Hyatt Bearings Division, General Motors Corporation

In the Matter of HYATT BEARINGS DIvISIoN ,. GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION and HYATT EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION, INC. Case No. R-1.336.-Decided August 10, 1939 Roller Bearings Manufacturing Industry-Investigation of .Representatives: controversy concerning representation of employees : employer agreeable to recognizing petitioning union only for its signed members-Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining: all hourly paid employees including student employees- Election Ordered Mr. Martin I. Rose and Mrs. H. D. Shea, for the Board. Mr. George D. Brooks and Mr. John Thomas Smith, of New York City, for the Company. Mr. David Sarbone of Newark, N. J.; for the Association. Mr. David Clydesdale , of Newark, N. J., for the I. A. M. Mr. Benjamin Rubenstein, . of New York City,. for. the .A. F. of L.- U. A. W. Liebman, Robbins, Pressman & Leider, by Mr. Harold Cammer, of New York City, for the C. I. O.-U. A. W. Mr. Theodore W. Kheel, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION STATEMENT OF THE CASE On October 31, 1938, Hyatt Employees Association, Inc., herein called the Association, filed with the Regional Director for the Second Region (New York City) a petition alleging that a question affecting. commerce had arisen concerning, the representation Of employees of the Hyatt Bearings Division of General Motors Corporation, Harri- son, New Jersey, herein called the Company, and requesting an in- vestigation and certification of representatives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act. On February 9, 1939, the National-Labor Relations Board, herein called the Board, acting pursuant to Section •9 (c) of-the Act- and Article III, Section 3, of National .Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series. 1, as amended, ordered-:an investigation and authorized the Regional .Director to- conduct it and to provide for an. appropriate hearing upon due notice. 14 N. L. R. B., No. 32. 441 442 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD On February 27, 1939, the Regional Director issued a notice of hear- ing, copies of which were duly served upon the Company, upon the Association, upon International Association of Machinists, Lodge 340, affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, herein called the I. A. M., and upon International Union, United Automobile Workers of America, herein called the U. A. W., labor organizations claiming to represent employees directly affected by the investigation. Pur- suant to the notice, a hearing was held on March 20, 22, and 31, and April 3, 1939, at New York City, before Mapes Davidson, the Trial Examiner duly designated by the Board. The Board, the Company, the Association, and the I. A. M. were represented by counsel and participated in the hearing. The group of the U. A. W. affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, herein called the A. F. of L.- U. A. W., appeared by counsel on March 31, 1939, and announced that it would file a charge alleging that the Company had violated Section 8 (2) of the Act in its relations with the Association and requested that the hearing be adjourned. The Trial Examiner denied his request and his ruling is hereby affirmed. The A. F. of L.- U. A. W. filed its charge on April 4, 1939. On June 29, 1939, the charge was dismissed by the Regional Director. Except to the extent stated above the A. F. of L.-U. A. W. took no part in the proceeding. On the last day of the hearing, a group of the U. A. W., affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, herein called the C. I. 0.- U. A. W., appeared by counsel solely for the purpose of stating its intention to file a charge alleging a violation of Section 8 (2) of the Act. No charge, however, was filed by the C. I. O.-U. A. W. Full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues was afforded all parties. During the course of the hearing, the Trial Examiner made several rulings on motions and on objections to the admission of evidence. The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner and finds that no prejudicial errors were committed. The rulings are hereby affirmed. Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following FINDINGS OF FAOT I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY Hyatt Bearings Division is an unincorporated division of General Motors Corporation, a Delaware corporation with principal offices and places of business in New York City and Detroit, Michigan. Hyatt Bearings' Division is located at Harrison, New Jersey. It is engaged in the manufacture and processing of roller bearings and HYATT BEARINGS DIVISION, GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION 443 similar products. From July 1, 1938, to January 1, 1939, raw ma- terials amounting in value to $566,426.00 were shipped to it from places outside the State of New Jersey. This constituted 99 per cent of all raw materials used. During the same period, it shipped finished products amounting in value to $5,311,800.00 to places outside the State of New Jersey. This constituted at least 991/2 per cent of the gross volume of all sales by the Hyatt Bearings Division. H. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED Hyatt Employees Association, Inc., is a labor organization admit- ting to membership all hourly employees of the Hyatt Bearings Division of the Company, excluding employees connected with or representing the management. International Association of Machinists, Lodge 340, is a labor organization affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, ad- mitting to membership all hourly employees of the Company. International Union, United Automobile Workers of America, affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, and International Union, United Automobile Workers of America, affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, are labor organizations. They tendered no proof with respect to their rules governing eligi- bility to membership. III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION A committee of the Association met with representatives of the Company in the early part of August 1938, and on several. occasions during the ensuing 6 weeks. Among other* things, the Union re- quested the Company to recognize it as the exclusive representative of all the hourly employees. The Company denied this request al- though it expressed its willingness to recognize the Association as the representative of its signed members. We find that a question has arisen concerning representation of employees of the Company. IV. THE EFFECT OF THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION UPON COMMERCE We find that the question concerning representation which has arisen, occurring in connection with the operations of the Company described in Section I above, has a close, intimate, and substantial relation to trade, traffic, and commerce among the several States, and tends to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce and the free flow of commerce. 444 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD V. TAE APPROPRIATE UNIT - The Association, the I. A. M., and the Company agreed that all hourly paid employees of the Company constitute an appropriate unit. Neither group of the U. A. W. expressed any view on this subject. The Company, however, would exclude from the unit ap- proximately 50 apprentices whom it considers students and not em- ployees. While the Association did not state for the record its position with respect to these apprentices, the I. A. M. maintained that they should be included within the unit. These apprentices are employed under the following circumstances : As openings become available, the Company selects boys whose aver- age age is from 18 to 20, to enroll in its training school. By con- tract with their parents, the boys undertake to work for 7,200 hours over a period of 3 calendar years. A section of the plant is set aside for their class rooms and machine shop. They have special in- structors under whom they work in the regular production depart- ments of the Company. Such work occupies about - of their time. In addition, they are -taught mathematics, junior engineering, and allied subjects. A formal graduation follows the completion of the course at which time the apprentices are awarded $150. If they so desire, they may continue with the Company. Approximately 57 per cent do continue as employees. While in training, apprentices work part of the time in the regular production -departments of the Company. They are thus brought into close alliance with other hourly employees.' As stated above, the I. A. M. desires to have these apprentices included within the appropriate unit. In light of this request and the circumstances of their work, we will include them. We find that all hourly paid employees of the Company, including apprentices, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collec- tive bargaining and that said unit will insure to employees of the Company the full benefit of their right to self-organization and to collective bargaining, and otherwise effectuate the policies of the Act. VI. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES Neither the Association nor the I. A. M. introduced into evidence any proof of representation and both requested that an election be held in order to settle the question concerning representation. We shall therefore direct an election. We will not include either group of the U. A. W. since neither has requested to be on the ballot. The record • does not reveal whether the Company follows a policy of seniority in laying off men. We will nevertheless permit all em- 'Cf. Matter of Bendix Products Corporation and International Union, United Automo- bile Workers of America, Bendier Local No . 9, 3 N. L. R. B. 682. HYATT BEARINGS DIVISION , GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION 445 ployees who have been temporarily laid off to participate in the elec- tion. We shall direct that the employees of the Company within the appropriate unit who were on the Company's pay roll immediately preceding the date of our Direction of Election herein, excluding those who have since quit or been discharged for cause , but including those who are sick, on vacation ,. or temporarily laid off, shall be eligible to vote. Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following : CONCLusIONs OF LAW 1. A question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the repre- sentation of employees of the Hyatt Bearings Division, General Motors Corporation, Harrison, New Jersey, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act. 2. The hourly paid employees of the Company, including appren- tices, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the National Labor. Relations Act. 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 Rela- tions Act, 49 Stat. 449, and pursuant to Article III, of Section 8, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, it is hereby DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation ordered by the Board to ascertain representatives for the purpose of collective bargain- ing with Hyatt Bearings Division, General Motors Corporation, Harrison, New Jersey, an election by secret ballot shall be con- -ducted within fifteen (15) days from the date of this Direction, under -the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Second Region, acting in this matter as the agent for the National' Labor .Relations Board and subject to Article III, Section 9, of said Rules and Regulations, among the hourly paid employees of the Company, including apprentices, whose names appear on the Company's pay roll immediately preceding this Direction of Election, excluding those .who have since quit or been discharged for cause , but including those who are sick, on vacation, or temporarily laid off, to determine whether they desire to be represented by Hyatt Employees Associa- tion, Inc., or by International Association of Machinists, Lodge 340, affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by neither.