Airlastic Rubber Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 12, 1948

77 N.L.R.B. 60 (N.L.R.B. 1948)

In the Matter of AIRLASTIC RUBBER COMPANY, EMPLOYER and UNITED
RUBBER, CORK, LINOLEUM AND PLASTIC WORKERS OF AMERICA, C. I. 0.,
PETITIONER
Case No. 13-R-4537.-Decided April 1 2,1948
Mr. Robert TV. MacDonald, of Chicago, Ill., for the Employer.
Mr. Manson L. James, of Chicago, Ill., for the Petitioner.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION. OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at Chicago,
Illinois, on January 28, 1948, before John P. Von Rohr, hearing
officer.' The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free
from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations
Board makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
Airlastic Rubber Company, a Delaware corporation, is engaged in
the manufacture of automobile weatherstripping at its sole plant
located at Chicago, Illinois. During the past year, the Employer
purchased raw material, consisting chiefly of crude rubber and syn-
thetics, valued in excess of $25,000, of which about 80 percent was
shipped to the plan from points outside the State of Illinois. During
the same period the Employer manufactured products valued
in excess of $25,000, of which about 75 percent was shipped to points
outside the State of Illinois.
The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the Act.
1 Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act, the
National Labor Relations Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to
a three-man panel consisting of Board Members Houston, Reynolds , and Gray.
77 N. L. R. B., No. 8.
60
AIRLASTIC RUBBER COMPANY
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED 2 _
61
The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress of
Industrial Organizations, claiming to represent employees of the
Employer.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Employer refuses to recognize the Petitioner as the exclusive
bargaining representative of employees of the Employer until the Peti-
tioner has been certified by the Board in an appropriate unit.
We find that a question affecting commerce exists concerning the
representation of employees of the Employer, within the meaning of
Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The parties agree that production and maintenance employees at
the Employer's Chicago plant, excluding all office clerical employees
and supervisors, constitute an appropriate unit. The Employer, how-
ever, would exclude five maintenance employees on the ground that
they are watchmen. The Petitioner would include them as mainte-
nance employees.
The five employees in dispute are on the designated pay roll as main-
tenance employees. During the regular workweek, they serve as
janitors and are under the same supervision as other production and
maintenance employees. However, during the weekend and on any
emergency shut-down of the plant, the men are employed on shifts
solely as watchmen. Inasmuch as the employees in dispute serve as
janitors during the normal workweek and their employment as watch-
men is irregular and restricted to times when the plant is not in opera-
tion, we find that they are employed as janitors and not as guards with-
in the meaning of Section 9 (b) (3) of the Act, as amended 3 Accord-
ingly we shall include them as maintenance employees in the unit.
We find that all production and maintenance 4 employees at the
Employer's Chicago, Illinois, plant, but excluding office clerical em-
ployees, guards, and supervisors, constitute a unit appropriate for the
purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9
(b) of the Act.
2 Rubber and Plastic Workers Union, Local 82, a labor organization affiliated with the
American Federation of Labor, moved to intervene . Inasmuch as this labor organization
did not show any colorable claim of representation among the employees herein concerned,
the hearing officer properly denied this request.
'Matter of Radio Corporation of America, 76 N L. R. B. 826; Matter of Steelweld
Equipment Company, 76 N L: R B. 831 ; Matter of C. V. Hill & Company, Inc, 76
N L R B 158.
' Included among the maintenance employees in the unit are the janitors discussed above.
62 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the
purposes of collective bargaining with Airlastic Rubber Company,
Chicago, Illinois, 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 Thirteenth Region, and subject to Sections 203.61
and 203.62 , of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regula-
tions-Series 5, among the employees 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 , 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 , and also ex-
cluding employees on strike who are not entitled to reinstatement, to
determine whether or not they desire to be represented by United Rub-
ber, Cork, Linoleum and Plastic Workers of America, C. I. 0., for
the purposes of collective bargaining.
MEMBER REYNOLDS took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Direction of Election.