III, Section 10, of the Rules and Regulations , the Board provided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice before Robert E. Greene, Trial Examiner. The hearing was held at Providence, Rhode Island, on June 3, 1946. The Company and the I. A. M. 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 Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are 69 N. L. R. B., No. 115. 952 WHITTET-HIGGINS COMPANY 953 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 Whittet-Higgins Company is a Rhode Island corporation, located at Providence, Rhode Island, engaged in the manufacture, sale, and distribution of automatic screw machine products. The Company annually purchases raw materials consisting principally of bar steel and rods to a value of approximately $500,000, of which approximately 80 percent is purchased from points outside the State of Rhode Island. The Company's finished products are valued at approximately $500,- 000, approximately 80 percent of which is shipped to points outside the State. of Rhode Island. The Company concedes, and we find, that it is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED International Association of Machinists is a labor organization admitting to membership employees of the Company. III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION The Company refuses to recognize the I. A. M. as the exclusive bargaining representative of its employees until the I. A. M. has been certified by the Board. 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 Act. IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT The I. A. M. seeks a unit consisting of all production and main- tenance employees, including shop clerks, watchmen, matrons, cafe- teria employees, shipping department employees, working foremen 1 and group leaders engaged in production, but excluding office and clerical employees, departmental foremen, and all other supervisory and executive employees. With the exception of the assistant fore- men, nine in number, the parties are in accord as to the composition 1 At the bearing the nine supervisors in dispute were referred to as working foremen, assistant foremen, shift foremen and lead men. We shall refer to them as assistant fore- men. It also appears that the phrase "group leaders engaged in production ," used by the I. A. M. in its petition , refers to the same individuals. 954 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD of the unit. The disagreement between the parties is reflected in the Company's challenge of the nine ballots cast by the assistant foremen. The I. A. M. contends that the assistant foremen are not supervisory employees and urges their inclusion in the unit; the Company contends that they are supervisors and would exclude them. The production and maintenance forces of the Company are divided into five departments, each of which, except the shipping department, operates on a two-shift basis, i. e., a day and night shift. One of the nine assistant foremen in dispute is assigned to the shipping depart- ment under a foreman. Each of the other four departments is headed by a foreman and two assistant foremen. The foremen work only on the day shift, and in their absence complete supervision of the respec- tive departments is taken over by the assistant foremen. Except in the shipping department, assistant foremen work on rotating shifts alternating every other week between the day and night shifts. Assistant foremen have the power to make work assignments, to see that safety rules are observed, to discipline and effectively recommend discharge. On occasions they have effected disciplinary action and the discharge of employees. They receive a wage differential of 10 cents an hour over and above the highest paid rank and file employee whom they supervise. During the war, due to their status, they were exempted from participating in the activities of the Labor-Manage- ment Committee, but along with the foremen and a few selected employees of the Company they attended several training-within- industry courses. Neither the assistant foremen nor the foremen have the power to hire, all hiring being done by the superintendent in conjunction with the personnel manager. However, the foremen, or in their absence the assistant foremen, are consulted on occasion as to the suitability of prospective employees. The assistant foremen attend meetings of supervisory employees of the Company, and are ordinarily consulted as to job classifications and wage rates of the rank and file employees whom they supervise. From the foregoing facts, it is clear that the assistant foremen are supervisors within the Board's usual definition. Accordingly, contrary to the I. A. M.'s contention, we shall exclude them from the unit hereinafter found appropriate. We find that all production and maintenance employees of the Com- pany, including shop clerks, watchmen, matrons, cafeteria employees, and shipping department employees, but excluding clerical employees, departmental foremen, assistant foremen, executives, and all other su- pervisory employees with authority to hire, promote, discharge, disci- pline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or effec- tively recommend such action, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act. WHITTET-HIGGINS COMPANY V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES 955 The results of the election held previous to the hearing show that the I. A. M. has secured a majority of the valid votes cast in the elec- tion. The challenges to the ballots of the nine assistant foremen are hereby sustained. We shall certify the I. A. M. as the collective bar- gaining representative of the employees in the appropriate unit. CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES 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, Sections 9 and 10, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and' Regulations-Series 3, as amended, IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED that the International Association of Ma- chinists has been designated and selected by a majority of all pro- duction and maintenance employees of Whittet-Higgins Company, Providence, Rhode Island, including shop clerks, watchmen, matrons, cafeteria employees, and shipping department employees, but exclud- ing office and clerical employees, departmental foremen, assistant foremen, executives, and all other supervisory employees with author- ity to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or effectively recommend such action, as their representative for the purposes of collective bargaining, and that pur- suant to Section 9 (a) of the Act, the said organization is the exclusive representative of all such employees for the purposes of collective bargaining with respect to rates of pay, wages, hours of employment, and other conditions of employment. MR JOAN M. HOUSTON took no part in the consideration of the above Decision and Certification of Representatives.