072 NLRB 480
Modern Machine & Pattern Co.
In the Matter of J. J. ROURKE, D/B/A MODERN MACHINE & PATTERN
COMPANY, EMPLOYER and UNITED STEELWORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO,
,PETITIONER
Case No. 11-R-1003.-Decided February 7, 1947
Mr. C. A. Rourke, of Terre Haute, Ind., for the Employer.
Mr. Harry E. Burns, of Terre Haute, Ind., for the Petitioner.
Mr. Carl Maddox, of Indianapolis, Ind., for the Molders.
Mr. Frank Poit, of Cincinnati, Ohio, for the Molders.
Miss Eleanor Scliwartzbacli, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon an amended petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held
at Terre Haute, Indiana, on December 6, 1946, before Clifford L.
Iardy, hearing officer.
The hearing officer's rulings made at the hear-
ing 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. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
J. J. Rourke, an individual, ^/a Modern Machine & Pattern Com-
pany, operates an aluminum foundry at Terre Haute, Indiana. Dur-
ing the past 12 months, the Employer bought material, consisting
principally of aluminum, amounting in value to over $250,000, more
than 75 percent of which was shipped to the plant from points outside
the State of Indiana.
During the past 12 months, sales of the Em-
ployer's products exceeded $500,000, over 75 percent of which was
shipped outside the State of Indiana.
The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
II.
THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress
of Industrial Organizations, claiming to represent employees,of the
Employer. '
72 N L R B, No. 85
480
MODERN MACHINE & PATTERN COMPANY
481
The International Molders & Foundry Workers Union of North
America, herein called the Molders, is a labor organization affiliated
with the American Federation of Labor, claiming to represent em-
ployees of the Employer.
III. TILE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
Prior to the hearing in this proceeding, the Petitioner asked the
Employer to recognize the Petitioner as the exclusive bargaining
representative of the Employer's employees.
The Employer refused,
alleging that a contract between the Employer and the Molders con-
stituted a bar.
The Employer and the Molders entered into a contract to remain in
full force and effect until January 14, 1947.1 Since the contract has
now expired, we find that the contract is no bar to a determination of
representatives, pursuant to the petition filed herein.
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 the agreement of the parties, that all
production and maintenance employees, excluding office and clerical
employees, foremen, and all other supervisory employees with au-
thority 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 ELECTION
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining with J. J. Rourke, d/b/a Modern Ma-
chine & Pattern Company, Terre Haute, Indiana, 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 Ninth 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
1 The record does not disclose the date on which the contract was executed
The contract
contains no provision for automatic renewal
482
DECISIONS
OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
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 Steel-
workers of America, CIO, or by International Molders & Foundry
Workers Union of North America, AFL, for the purposes of collective
bargaining, or by neither.