American Air Filter Co., Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 17, 1945

61 N.L.R.B. 604 (N.L.R.B. 1945)

In the Matter Of AMERICAN AIR FILTER COMPANY, INC. and INTER- .
NATIONAL UNION, UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AIRCRAFT AND AGRICULTURAL
IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA, C. I. O.
Case No. 9-R-1733.-Decided April 17, 1945
Messrs. T. M. Galphin , Jr., and W. M. Reed, both of Louisville, Ky.,
for the Company.
Messrs. L. Leonard and Jess B . Moss, both of Louisville , Ky., for the
UAW-CIO.
Mr. J. Darlington Raine , of Louisville , Ky., for the Independent.
Mr. Louis Monas , of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon a petition duly filed by International Union, United Auto-
mobile, Aircraft and Agricultural Implement Workers of America,
C. 1. 0., herein called the UAW-CIO, alleging that a question affecting
commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of
American Air Filter Company, Inc., Louisville, Kentucky, herein
called the Company, the National Labor Relations Board provided for
an appropriate hearing upon due notice before Herbert J. Nester,
Trial Examiner. Said hearing was held at Louisville, Kentucky, on
March 9, 1945. The Company, the UAW-CIO, and United Dust
Control Workers, herein called the Independent, appeared and par-
ticipated, were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to examine and
cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing on the
issues. At the hearing, the Trial Examiner reserved ruling on the
Company's motion to dismiss the petition. For reasons set forth in
Section IV, infra, this motion is denied. The Trial Examiner's rul-
ings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby
affirmed. All parties were afforded an opportunity to file briefs with
the Board.
Upon the entire record in, the case, the, Board makes the following :
61 N. L. R. B., No. 87.
604
AMERICAN AIR FILTER COMPANY, INC.
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
605
American Air Filter Company, Inc., a Delaware corporation having
its principal place of business and plants at Louisville, Kentucky, is
engaged in the manufacture of air filtration and dust collection equip-
ment for civilian and Government use. During 1944, the Company
utilized raw materials valued in excess of $2,000,000, 99 percent of
which originated from sources outside the State of Kentucky. Dur-
ing the same period, the Company manufactured finished products
valued in excess of $8,000,000, 95 percent of which was shipped to
points outside that State.
The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
International Union, United Automobile, Aircraft and Agricultural
Implement Workers of America, affiliated with the Congress of In-
dustrial Organizations, is it labor organization admitting to member-
ship employees of the Company.
United Dust Control Workers is an unaffiliated labor organization
admitting to membership employees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Company has refused to grant recognition to either the UAW-
CIO or the Independent as the exclusive bargaining representative of
certain of its employees until the UAW-CIO or the Independent has
been certified by the Board in an appropriate unit.
A statement of a Board Field Examiner, introduced into evidence
at the hearing, indicates that the UAW-CIO represents a substantial
number of employees in the unit hereinafter found appropriate.'
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 UAW-CIO contends that the appropriate unit should consist of
all, production and maintenance employees of the Company's four
'The Field Examiner reported that the UAW -CIO submitted 276 authorization cards,
267 of which bore the names of persons appearing on the Company's pay roll of February
5, 1945, containing the names of 530 employees in the unit alleged by the UAW-CIO to
be appropriate.
The Independent submitted 60 authorization cards, 58 of which bore the names of
persons appearing on the above-mentioned pay roll.
639678-45-vol. 61-40
606 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
plants with certain agreed inclusions and exclusions. The Company
urges as appropriate two separate units, one embracing employees of
plants 1 and 3, and the other, employees of plants 2 and 5. The In-
dependent takes no position with respect to the appropriate unit.
The Company operates four production plants in Louisville, Ken-
tucky, all located within a radius of 11/2 miles. The land, buildings,
and equipment of plants 1 and 3 are owned by the Company. It
occupies plant 2 under a lease terminating the end of 1945, and it has
possession of plant 5 as a monthly tenant 2 Plants 1 and 3 employ
about 380 persons; and produce and assemble, for the most part,
heavy air filters for industries engaged in war production ; some of
their products are purchased by the Government for naval use.
Plants 2 and 5 employ approximately 140 persons .4 Plant 2 produces
military aircraft air filters and assembles parts furnished by plant 5
which performs some light assembly work, but is operated principally
as an adjunct to plant 2.
The Company argues that the activities at plants 2 and 5 are tem-
porary since it does not anticipate continuing them after the war, that
the operations at plants 1 and 3 are permanent, and that two separate
units are consequently appropriate. However, the UAW-CIO has
extended its organizational activities among the employees in the Com-
pany's four plants. So-called "new" employees have been engaged at
plant 2 since its operations were expanded in 1942, and at plant 5
since that plant was acquired in 1943; in 1942 and 1943 some of the
older employees were transferred to these plants from plant 1. More-
over, inasmuch as the date of the war's termination is uncertain, the
Company's conclusion that opertions at plants 2 and 5 are temporary
is not entirely warranted. We note, furthermore, that wage scales in
all plants do not differ to any great extent, and that job classifications
are similar. One production manager is in charge of production at all
four plants, assisted by an assistant superintendent in charge at each
plant and one personnel manager supervises a common personnel office
for all four plants. Upon the entire record, we are convinced that a
single four-plant unit of all production and maintenance employees of
the Company is appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining.
We, accordingly, find that all production and maintenance em-
ployees of the Company's four plants at Louisville, Kentucky, in-
cluding the assistant head janitor,5 factory clericals, guards,, leadmen,
2 Plants 1 and 2 were in operation before the commencement of the war . In 1942, the
operations of plant 2 were expanded , and plant 3 was acquired , plant 5 was acquired late
in 1943.
3 These plants do not employ any women workers in production operations
4 Plant 2 has about 125 employees , 65 to 70 of whom are women , plant 5 employs 15
persons , 7 or 8 of whom are women.
5 It appears that this employee is not supervisory.
6 Although armed and uniformed , they are not militarized ; nor does the evidence reveal
that they are deputized.
AMERICAN AIR FILTER COMPANY, INC. 607
and inspectors,' but excluding office clerical employees, the laboratory
engineer apprentice, foremen and assistant foremen, and all other su-
pervisory employees with authority to hire, promote, discharge, disci-
pline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or ef-
fectively recommend such action, constitute a unit appropriate for the
purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b)
of the Act.
V. THE DETERMINATION 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 immediately preceding the date of the Direction of Election
herein," subject to the limitations and additions set forth in the
Direction.9
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, and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor Rela-
tions Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3, as amended, it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes' of collective bargaining with American Air
Filter Company, Inc., Louisville, Kentucky, 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 super-
vision of the Regional Director for the Ninth Region, acting in this
matter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject
to Article III, Sections 10 and 11, of said Rules and Regulations,
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 the said pay-roll period because they were ill or on
vacation or temporarily laid off, and including employees in the armed
forces of the United States who present themselves in person at the
polls, but excluding any who have since quit or been discharged for
cause and have not been rehired or reinstated prior to the date of the
election, to determine whether they desire to be represented by UAW-
CIO, or by United Dust Control Workers, for the purposes of col-
lective bargaining, or by neither.
7It appears that leadmen and inspectors are not supervisory employees
The parties requested that eligibility be determined by the pay roll of March 5, 1945
No sufficient reason appears, however, for deviating from our usual practice in this
respect.
8 Both unions requested that they be designated on the ballot as their names appear in
the Direction.