Metal Process Corp.

In the Matter Of METAL PROCESS CORPORATION and INTERNATIONAL UNION, UNITED AUTOMOBILE WORKERS OF AMERICA, AFFILIATED WITH THE CONGRESS OF INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATIONS Case No. R-2254.-Decided January 31, 1941 Jurisdiction : metal plating industry. Investigation and Certification of Representatives : existence of question: re- fusal to accord recognition to union until it had been certified by the Board; election necessary. Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : all production and hourly rate em- ployees of the Company, excluding supervisory officials, office employees, and watchmen, agreement as to. McMahon, Abbott cC Roberts, by Mr. David E. Roberts, of Detroit, Mich., for the Company. Mr. Maurice Sugar, by Mr. Jack M. Tucker, of Detroit-, Mich., for the Union. • Mr. Louis Cokin, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION STATEMENT OF THE CASE On" October 16, 1940, International Union, United Automobile Workers of America, affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Or- ganizations, herein called the Union, filed with the Regional Director for the Seventh Region (Detroit, Michigan) a petition alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representa- tion of employees of Metal Process Corporation, Detroit, Michigan, herein called the Company, and requesting an investigation and cer- tification of representatives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the Na- tional Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act. On November 26, 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 Regu- lations-Series 2, as amended, ordered an investigation and author- ized the Regional Director to conduct it and to provide for an appropriate hearing upon due notice. 29 N. L. R. B., No. 68. 356 METAL PROCESS CORPORATION 357 On January 6, 1941, the Regional Director issued a notice of hear- ing, copies of which were duly served upon the Company and. the Union. Pursuant to notice, a hearing was held on January 13, 1941, at Detroit, Michigan, before Earl R. Cross, the Trial Examiner duly designated by the Board. The Company and the Union were represented by counsel and participated in the hearing. Full oppor- tunity 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 FACT 1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY Metal Process Corporation operates a plant at Detroit, Michigan, where it is engaged in the business of plating metals. The Com- pany stated at the hearing that sufficient of the products plated by it pass in the course of interstate commerce to subject the Company to the jurisdiction of the Board and stated that for the purpose of this hearing it conceded that it was engaged in interstate commerce. II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED International Union, United Automobile Workers of America, is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Or- relation, to trade, traffic, and commerce among the several States and rate employees of the Company, excluding supervisory officials, office employees, and watchmen. III. IHE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION On October 15, 1940, the Union, claiming to represent a majority of the employees of the Company, requested the Company to bar- gain with it as exclusive representative of the employees. The Com- pany refused to' bargain with the Union until it had been certified by the Board. A statement of the Regional Director introduced in evidence shows that the Union represents a• substantial number of the employees in the unit alleged by it to be appropriate.' . We find that a question has arisen concerning the representation of employees of the Company. i The Regional Director's statement shows that 16 employees whose names appear on the Company pay roll of October 25, 1940, have signed application cards in the Union. There are approximately 25 employees in the alleged appropriate unit. DECISIONS- OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 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 labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce and the free flow of commerce. V. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT The Union and the Company agreed at the hearing that the appro- priate unit should consist of all production and hourly rate employ- ees of the Company, excluding supervisory officials, office employees, and watchmen. We see no reason for departing from such unit. We find that all production and hourly rate employees of the Company, excluding supervisory officials, office employees, and watch- men, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining, and that said unit will insure tc employees of the Com- pany 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 The Union seeks to be certified on the basis of the record. The evidence at the hearing shows that the Company employs approxi- mately 25 employees in the appropriate unit. In support of its claim of majority representation, a representative of the Union testified that 18 employees had signed application cards in the Union. The Com- pany stated that it would leave the question of certification up to the Board. Neither the application cards of the Union nor the pay roll of the Company were introduced in evidence at the hearing. Under these circumstances, we believe that the question concerning representation can best be resolved by means of an election by secret ballot. - a The Union and the Company agreed at the hearing that, in the event the Board directs,an election, eligibility to vote should be ex- tended to the employees whose names appear on the Company's pay roll immediately preceding the date of the Direction of Election herein and who have been in the employ of the Company thirty (30) days at that time. We find that the employees of the Company eligible to vote in'the election shall be those in the appropriate unit who were employed, during the pay-roll period immediately preced- ing the date of the Direction of Election herein and who were in the employ of the Company thirty (30) days at that time, including METAL PROCESS CORPORATION 359 employees who did not work during such pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation and employees who were then or have since been temporarily laid off, excluding ,those who have since -quit or been discharged for cause. 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 Metal Process Corporation, Detroit, Michi- gan, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act. 2. All production and hourly rate employees of the Company, excluding supervisory officials, office employees, and watchmen, con-' stitute 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 Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, and pursuant to Article III, Section 8, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, it is hereby DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation authorized by the Board to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargain- ing with Metal Process Corporation, Detroit, Michigan, 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 Seventh Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National Labor Re- lations Board, and subject to Article III, Section 9, of said Rules and Regulations, among all production and hourly rate employees of the Company who were employed during the pay-roll, period immediately preceding the date of this Direction and were in the employ of the,Company thirty (30) days at that time, including employees who did not work during such pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation and employees who were then or have since been temporarily laid off, but excluding supervisory officials, office employees, watchmen, and employees who have since quit or been discharged for cause, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented by International Union, United Automobile Work- ers of America, affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organiza- tions, for the purposes of collective bargaining.