Fruehauf Trailer Co. of California

In the Matter of FRUEHAUF TRAILER COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA and UNITED AUTO, AIRCRAFT AND AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA, LOCAL 811, C. I. O. Case No. R-3089-Decided December 18, 1941 Jurisdiction : motor trailer and body manufacturing industry. Investigation and Certification of Representatives : existence of question: refusal of Company to accord union recognition ; collective bargaining agree- ment which has been abandoned by both the Company and the union, no b'ar to ; name of competing organization which made no showing of representation at the hearing, but which conducted joint organizational campaign with an- other union, to be placed on the ballot jointly with that union, but with leave to withdraw upon notice within five days ; election necessary. Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : all production and maintenance employees in the manufacturing and sales departments and in the service shops of the Company, including truck drivers, but excluding supervisors, and salaried and office employees. Mr. Stanley A. Phipps, of Los Angeles, Calif., for the Company. Gallagher cC Wirin, by Mr. Harry A. Kaplan, of Los Angeles, Calif.; for the U. A. W. Mr. John V. Cralley and Mr. A. H. Peterson, of Los Angeles, Calif., for the I. A. M. Mr. Lew C. G. Blix, of Los Angeles, Calif., for the Teamsters. Mr. Marvin C. Wahl, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION STATEMENT OF THE CASE On or about August 25; 1941, United Auto, Aircraft and Agricul- tural Implement Workers of America, Local 811, C. I. 0.,' herein called the U. A. W., filed with the Regional Director for the Twenty- first Region (Los Angeles, California) a petition alleging that a ques- tion, affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of Fruehauf Trailer Company of California, Los Angeles, i By motion granted at the hearing, the name of the organization was amended to read as appears above. ,37 N. L. R B., No. M. 757 433257-42-vor. 37--w 758 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD California, herein called the Company, and requesting an investiga- tion and certification of representatives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act. On September 30, 1941, 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 September 30, 1941, the Regional Director issued a notice of hearing, copies of which were duly served upon the Company and the U. A. W., and upon International Association of Machinists, Welders and Production Workers, Local 311, A. F. of L., herein called the I. A. M., and International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, Local 495, of the Garage, Automotive and Service Station Employees, A. F. of L., herein called the Teamsters, labor organizations claiming to represent employees directly affected by the investigation.2 Pursuant to notice, a hearing was held on October 8, 1941, at Los Angeles, California, before Maurice J. Nicoson, the Trial Examiner duly designated by the Chief Trial Examiner. The Company and the U. A. W. were represented by counsel'and'the I. A. M. and Teamsters by their representatives; all parties participated in the hearing. Full opportunity to' be, heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bear ing on the issues was afforded all parties. During the course of the hearing, the Trial Examiner made various 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 Fruehauf Trailer Company of California, a California corporation, is engaged in the, manufacture and sale of commercial- motor trailers. and bodies.' It maintains and operates plants in Los Angeles, herein, involved, and in Fresno and San Diego, California, Seattle, Wash- ington, and Portland, Oregon'. During the first 6 months of 1941, it purchased products valued at more than $500,000; 'more than $380,000 worth of the products were shipped from 'places outside _ the State of California. During the same period, the Company's 2 Notice of hearing was also duly served upon the Trailer Employees Service Association, but that organization did not appear at the hearing. FRUEHAUF TRAILER- COMPANY 759 net sales- amounted to more than $1,800,000. Of this amount, ap- proximately $490,000 was received from the sale of products shipped to places outside of California. The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. H. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED United Auto, Aircraft and Agricultural Implement Workers of America, Local 811, is a labor organization affiliated with the Con- gress of Industrial Organizations, admitting to membership em- ployees of the Company. International Association of Machinists, Welders and Production Workers, Local 311, is a labor organization affiliated with the Ameri- can Federation of Labor, admitting to membership employees of the Company. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehouse- men and Helpers of America, Local 495, of the Garage, Automotive and Service Station Employees, -is a labor 'organization affiliated' with the American Federation of Labor, admitting to membership employees of the Company. III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION On or about July 20, 1941, the Company, rejected the I. A. M.'s request for recognition as the exclusive representative of its em- ployees within a claimed unit, contending that the ,I. A. M. did not represent a majority of such employees, and that it had an out- standing collective bargaining agreement with the Trailer Employees Service Association. Thereafter the U. A. W. requested the Com- pany to negotiate a contract with it, but the Company likewise refused, claiming that the U. A. W. did not represent a majority of its employees. It appears that in 1938, the Company entered into an agreement' with the Trailer Employees Service Association which contained a provision that either party, on 90 days' notice to the other party, could terminate the agreement.4 While neither party gave notice of its intention to terminate the agreement, a representative of the Company testified that both parties had ceased observing the agree- ment since August 14, 1941. Moreover, an "agreement" was-intro- duced in evidence, signed by the officers of the Trailer Employees Service Association, which provided that the Association "shall hereby not' have any rights of collective bargaining" at the Com- 'The Company refused to sign an agreement , presented by the I A. Al and the Teainsters, under which the ,Company would recognize the I A M and the Teamsters as the joint collective bargaining representative of its employees. 4 That agreement was not made a part of the record , nor do the terms appear therein. 760 - DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD pang's plant and that in the event of an election in the instant proceedings it did not desire to appear upon the ballot. A letter to the same effect, addressed to the Regional Director in Los Angeles and signed by the president of the Trailer Employees Service Asso- ciation, was introduced in evidence. In addition, as indicated above, the Trailer Employees Service Association did not appear at the hearing, although it was served with notice of hearing. A statement by the Regional Director introduced at the hearing shows that the U. A. W. and the I. A. M. represent a substantial- number of employees in the unit, hereinafter found to be-appropriate.5 We find' that a question has arisen concerning the 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 com- merce and the free flow of commerce. V. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT The Company and the U. A. W. contend that all production and maintenance employees in the manufacturing and sales departments and in the service shops of the Company, including truck drivers, but excluding supervisors having the power to hire and discharge and salaried and office employees, constitute an appropriate unit. The I. A. M. contends that all production employees, excluding executive officers, supervisors, and confidential employees comprise an appropriate unit. The Teamsters claim all trucklnen, lubrication operators, gas-pump island operators, stock- and parts-room men, pick-up and delivery men, swampers, teamsters' helpers, and ware- -housemen - as an.' appropriate unit. However, as` noted' previously the Teamsters made no showing of membership and we cannot, under the circumstances, attach any weight to its claim for a separate unit. 5 The Regional Director's statement shows that 224 persons were members in good stand- ing of the U A. W. as of September 21, 1941. The names of 203 of said persons appealed on the Company 's September 4, 1941 , pay roll. The I A . M submitted to the Regional Director 51 authorization cards dated in July , August, and September 1941 All of the signatures on the cards appeared to be genuine, and 37 of them corresponded to names of persons appearing on the Company's September 4, 1941 , pay roll. The Teamsters submit- ted no evidence to the Regional Director in support of its claim to represent employees of the Company. FRUEHAUF TRAILER COMPANY 761 The, unit claimed by the U. A. W. and the Company is the same as that covered by the. contract, discussed in Section III, supra, between the Company and the Trailer Employees Service Associa- tion. _ Moreover, the I. A. M. and the Teamsters have conducted a joint organizational campaign at the Company's plant and, as noted previously, submitted a contract to the Company providing that they should be recognized as a joint representative; and, it appears, the units which they seek cover substantially the same employees as those whom the U. A. W. and the Company claim comprise an appropriate unit. Upon the basis of the entire record, we are of the opinion and find that all production and maintenance employees in the manufacturing and sales departments and in the service shops of the Company, including truck drivers, but excluding supervisors 6 and salaried and office employees,' constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining and that such unit will insure to employees of the Company the full benefit of -their right to self- organization and to collective bargaining and otherwise will effectu- ate the policies of the Act. VI. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES We find that the question concerning representation which has arisen can best be resolved by an election by secret ballot. In view of the fact that the Teamsters and the I. A. M. conducted-a joint organizational campaign and, at the hearing, sought units which, taken together, encompass substantially the same employees as those who fall within the unit found appropriate herein, we shall permit the Teamsters to appear jointly with the'I. A. M. upon the ballot as an alternative choice to the U. A. W. If the Teamsters desires to withdraw from the ballot, it shall notify the Regional Director to that effect within five (5) days after the receipt of this Decision and Direction of Election, and its name shall thereupon be omitted from the ballot. In accordance with our usual practice, we shall direct that those eligible to vote in the election shall be the employees within the appropriate unit who were employed by the company during 6 The U. A W asked to exclude supervisors "having the power to hire and discharge" while the I. A. M stated merely that it would exclude "supervisors" without adding the limitation specified by the U. A. W. We are of the opinion that all supervisors, whether or not they have "the power to hire and discharge," should be execluded ' The I A M did not specifically ask for the exclusion of "salaried and office" employees, but urged the exclusion of "confidential" employees. It did not, however, specify which employees it considered "confidential" nor does it appear on the record that there are any "confidential" employees among those included in the appropriate unit Those employees of the Company who might fall within the classification of "confidential" employees are, in all probability, among the "salaried and office" employees whom we have excluded from the appropriate unit. Under all, the circumstances, we shall construe "confidential" employees to come within the exclusion of "salaried and office" employees. 762 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of the Direction of Election, subject to the limitations and additions set forth in the Direction. - 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 rep- resentation of employee of Fruehauf Trailer Company of California, Los Angeles, California, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act. - 2. All production and maintenance employees in the manufac- turing and sales departments and in the service shops of the Com- plant, including truck drivers, but excluding supervisors and salaried and office employees 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,'and pursuant to Article III, Section 8, of National Labor Relations . Bo and 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 bar- gaining with Fruehauf Trailer Company of California, Los Angeles, California, 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 Twenty-first Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board and subject to Article III, Section 9, of said Rules and Regulations, among all production and maintenance employees in the manufacturing and sales departments and in the service shops of the Company who were employed by the Company during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of this Direction of Election, including truck drivers and em- ployees who did not work during such pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation or in the active military service or training of the United States, or temporarily laid- off, but excluding super-- visors, salaried and office employees, and employees who have since quit or been discharged for cause, to determine whether they desire FRUEHAUF TRAILER COMPANY 763 to be represented by United Auto, Aircraft and Agricultural Im- plement Workers of America, Local 811, C. I. 0., or by International Association of Machinists, Welders and Production Workers, Local 311, A. F. of L., and International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauf- feurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, Local ' 495, of the Garage, Automotive and Service' Station Employees, A. 'F: 'of L., for the purposes of collective bargaining,' or by neither. - MR. GERARD D: REILLY took no part in the consideration of the above Decision and Direction of Election.