Perfection Spring and Equipment Co.

In the Matter Of PERFECTION SPRING AND EQUIPMENT COMPANY, EMPLOYER and INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS, DISTRICT 54, PETITIONER Case No. 8-B-24128.-Decided February 13, 1947 Mr. Henry B. Johnson, of Cleveland, Ohio, for the Employer. Messrs. Howard Tausoh and Hugh McLean, of Cleveland, Ohio, for the Petitioner. Messrs. Stanley Kwiat and Clinton Bell , of Cleveland, Ohio, for the Intervenor. Mr. Edmund J. Flynn, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at Cleveland, Ohio, on November 12, 1946, before Thomas E. Shroyer, hearing offi- cer. At the hearing, the Petitioner moved to exclude the Intervenor from the ballot in any election directed in this proceeding, and the hearing officer referred this motion to the Board for ruling. In view of the Intervenor's past contractual relations with the Employer, the motion is hereby 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 - I. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER Perfection Spring and Equipment Company, an Ohio corporation having two plants in Cleveland, Ohio, both of which are involved in this proceeding, is engaged in the manufacture, sale, and servicing of auto parts. The annual value of the finished products handled by the Employer is in excess of $250,000, of which approximately 10 percent is shipped to points outside the State of Ohio. The annual value of raw materials used by the Employer is in excess of $150,000, of which approximately 25 percent is shipped from points outside the State of Ohio. The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. 72 N. L It. B., No. 115. _ 590 PERFECTION SPRING AND EQUIPMENT COMPANY II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED , 591 The Petitioner is a labor organization, claiming to represent em- ployees of the Employer. International Union, United Automobile, Aircraft and Agricultural Implement Workers of America, Local 217, herein called the Inter- venor, is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, claiming to represent employees of the Employer. III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION Shortly after June 2, 1946, the Petitioner requested the Employer to recognize it as exclusive bargaining agent of the Employer's employees. The Employer refused to grant this request. On October 15, 1946, the Petitioner filed the petition in this proceeding. On June 2, 1941, the Employer and the Intervenor executed a col- lective bargaining contract which provided that it was to remain in effect for 1 year, and from year to year thereafter in the absence of, written notice to terminate given by either party thirty (30) days before any anniversary date. The Intervenor contends that this con- tract, having automatically renewed itself before the Petitioner ad- vanced its rival claim to representation, constitutes a bar to this pro- ceeding. But the record establishes that, since later in 1941, the contract has not been administered by the Intervenor, and that the Intervenor has ceased to act as representative of the employees of the Employer. Since December 1941, there have been no weekly meetings between the Employer and the Intervenor, as provided in the contract, for the purpose of presenting grievances. There is no evidence that dues have been collected by the Intervenor, since 1944. Moreover, the employees, old and new alike, have been unaware of any activity by the Inter- venor for well over a year. In 1945, when a wage increase for the Employer's employees was sanctioned by the Wage Stabilization Board, the Employer did not consult the Intervenor, and the Inter- venor did not join in the application for the increase which was filed with the War Stabilization Board. The Employer knows of no shop committee, shop steward, or union officers at its Cleveland plants.' These facts establish that before the 1946 operative date of the automatic renewal clause in the contract between the Employer and the Intervenor, the latter had become defunct insofar as the employees IIn 1944 the Intervenor's shop steward at the Employer's plants was promoted to a supervisory position and resigned his stewardship At that time he arranged with another employee to have him serve as acting shop steward It does not appear that this employee was active in his role as acting shop steward. When, in June or July 1946, the Inter- venor's business agent and another of its representatives learned that the acting shop steward was also to be promoted to a supervisory position, they met with the acting shop steward and an unidentified employee and received promises from the latter that lie would designate a successor to the acting shop steward So far as the record shows no successor was ever appointed, nor did the Intervenor take any further steps in the matter. 731242-47-vol. 72--39 592 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD involved in this proceeding are concerned. At that crucial date, there- fore, the Intervenor did not truly represent the Employer's employees. Hence, we are of the opinion that in 1946 the Intervenor was incapable of renewing the contract in their behalf. We conclude that the 1941 contract is not a bar to a current determination of representatives.2 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, maintenance, and service employees at both of the Em- ployer's Cleveland, Ohio, plants, including watchmen and the ship- ping clerk, but excluding office employees, truck drivers, sales em- ployees, and all supervisory employees with authority to hire, pro- mote, 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 mean- ing of Section ,9 (b) of the Act. DIRECTION OF ELECTION As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Perfection Spring and Equip- ment Company, Cleveland, Ohio, 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 Eighth Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Sec- tions 203.55 and 203.56, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 4, among the employees in the unit found appro- priate 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 rein- stated prior to the date of the election, to determine whether they desire to be represented by International Association of Machinists, District 54, or by International Union, United Automobile, Aircraft and Agricultural Implement Workers of America, Local 217, C. I. 0., for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by neither. 2 Matter of Koppers Company, Inc, Wooil Preseriing Ditiision, 72 N L R B 31 We find it unnecessary to pass upon the Petitioner's contention that the 1941 contract is a "member-only" agreement and for this reason is no bar to this proceeding