The B. F. Goodrich Co.

In the Matter of TILE B. F. GOODRICH COMPANY a d FOREMAN'S ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, CHAPTER #98 Case No. 8-R-1874.-Decided January 8, 1946 Messrs. L. M. Buckingham, James Olds, C. D. Russell, and George Ohio, for the Company. K'ilmon, of Akron, Messrs. William Valiance and Bernard E. Konopka, of Detroit, Mich., for the Union. Mr. Bernard Goldberg, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION STATEMENT OF THE CASE Upon a petition duly filed by Foreman's Association of America, Chapter #98, herein called the Union, alleging that a question affect- ing commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of The B. F. Goodrich Company, Akron, Ohio, herein called the Company, the National Labor Relations Board provided for an ap- propriate hearing upon dice notice before Thomas E. Shroyer, Trial Examiner. The hearing was held at Akron, Ohio, on July 19, 20, 23, and 24,1945. The Company and the Um on appeared and participated. All parties were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues. The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. All parties were afforded an opportunity to file briefs with the Board. The Conmpany's request for oral argument is hereby denied. Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following : FINDINGS OF FACT 1. TILE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY The B. F. Goodrich Company, a New York corporation, operates an office and plant in Akron, Ohio, where it is engaged in the manu- facture and distribution of rubber and rubber-like products. During 65 N. L. R. B., No. 58. 294 THE B. F. GOODRICH COMPANY 295 1943, the Company manufactured finished products valued in excess of $100,000,000, of which approximately 75 percent represented ship- ments to points outside the State of Ohio. During the same year, the Company purchased raw materials valued in excess of $50,000,000, of which approximately 75 percent represented shipments from points outside the State. We find that the Company is engaged in commerce within the mean- ing of the National Labor Relations Act. II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED Foreman's Association of America, Chapter #98, is an unaffiliated labor organization admitting to membership supervisory employees of the Company. III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION On April 21, 1945, the Union requested the Company to meet with it for the purpose of recognition and the negotiation of a collective bargaining contract. On April 28, 1945, the Company declined the request. The Company contends that the foremen involved in this proceeding are not "employees" within the meaning of Section 2 (3) of the Act, but are rather "employers" under the definition contained in Section 2 (2). The question of the status of foremen under the Ace was dis- cases and we there cussed in all its aspects in the So.ss 1 and Paaelcaii dl 2 held that foremen in relation to their employer are "employees." This conclusion was reaffirmed in the recent Young case.3 In accord with our previous determinations, we find that the foremen involved in this proceeding are "employees" within the meaning of the Act.4 A statement of a Board agent, introduced into evidence at the hear- ing, indicates that the Union represents a substantial number of em- ployees in the unit hereinafter found appropriate.' We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the representation of employees of the Company, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. IV. TIIE APPROPRIATE UNIT The Union has petitioned for a unit of floor foremen, shift foremen, chief schedulers, senior schedulers, chief dispatchers, and senior dis- Matter of Soss Manufacturing Company, 56 N. L. It B. 348. Matter of Packard Motor Car Company , 61 N. L it. B 4, and 64 N . L. it. B 1212. a Matter of L. A. Young Spring & Wire Corporation, 65 N. L. R. B. 298. 4 See N L R. B. v Armour and Co (C. C A 10, Nov 5, 1945 ), 17 L it. R 372 ; Jones & Laughlin Steel Corporation v. N L. it. B, 146 F. (2d) 833 (C C. A. 5) , N. L. R. B v. Skinner & Kennedy Stationery Company, 113 P. (2d) 667 (C. C. A. 8). 5 The Field Examiner reported that the Union submitted 802 application cards ; and that the names on 685 of the cards also appeared on the Company's current pay roll which contained the names of 908 employees in the appropriate unit. 296 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD patchers. In the alternative, the Union has suggested that two units, one limited to floor and shift foremen and the other to chief schedulers, senior schedulers, chief dispatchers, and senior dispatchers might be appropriate. The Company has made no contention as to the com- position of the unit or units. Rather does it assert that because the foremen, dispatchers and schedulers here involved are part of manage- ment, a unit of such employees is inappropriate. The Company at- tempts to distinguish this case from the Packard case on the ground that the supervisors in this proceeding have duties, powers and re- sponsibilities greater than those of the supervisors in that case and cannot be classified as mere "traffic cop-," of industry. The Company has also set forth various evils which it alleges will flow from the unionization of its foremen. The issues raised in this proceeding were considered in extenso in the Young case.° We there held, as we do here, that foremen a,e "employees" within the meaning of Section 2 (3) of the Act; that, as "employees," they are entitled to be placed in some appropriate unit under Section 9 (b) ; that the type of industry in which the foremen are employed is immaterial; and that the nature of the duties and responsibilities of the foremen is relevant only insofar as it bears on the question of proper grouping of the foremen for collective bargain- ing purposes. The Company has made no contention that the Union, which admits only supervisory employees into membership and is unaffiliated with any other labor organization, is not independent of the United Rubber Workers of America, CIO, which represents production and mainte- nance workers, clerical employees, and guards in separate units. As in previous cases, we find that the Union is an independent, unaffiliated labor organization organized for the exclusive purpose of represent- ing supervisory employees.' As noted above, the Company has not objected to the composition of either of the alternative units requested by the Union. We there- fore find, in accord with the primary request of the Union, that all floor foremen, shift foremen, chief schedulers, senior schedulers, chief dispatchers, and senior dispatchers employed by the Company in its Akron plant, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of col- lective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act. A'. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES We shall direct that the question concerning representation which has arisen be resolved by an election by secret ballot among employees 6 Matter of L. A. Young Sprang & Wire Corporation, supra. a Matter of L. A. Yonog Sprang & Wire Corporation, supra; Matter of Packard Motor Car Company, supra. THE B. F. GOODRICH COMPANY 297 in the appropriate unit who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of the Direction of Election herein, subject to the limitations and additions set forth in the Direction. DIRECTION OF ELECTION By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National Labor Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor Rela- tions Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3, as amended, it is hereby DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa- tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with The B. F. Good- rich Company, Akron, 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 Article III, Sections 10 and 11, of said Rules and Regulations , among em- ployees 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 Fore- man's Association of America , Chapter #98, for the purposes of collective bargaining. MR. GERARD D. REILLY took no part in the consideration of the above Decision and Direction of Election.