Products Manufacturing & Engineering Corp.

In the Matter of PRODUCTS MANUFACTURING & ENGINEERING CORPORA- TION, EM ►'I.oYr:i; and UNITED ELECTRICAL, RADIO & MACHINE WORK- ERS of AMERICA, CIO, PETITIONER Case No. 1 R-4146.Decided April 8,19/7 Mr. Maurice E. Bur r, of Chicago, Ill., for the Employer. Mr. Leo Turner, of Chicago, Ill., for the Petitioner. Mr. Joseph M. Jacobs, by Mr. Jacob N. Gross, of Chicago, Ill., for the Intervenor. Mr. George H. Yayh jianz, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at Chicago, Illinois, on February 3. 1947, before Max Rotenberg, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prej- udicial error and are hereby affirmed. Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations Board makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT I. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER Products Manufacturing & Engineering Corporation, an Illinois corporation having its principal place of business in Chicago, Illinois, operates two manufacturing plants, known as the Armitage and Wabansia plants, respectively. At the Armitage plant, it is engaged in general machine work, and at its Wabansia plant, it is engaged in stamping and assembling component parts for radios. Only the Wabansia plant is involved in this proceeding. During 1946, the Employer purchased for use at these plants raw materials valued at approximately $40,000, about 15 percent of which originated outside the State of Illinois. During the same period, it sold finished prod- ucts valued at approximately $200,000, about 15 percent of which was shipped out of the State. The Employer admits, and we find, that it is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. 73 N. L. R. B, No. 42. 233 234 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD II. THE `ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, claiming to represent employees of the Employer. International Brotherhood of Electrical `Yorkers, Local B-1031, herein called the Intervenor, is a labor organization affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, claiming to represent employees of the Employer. 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 aplDropriate unit. The Intervenor asserts that a cross-check conducted pursuant to a cross-check agreement with the Employer is a bar to this proceeding. On December 9, 1916, the Intervenor and the Employer orally agreed that the latter would recognize the former as the bargaining representative of the employees involved in this proceeding if a cross- check, by a captain in the Chicago police department, of evidence of representation submitted by the Intervenor showed that the latter represented a majority of the employees. On December 12, 1946, the captain conducted the cross-check and reported to the Employer that the Intervenor did represent such a majority. On the following day, the Employer and the Intervenor started negotiations fora collective bargaining agreement. On December 14, 1946, the Petitioner notified the Employer of its claim to represent the latter's employees and on December 18, filed the present petition. Thereafter, on February 1, 1947, the Employer and the Intervenor entered into a collective bar- gaining contract for a 1-year term. Neither the Intervenor nor the Employer contends that this agreement is a bar. The Intervenor argues that the same effect should be given to the cross-check conducted by the police captain pursuant to oral agree- ment as the Board gives to its own certification following an election. In previous cases, the Board has refused to give this effect to cross- checks conducted by a conciliator of the United States Conciliation Service' and by one of its own Regional Directors 2 where the results of the cross-check were not posted on the employer's premises for a reasonable period of time so that either the employees or other in- terested parties might have the opportunity of protesting these results before they became final. In the present case, there is no evidence of such posting. Under these circumstances, we refuse to accord this 1 Matter of Electro Metallurgical Company, 69 N L R. B. 772. See also Matter of Vic- tory Chemical Company, 60 N L R B 997 2 Matter of Joe Hearin, 68 N L R B. 150 and 66 N. I, R B 1276 PRODUCTS MANUFACTURING & ENGINEERING CORPORATION 235 card check the'same status as a dertification by the Board ' following an election. Accordingly, Ave find that the oral cross-check agreement and the card check conducted pursuant thereto do not bar a present determination of representatives. 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 accordance with an agreement of the parties, that,all production'and maintenance employees of the Employer at its Wa- bansia plant, including watchmen and factory clerical employees, but excluding office clerical 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, con- stitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act. DIRECTION OF ELECTION 3 As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the pur- poses of collective bargaining with Products Manufacturing & Engi- neering Corporation, Chicago, Illinois, 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 Thirteenth Region, acting in this mat- ter 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 they desire to be represented by United Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers of America, CIO, or by International Brotherhood of Electrical Work- ers, Local B-1031, AFL, for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by neither. CHAIRMAN HERZOG took no part in the consideration of the above Decision and Direction'of Election. Any participant in the election herein may, upon its prompt request to, and approval thereof, by the Regional Director , have its name removed from the ballot