The Voss Co.

In the Matter of THE VOSS COMPANY, EMPLOYER and INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS, PETITIONER Case No. 1-R-3308.Decided November 13, 1946 Mr. Arthur L. Corbin, Jr., of New Haven, Conn., for the Employer. Mr. Harold F. Reardon, of Boston, Mass., and Mr. Richard Thurer, of Stamford, Conn., for the Petitioner. Mr. Jack Mantel, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at New Haven, Connecticut, on October 14, 1946, before Robert E. Greene, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations Board makes the following : FINDINGS OF FACT I. TILE BUSTNESS OF THE EMPLOYER The Voos Company is a Connecticut corporation having its prin- cipal place of business in New Haven, Connecticut, where it is en- gaged in the manufacture, sale, and distribution of cutlery and other household utensils. The annual value of the raw materials purchased by the Employer, consisting chiefly of steel, wood, and celluloid, is in excess of $100,000, substantially all of which are shipped to its plant from points outside the State of Connecticut. The Employer's finished products are valued at approximately $200,000 annually, 90 percent of which is shipped to points outside the State. The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED The Petitioner is 4, labor organization claiming to represent em- ployees of the Employer. 71 N. L. R B., No. 106 717734-47-vol. 1-44 671 672 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION The Employer refuses to recognize the Petitioner as the exclusive bargaining representative of employees of the Employer until the Petitioner has been certified by the Board in an appropriate unit. We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the representation of employees of the Employer, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT We find, in substantial accordance with the agreement of the parties, that all production and maintenance employees of the Employer, excluding office and clerical employees, executives, and all supervisory employees 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. DIRECTION OF ELECTIOO As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining with The Voos Company, New Haven, Connecticut, an election 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 First Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Sections 203.55 and 203.56, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations- Series 4, among the employees in the unit found appropriate 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 during said pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation 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 employees who have since quit or been discharged for cause and have not been rehired or reinstated prior to the date of the election, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented by International Association of Machinists, for the purposes of collective bargaining.