Dominion Electrical Manufacturing Co., Inc.

In the Matter of DOMINION ELECTRICAL MANUFACTURING COMPANY, INC. and INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS LOCAL 453 (AFL) Case No. R--.046.Decided October 8, 1940 Jurisdiction : electrical appliance manufacturing industry. Investigation and Certification of Representatives: existence of question: dis- pute as to appropriate unit ; refusal to accord recognition to union ; election unnecessary. Contract renewed between Company and one union held to be no bar to representation proceeding instituted by rival union where all of the evidence indicates that at the time of renewal of the contract the contracting union no longer represented a majority of employees in the unit covered by the contract and where prior to such renewal both the Company and the con- tracting union had notice of the claims of the rival union. Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : all machinists, tool and die makers and apprentices. Mr. A. G. Sounder, of New Castle, Pa., and Mr. Paul R. Hutchings, of Washington, D. C., for the I. A. M. Mr. Edwin Beal, of Mansfield, Ohio, for the United. Mr. Samuel Shapiro, of Mansfield, Ohio, for the Company. Mr. Ben Law, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES STATEMENT OF THE CASE On July 3, 1940, International Association of Machinists,. Local 453, affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, herein called the I. A. M., filed with the Regional Director for the Eighth Region (Cleveland, Ohio) a petition alleging that a question affecting com- merce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of Dominion Electrical Manufacturing Company, Inc.,' Mansfield, Ohio, herein called the Company, and requesting an investigation and certi- fication of representatives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act. On August 1 Erroneously designated in the petition as Dominion Electrical Mfg., Inc. 27 N. L. R. B., No. 134. 722 DOMINION ELECTRICAL MANUFACTURING COMPANY, INC. 723 12, 1940, 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 2, as amended, ordered an investigation and authorized the Regional Director to conduct it and to provide for an appropriate hearing upon due notice. On August 15, 1940, the Regional Director issued a notice of hearing, copies of which were served upon the Company, the I. A. M., and United Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers of America, herein called the United, an organization alleged in the petition to have an interest in the subject matter of the proceeding. On August 20, 1940, the Regional Director issued a notice of postponement of the hearing from August 24, 1940, as set at first, to September 4, 1940. This notice was served upon each of the above-mentioned parties. Pursuant to the notice, a hearing was held on September 4, 1940, at Mansfield, Ohio, before Max W. Johnstone, the Trial Examiner duly designated by the Board. The Company was represented by its personnel manager, the United by an international representative, and the I. A. M. by its business agent. All three parties participated in the hearing. 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 objections to, the admission of evidence. The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Exam- iner and finds that no prejudicial errors were committed. The rulings are hereby affirmed. At the close of the hearing, the United moved that the petition filed by the I. A. M. be dismissed. The Trial Examiner reserved ruling on this motion for the Board. The motion is hereby denied. On September 18, 1940, pursuant to leave granted to all parties by the Board, the United filed a brief which has been considered by the Board. Pursuant to notice, a hearing was had for the purpose of oral argument before the Board in Washington, D. C., on September 19, 1940. The I. A. M. was represented by counsel and participated in the argument. The United and the Company did not appear for the oral argument. Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following : FINDINGS OF FACT I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY Dominion Electrical Manufacturing Company, Inc., an Ohio cor- poration, is engaged at its plant in Mansfield, Ohio, in the manufa- ture of electric irons, toasters, -waffle irons, sandwich grills, and 724 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD kindred products. Approximately 80 per cent of the raw materials used by the Company in its manufacturing processes come from outside the State of Ohio. Approximately 95 per cent of the finished goods produced by the Company are sold outside the State of Ohio. In 1939 the Company used raw materials valued at about $650,000 and produced finished goods valued at about $1,350,000. The Company concedes that it is engaged in interstate commerce within the meaning of the Act. IL THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED International Association of Machinists, Local No. 453, is a labor organization affiliated with the American Federation of Labor. It admits to membership employees of the Company. United Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers of America is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations. Local No. 706 of the United is a labor organization which admits to membership employees of the Company. III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION Local No. 706 first started to. organize among the production and maintenance employees of the Company, exclusive of polishers, buff- ers, platers, and platers' helpers,2 in 1936. In the same year, or in 1937, the Company and Local No. 706 entered into a contract, the nature of which does not appear in the record. Sometime in 1937, during the pendency of a strike called by Local No. 706 among the production and maintenance workers, the 16 or 18 men then employed in the tool and die room joined Local No. 706. The tool and die room employees had not previously been organized. On July 1, 1938, the Company and Local No. 706 entered into a second contract by which the former recognized the latter as "sole collective bargaining agency for its members." This contract provided that it should be in effect from July 1, 1938, until July 1, 1939, and that it should thereafter continue in effect from year to year unless either .party should give the other written notice of a desire for change within "ample" time before any expiration date. In September 1938 Local No. 706, with a view toward proving majority representation for the purpose of securing a revision of its contract mentioned above, distributed authorization cards among the employees of the Company. Apparently a majority of them signed Since 1935 Metal Polishers , Buffers, Platers & Helpers, Local 39, a labor organization affiliated with the American Federation of Labor , has been the undisputed bargaining representative for all polishers, buffers, platers , and platers' helpers employed by the Company. This organization appeared at the hearing but chose not to intervene in the proceeding. ' DOMINION ELECTRICAL -MANUFACTURING COMPANY, INC. 725 such cards. On October 28, 1938, the Company and Local No. 706, at the request of the latter, revised the contract between them by striking the, words "for its members" from the recognition clause. The apparent intent and effect of this revision was to constitute Local No. 706 the sole collective bargaining agency -for all employees of the 'Company, except the polishers, buffers, platers, and platers' helpers,3 and supervisors, watchmen, office, clerical and salaried em- ployees.4 Other than this broadening of the recognition clause, there was no change in the contract. Prior to the revision of the contract between the Company and Local No. 706, the employees in the tool and die room had, on Octo- ber 1, 1938, ceased to pay any dues to Local No. 706. During the summer of 1939 all but one or two of these employees joined the I. A. M. Thereafter, the I. A. M. requested both the Company and Local No. 706 to recognize it as the exclusive bargaining representa- tive of a unit composed of the employees in the tool and die room.5 Apparently as a result of such overtures by the I. A. M., on October 20, 1939, the president and secretary of Local No. 706 wrote to the Company, stating that a majority of the machinists, tool and die makers and their helpers and apprentices were members of the I. A. M. and wished to be represented by it, and asking that the Company allow a modification of the contract between it and Local No. 706 to exclude such employees from the unit for which the latter organization was recognized as bargaining agency. What reply, if any, the Company made to this letter does not appear. On November 14,,1939, the I. A. M. again asked representatives of Local No. 706 for the exclusion of machinists, tool and die makers and helpers from the larger unit. On this occasion the international representative of the United refused to consent to such an exclusion. On April 6, 1940, the I. A. M. once more addressed its plea to the Company. On July 2, 1940, the Company replied that it could not grant the I. A. M. recognition unless the unit it requested should be found appropriate by the Board. On July 3, 1940, the I. A. M. filed the petition which instituted this proceeding. It is clear that, aside from the above-mentioned letter of October 20, 1939, written by officials of Local No. 706 to the Company, neither Local No. 706 nor the Company gave notice to the other prior to either July 1, 1939, or July 1, 1940, of a wish to abandon or modify s See footnote 2, supra. Local No. 706 does not admit supervisors , watchmen, office, clerical and salaried em- ployees to membership. 6 The date of the first of such requests made by the I. A M is not clear from the record. On August 14, 1939, however, the I. A. M filed a petition with the Board for investigation and certification of representatives for a unit composed of the machinists , tool and die makers and apprentices employed by the Company . This petition was dismissed by the Board on January 3, 1940. 726 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD the contract between them. At the hearing both the Company and 'Local No. 706 contended that, pursuant to its terms, the contract was automatically extended for one year after each of the above dates. Under the circumstances of this case the contract is not a bar to further proceedings. Since the summer of 1939, the I. A. M. has been designated by a majority of the employees within the unit which it contends is appropriate as their representative for purposes of collective bargaining.6 Prior to July 1, 1940, both the Company and Local No. 706 had full knowledge of the claims of the I. A. M. with respect to both the appropriate unit and representation by it in such unit.? Further, all of the evidence indicates that by July 1, 1940, Local No. 706 no longer represented a majority of the em- ployees within the unit theretofore covered by its contract with the Company. A statement by a Field Examiner for the Board concern- ing claims of authorization for the purpose of representation was introduced in evidence. In this statement the Field Examiner re- ported that Local No. 706 had produced no books or records con- cerning representation, but that its acting president signed an affi- davit to the effect that during the year ending September 3, 1940, Local No. 706 collected no dues, held no meetings, had no committee set up in the plant, had not met with the Company on any grievance and had no membership among the employees except its acting officers. On October 5, 1939, the United suspended Local No. 706 in accordance with a section of its constitution which provides, "any local failing to send in the monthly report and per capita and initia- tions due within 40 days from the date of delinquency shall be suspended." We find that a question has arisen concerning the representation of employees of the Company. V. 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 9 At the time of the hearing the Company had in its employ 13 men within the unit which the I. A. M. contends is appropriate . The I. A. M. introduced in evidence authorization cards signed by 12 of the 13 employees Of the authorization cards , 9 were signed in June 1939, 2 in August 1939, and 1 in March 1940. All of the parties stipulated that each of the 12 employees signing an authorization card subsequently joined the I. A. M. and that all of them were members in good standing at the time of the hearing. There is also un- disputed evidence that all but one or two of the machinists, tool and die makers and helpers employed by the Company during and after the summer of 1939, but not at the time of the hearing, had joined the I. A. M. 7 See Matter of Colonie Fibre Company, Inc. and Cohoes Knit Goods Workers Union No. 21514, A F. of L 9 N. L R. B. 658. DOMINION ELECTRICAL MANUFACTURING COMPANY, INC. 727 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 com- merce and the free flow of commerce. VI. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT At the time of the hearing there were 13 employees of the Company within the unit of machinists, tool and die makers and apprentices which the I. A. M. contends is appropriate. These 13 employees work in a separate department, partitioned off from the rest of the plant by means of a wire fence. They are engaged in the repair of machinery and dies and in the construction of new dies. They do little or no regular production work. All of the evidence indicates, as shown above, that Local No. 706 did not represent a majority of the employees of the Company when its contract with the Company was automatically renewed on July 1, 1940. Moreover, it is clear that for approximately 9 months prior to that time Local No. 706 had ceased to function and that its contract with the Company was for all practical purposes "dead." During the same period the I. A. M. maintained an active organization among the machinists, tool and die makers and apprentices and made re- peated efforts to obtain recognition as their bargaining representative. The unit requested by the I. A. M. is suitable for the purposes of collective bargaining. The preference of a majority of the employees within such unit for representation by the I. A. M. is clear. Under all of these circumstances we find that the machinists, tool and die makers and apprentices employed by the Company at its Mansfield, Ohio plant, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining and that such unit will insure to employees of the Com- pany the full benefit of their right to self-organization and to collec- tive bargaining and otherwise effectuate the policies of the Act. VI. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES As previously stated,8 the parties stipulated at the hearing that 12 of the 13 employees within the unit contended for by the I. A. M. are members of the I. A. M. Local No. 706 makes no claim of membership or authorizations within such unit. Under these circumstances an election is unnecessary. We find that the I. A. M. has been desig- nated and selected by a majority of the employees in the unit herein found to be appropriate as their representative for the purposes of collective bargaining. It is, therefore, the exclusive representative 8 See footnote 6, supra. 728 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD of all employees in such unit for the purposes of collective bargaining, and we will so certify. 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 Dominion Electrical Manufacturing Com- pany, Inc., Mansfield, Ohio, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act. 2. All machinists, tool and die makers and apprentices employed by the Company at its Mansfield, Ohio, plant, constitute a unit ap- propriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the mean- ing of Section 9 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act. 3. International Association of Machinists, Local No. 453, affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, is the exclusive repre- sentative of all the employees in such unit for the purposes of col- lective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (a) of the National Labor Relations Act. CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National Labor Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Re- lations Act, 49 Stat. 449, and pursuant to Article III, Sections 8 and 9, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations- Series 2, as amended, IT IS HERESY CERTIFIED that International Association of Machinists, Local No. 453, affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, has been designated and selected by a majority of all persons em- ployed as machinists, tool and die makers and apprentices at the Mansfield, Ohio, plant, of Dominion Electrical Manufacturing Com- pany, Inc., as their representative for the purposes of collective bar- gaining, and that, pursuant to Section 9 (a) of the Act, International Association of Machinists, Local No. 453, affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, is the exclusive representative of all such em- ployees for the purposes of collective bargaining in respect to rates of pay, wages, hours of employment, and other conditions of employment.