Aluminum Co. of America

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Sep 25, 1942

44 N.L.R.B. 490 (N.L.R.B. 1942)

In the Matter of ALUMINUM COMPANY OF AMERICA, LAFAYETTE WORKS
and AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR
- . Case No..R-1201.Decided September 25, 1942
Jurisdiction : extruded aluminum pipes and tubes manufacturing industry.
Investigation and Certification of Representatives : existence of question: re-
fusal to accord recognition to either of two rival unions; election necessary.
Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : all production and maintenance
employees, timekeepers, dispatchers, and truck drivers, excluding clerical em-
ployees, and supervisory employees with power to hire and/or fire, supervisory
employees with power to recommend hiring and/or firing, and the plant
protection force.'
Stuart, Deval, Braniga'i and Ball, by Mr. Michael T. Ricks, of
Lafayette, Ind., for'the Company.
Mr. Frank S. Pryor, of Frankfort, Ind., Mr. S. A. Sweeney, of
Indianapolis, Ind., Mr. Harold Graybill, of Lafayette, Ind., and Mr.
Charles Childress, of West Lafayette, Ind., for the A. F. L.
- Mr. John J. Play fair, of Lafayette, Ind., Mr. Harold L. McNamara,
of Indianapolis, Ind., and Mr. Gerald Fendrick, of Watson, W. Va.,
for the C. I. O.
Mr. Harry H. 'Ii:uskin, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
• Upon. petition duly filed by American Federation of Labor, herein
called the A. F. L., alleging that a question affecting commerce had
arisen concerning the representation of employees of Aluminum Co-m--7',
pany,of America, Lafayette Works,, Lafayette, Indiana, herein called
the Company, the National Labor Relations Board provided for an
appropriate hearing upon due notice before Arthur R. Donovan, Trial
Examiner.' Said hearing was held at Lafayette, Indiana, on August
25, 1942. The Company, the A. F. L., and International Union,
Aluminum Workers of America, affiliated with the Congress of Indus-
trial Organizations, herein called the C. I. 0., appeared, participated,
and were afforded full opportunity to be heard,'to examine and cross-
examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues.
44 N L. R. B., No 86.
490
ALUMINUM COMPANY OF AMERICA 491
The Trial Examiner's rulings, made at the hearing, are, free from
prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
- Aluminum Company of America; Lafayette Works, is( a - Pennsyl-
vani.l corporation engaged at Lafayette, Indiana, in the manufacture
of extruded aluminum pipes and tubes. The raw materials used an-
nually by the Company in its manufacturing operations are valued
at more than $1,000,000, of which more than 50 percent represents
shipments from outside the State of Indiana. The Company's annual
sales exceed $1,000,000, and more than 50 percent of its finished
products is shipped outside the State. The Company admits that it
is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor
Relations Act. -
II., THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
American Federation of Labor is a labor organization admitting to
membership employees of the Company.
International Union, Aluminum Workers of America, is a labor,
organization ; affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations,
admitting to membership employees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The parties stipulated at the hearing that a question concerning,
representation has arisen as a result of the Company's refusal to recog-
nize any labor organization as the bargaining representative of its
employees until and unless such labor organization is so certified by
the Board.
A statement and a supplemental statement of the Regional Direc-
tor, in evidence, and a statement made at the hearing by the Trial
Examiner show that both the A. F. L. and the C. I. O. represent a sub-
stantial number of employees in the unit herein found to be appro-'
priate.1
1 The Regional Director reported that the A F L submitted 1,378 membership-appli-
cation cards and authorization cards, of o'luch 26 were duplicates. 152 bore names of per-
sons not appearing on the eligibility list of May 30 , 1942 , furnished by the Company,
and 7 bore printed signatures , while the remaining 1,193 cards were dated as follows :
1 in July 1941; 2 in August 1941, 24 in December 1941, 4 in February 1942, 105 in March
1942, 331 in April 1942 , 446 in May 1942 , 179 in June 1942 . and 101 undated ; that the
1,193 cards bore signatures which appeared to be genuine ; that all the names appearing
on the 1 , 193 cards also appeared on the eligibility list of employees furnished by the
Company; that the C . I. O . submitted 143 membership cards, of which 23 cards bore
492- ' DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
We find that' a' question affecting commerce has arisen- concerning
the representation of employees of the Company, within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.,
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The parties agreed that all production and maintenance employees
and truck drivers, excluding clerical and supervisory employees with
power to hire and/or fire, supervisory employees with power to rec-
ommend hiring and/or firing, and the plant protection 'force, consti-
tute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining. The
only controversy relates to timekeepers and dispatchers.2
Timekeepers are employed by the Company to check time clocks
and to work on the employees' time cards. They perform no manual
labor. Some timekeepers work at desks in the tube mill near the pro-
duction employees, while other timekeepers work in offices designated
specifically for clerks. It is not clear from the record, however,
whether the latter are stationed in separate buildings or in those
structures devoted to production. There is no distinction in the du-
ties of the timekeepers in the tube mill and those working in the offices.
The C. I. G. admits timekeepers to membership and seeks to, have
them included in the bargaining unit. It claims that in its' collective
bargaining contracts covering other plants of the Company time-
keepers, as well as dispatchers, have been included in a unit of produc-
tion and maintenance employees. The A. F. L. and the Company
contend that timekeepers should be excluded on the ground that they
take no part in production work. Although their duties are clerical
in nature, the work of the timekeepers is closely related to that of the
production and maintenance employees and the interests of all three
groups in conditions of employment are allied. We shall, accordingly,
include timekeepers in the bargaining unit.3
names of persons not appearing on the eligibility list while the remaining 120 cards were
dated as follows : 15 in February 1942 , 18 in March 1942, 6 in April 1942 , 28 in May 1942,
31 in June 1942, and 22 undated; and that all the 120 cards bore signatures which ap-
peared to be genuine . The eligibility list contains 4,129 names of production and mainte-
nance employees.
The Regional Director reported further that-the C I 0 submitted 248 additional inem-
bersbip cat (Is which were spot-checked and found to be dated as follows. 1 prior to 1942,
161 in 1942, and 86 undated ; and that the names appearing on 80 percent of the cards
also appeared on the eligibility list of May 30, 1942
The Trial Examiner reported that the C. I 0 submitted 221 additional application-
cards dated during 1942 ; that none of these cards was a duplicate of any card previously
presented to the Regional Director; and that the names appearing on the 221 cards also
appeared on the Company's pay roll of May 30, 1942
2At the hearing, the A F. L raised the issue as to whether or not messengers and crane'
workers or crane helpers , whom it also considered as dispatchers , were to be included in
the,unit. All the,parties agreed , however, and we find, that messengers shall be excluded
from ,, and crane workers or crane helpers shall be included in, the unit hereinafter found
to be appropriate.
i See Matter of The Edwaid Valve cC Manufacturing `Company, , Inc. and Local Union:
No. 2498, Steel Workers Organizing Committee, 38 N. L R B. 428.
ALUMINUM COMPANY OF AMERICA 493
Dispatchers ai•e clerks whose duty it is to allot the work to the vari-•
ous production operations , to issue orders describing the type of work
to ,be done, and to see that the raw materials and finished products
move through the plant. They perform no manual labor.
The C. I. O. seeks to include dispatchers in the bargaining unit for
the same reasons offered in support of its contention as to the tiine-
keepers. The Company maintains that dispatchers should be excluded
because their work is entirely clerical and is in no way involved in the
production process . The A. F. L. agrees with the Company that dis-
patchers should be excluded but on the ground that their work is super-
visory in nature. We do not consider the dispatchers,to be supervisors.
Since their work . is closely connected with the production operations,
since their interests are similar •to those of production and maintenance
employees, and, further, since it would appear that the C. I. O. is
bargaining 1for.them at other plants . of the Company where they are
included in production and maintenance units , we. shall include dis-
patchers in the bargaining unit.
We find that all production and maintenance ' employees, time-
keepers, dispatchers, and truck drivers, excluding clerical employees,
and supervisory employees with power to hire and/or fire, supervisory
employees with power to recommend hiring and/or firing, and the
plant protection force, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes
of collective bargaining, within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the
Act.
V. THE DETER MINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES '
We shall direct that the question concerning representation which
has arisen be resolved by an election by secret ballot among the em-
ployees in the appropriate unit who were employed during the pay-
roll period unmediately preceding the date of the Direction of Elec-
tion herein, subject to the limitations and additions set forth in the
Direction.
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 Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, it is
hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Aliuninum Coin-
pany of America , Lafayette Works, Lafayette , Indiana, 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 of Election,
under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the
494 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Eleventh 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 the employees in the unit found appro-
priate in Section IV, above, who were employed during the pay-roll
period ii iecliately preceding the date of this Direction, including
employees who did not work during such pay-roll period because tney
were ill or on vacation or in the active military service or training
of the United States, or temporarily laid off, but excluding employees
who have since quit or been discharged for cause, to determine
whether they desire to be represented by American Federation of
tabor or by International Union, Aluminum Workers of America,
affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining, or by neither.
MR. WM. M. LEISERSON took no part in the consideration of the
above Decision and Direction of Election.