The Timken Detroit Axle Co.

In the Matter of TILE TIMKEN DETROIT AXLE COMPANY, EMPLOYER and FOREMAN'S ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, CITAPTER No. 10, UNAFFILIATED, PETITIONER Case No. 7-fl-2293.-Decided March 31, 1947 Miller, Canfield, Paddock cC Stone, by Messrs. William G. Butler and Emmett E. Eagan, both of Detroit, Mich. ; and Mr. Frank O. Cole, of Detroit, Mich., for the Employer. Mr. Carl Brown, of Detroit, Mich., for the Petitioner. Mr. Arthw• Christopher, Jr., of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at Detroit, Michigan, on July 8, 22, and 23, 1946, before Woodrow J. Sandler, hearing officer. The Employer, at the hearing and in its brief, moved to dismiss the petition on the grounds that (1) the Board lacks juris- diction because the supervisors whom the Petitioner seeks to include in the unit are not employees within the meaning of the Act; (2) the Petitioner is not independent of the United Automobile, Aircraft R Agricultural Implement Workers of America, CIO, herein called the UAW, which currently represents the Employer's rank and file pro- duction and maintenance workers; (3) a unit of supervisors would not effectuate the policies of the Act and would-be contrary to the public interest; and (4) the proposed unit is in any event inappropriate be- cause it includes several levels of supervision. The hearing officer referred the motion to the Board for ruling thereon. For reasons stated hereinafter, the motion is denied. 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 1. TIIE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER The Timken Detroit Axle Company, an Ohio corporation with its principal offices in Detroit, Michigan, is engaged in the manufacture 73 N L. R B, No. 13. 93 94 DECISIONS OF NATION AL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD of axles, accessory parts, and forgings for motor trucks , busses, and other types of motor vehicles . We are here concerned with its Plants 1, 2, and 9 in Detroit, Michigan , and Plant 8 located at Melvindale, Michigan. During 1945 , more than 71 percent of the raw materials purchased by the Employer for use in its operations came from sources outside the State of Michigan. During the same year, the Employer's total sales were in excess of $136,000,000, of which amount more than 60 percent represented sales to customers outside the State. The Employer admits and the Board finds that the Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. II. TILE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED Foreman's Association of America, Chapter No. 10, is an unaffiliated labor organization admitting to membership only supervisory em- ployees of the Employer. 111. TIIE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION The Employer refuses to recognize the Petitioner as the exclusive bargaining representative of certain of its supervisory employees on the ground that supervisors are part of management. The Employer contends, in support of its motion to dismiss the petition, that the supervisors involved in this proceeding are not em- ployees within the Ineaning of the Act. The Board has rejected this contention in a number of cases involving foremen comparable to those who are the subject of this proceeding. The Board has held that fore- men in respect to their own terms and conditions of employment are employees within the meaning of Section 2 (3) of the Act.' This conclusion has been affirmed by the United States Supreme Court.' Accordingly, the Board finds that for the purposes of this proceeding, the supervisors herein considered are employees within the meaning of Section 2 (3) of the Act. The Board finds that a question affecting commerce has arisen con- cerning 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 ; THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES The Petitioner seeks a unit composed of all foremen, general fore- men, and salaried special assignment men employed by the Employer I See Matter of Soss Manufactating Company. 56 N L R B 348, Matter of Packard Motor Cai Company, 61 N L It B 4, and 64 N L R B 1212, Matter of The B F Good- rich Company, 65 N I, R B 294 Matter of L A Young Spring & Wire Corporation, 65 N L R B 298 Matter of Simmons Company, 65 N L R. I: 984. Matter of The Midland Steel Pioducts Company (Parish & Bingham Division), 65 N L R B 997, and Matter of Jones cC Laughlin Steel Corporation (Vesta-Shannopin Coal Division), 66 N. L R. B. 386. 2 Packard Motor Car Co ' Al L R B . 157 F (2d) 80 (C C A 6). THE TIMKEN DETROIT AXLE COMPANY 95; in its Plants 1, 2, and 9 in Detroit, Michigan, and Plant 8 in Melvin- dale, Michigan, excluding similarly classified supervisors in the Em- ployer's general office, clerical, technical, and engineering departments._ As indicated above, the Employer contends that (1) the Petitioner is. not independent of the UAW, which represents the Employer's pro- duction and maintenance employees; (2) a unit of the personnel in- volved herein would not effectuate the policies of the Act and would' be contrary to the public interest; and (3) the unit sought is in any event inappropriate. With respect to the latter contention, the. Employer argues that the proposed unit includes several levels of supervision. The Employer argues that the Petitioner is not independent of the UAW, which represents the Employer's rank and file employees, al- though the record is barren of any evidence that supports this conten- tion. In accord with previous decisions in which the Board made- similar determinations with respect to locals of the Foreman's Associa- tion of Ameriea,3 the Board finds that the Petitioner is an independent unaffiliated labor organization, organized for the exclusive purpose of representing supervisory employees of the Employer. For reasons stated in the Young case,4 the Board finds no merit in the contention of the Employer that a unit of its supervisors would not effectuate the policies of the Act. The Board has held that super- visors, as employees, are entitled to be placed in some bargaining unit.' The only remaining question to be considered is that of the appro- priate grouping of the employees affected by the petition. The Em- ployer, without waiving its argument that no unit of foremen is, appropriate, objects to the inclusion of general foremen, foremen, and salaried special assignment men in the same unit. It further contends that, in any event, the general foremen and the salaried special assign- ment men should be given the opportunity by separate voting to, determine whether or not they desire to be included within the same unit with foremen. The Employer conducts its manufacturing operations in the three, Detroit plants and in its fourth plant located at Melvindale, Michigan,, about di/2 miles from the other plants. The supervisory hierarchy in immediate charge of these operations consists of the president, price president in charge of manufacturing, 4 general superintendents, 3, assistant superintendents, 40 general foremen, 220 foremen, and about 10 salaried special assignment men. General -superintendents are 3 See Matter of L A. Young Slit in q & W2ne Corporation, supra; Matter of The B F Good- rich Company, 65 N. L R B 294 , and Matter of The Midland Steel Products Company, 65 N. L R B 997. 4 Matter of L A Younq Spring & Wire Corporation, 65 N L R B 298 6 See Matter of L. A Young Spring & Wire Corporation, supra; and Matter of The B. F. Goodrich Company, supra. 73992G-47-vol 71-8 9 6 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD ,each in charge of an entire plant and are generally assisted in the per- foi-mance of their duties by assistant superintendents. General fore- men supervise from 2 to 6 departments of a plant whereas foremen are each in charge of a department. Salaried special assignment men generally function as "roving trouble shooters." Foremen are respon- sible to general foremen who, in turn, together with salaried special .assignmentmen, are supervised by assistant plant superintendents and ,plant superintendents. All general foremen, foremen, and salaried special assignment men have the same general privileges and advantages shared by all salaried ,and supervisory employees alike. All are paid on a weekly salary basis, receive the same vacation privileges, and are covered by the same retirement insurance plan. General foremen are paid about 15 percent 71ess than assistant superintendents and 20 percent more than foremen and salaried special assignment men. General foremen are responsible for maintaining the production schedules of their departments and, in this connection, each supervises from 4 to 12 foremen and an average of 225 rank and file employees. Although general foremen ordinarily do not have direct contact with rank and file employees, the record reveals one instance in which a general foreman is serving in a dual capacity as general foreman and foreman. General foremen have the power effectively to make recom- mendations to their superintendents regarding changes in the status ,of their subordinate foremen. They also rate their subordinates on forms which are sent to the personnel department, and represent the Employer in the second stage of the grievance procedure affecting the rank and file employees. Two general foremen are also selected pe- riodically from a rotating list for the purpose of serv-ung on the Employer's Labor Relations Committee which participates in the third stage of the grievance procedure. A general foreman, on his .own initiative, may grant to his foremen time off and leaves of absence for short periods. However, he must obtain the approval of his plant superintendent before he is permitted to work his subordinates over- time. During absences from the plant, a general foreman is usually -replaced by another general foreman or an assistant superintendent. In addition, general foremen attend monthly meetings called by man- agement and which foremen attend only on special occasions. Foremen are responsible for the quality and quantity of production in their respective departments and their duties are entirely super- visory in nature. Each supervises from 10 to 40 rank and file em- ployees. Foremen have the power effectively to recommend changes in the status of their subordinates. A foreman also initiates, by requi- sition, the employment of additional personnel needed within his THE TIMKEN DETROIT AXLE COMPANY 97 department and interviews applicants for jobs therein who are re- ferred to him by the personnel department. Foremen regularly prepare efficiency rating forms for their subordinates and represent the Employer in the initial stage of the grievance procedure affecting the rank and file employees. Each foreman initiates time studies with respect to new operations within his department. In addition, fore- men attend regular weekly foremen's meetings at which production problems are discussed and they are also consulted with regard to matters affecting their departments under consideration by the Labor Relations Committee which handles the third stage of the rank and file employee grievance procedure. Salaried special assignment 6 men generally serve directly under assistant plant superintendents or plafit superintendents. As indi- cated above, their duties are somewhat diversified, their main function being to serve as "trouble shooters." Their salaries are approxi- mately the same as those of foremen. Although the Employer does not consider salaried special assignment men as being within the category of regular supervisors, contending, in this connection, that they exercise very little, if any, supervisory authority over rank and file employees, one witness 7 testified that his duties and responsibilities while serving as a special assignment man were not changed upon his reclassification to the position of foreman. In both capacities he supervised the work of the same rank and file workers performing the same duties. In view of the foregoing, including the small size of the general foremen group in contrast to the foremen and salaried special as- signment men group, and the existence of a line of cleavage between these groups with regard to such matters as the former's supervisory authority over the latter, and the transmission of information solely to general foremen concerning the Employer's over-all production schedules and controllable costs, there are some advantages to the Board's establishing a separate unit of general foremen if they should desire that result. On the other hand, the common back- ground, interests, and problems of the general foremen, foremen, and salaried special assignment men establish a community of interest which makes it inadvisable for the Board to exercise its own power to reach that result. A majority of the Board s believes, however, that before general foremen are included in a unit consisting of sev- 9 Salaried special assignment men are one of two classifications of special assignment men. The other consists of hourly paid employees who perform work such as "errand run- ning," etc These employees are included within the coverage of the rank and file collective bargaining contract with the UAW 7 William Johns 9 Chairman Herzog and Member Red nolds See Mr. Reynolds' separate concurring opin- ion herein 0 9S DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD eral levels of supervisory employees, they should be given the oppor- tunity, by separate voting, to determine whether or not they desire to be included in the same unit with foremen and salaried special as- signment men. Therefore, no final determination shall be made at this time pending the elections directed hereinafter.9 Accordingly, the Board shall direct that two separate elections by secret ballot be held among the employees in the voting groups de- scribed below : (1) All general foremen employed by the Employer at its Plants 1, 2, and 9 in Detroit, Michigan, and Plant 8 in Melvindale, Michigan, excluding those in the general office, clerical, technical and engineer- ing departments. (2) All foremen and salaried special assignment men employed by the Employer at its Plants 1, 2, and 9 in Detroit, Michigan, and Plant 8 in Melvindale, Michigan, excluding those in the general office, clerical, technical and engineering departments. As stated above, the Board will make no final determination of the appropriate unit pending the results of the elections. DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining with The Timken Detroit Axle Company, Detroit, Michi(ran, elections by secret ballot shall be con- ducted 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 Seventh 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 voting groups described in Section IV, above, who were employed during the pay- roll period immediately preceding the date of this Direction, includ- ing 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 them- selves 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 elections, to determine within each voting group whether or not they desire to be represented by Foreman's Association of America, Chapter No. 10, Unaffiliated, for the purposes of collective bargaining. ° Matte) of The Midland Steel Products Company , 65 N L. R B 997 , Matter of 1371ll1ams 0+1-O-1Iatrc Drprsrona of Erueka Williams Corpo,ation, 67 N L It L' 1091 Matter of Lock- heed Aircraft Corporation, 70 N L R B 606 0 THE TIMKEN DETROIT AXLE COMPANY 99 AIR. JOHN Al. HousTON. concurring separately : For the reasons stated in my concurring opinion m Matter of The Midland Steel Products Company, cited above, which I find equally applicable here, I would find appropriate a unit consisting of general foremen, foremen, and salaried special assignment men, and would not order separate elections. In all other respects, I agree with Chair- man Herzog's opinion. AIR. JAMES J. REYNOLDS, Ja., concurring separately: To the extent indicated by my concurring opinion in Matter of Chicago Pneumatic Tool Company,70 I concur in this decision. Fur- ther, I agree with Chairman Herzog that separate voting groups be established for general foremen, and for foremen and salaried special assignment men. 10 72 N L R B 7