Brust Tool Mfg.Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 8, 1941

34 N.L.R.B. 24 (N.L.R.B. 1941)

In the Matter of BRUST TOOL MFG. Co. and DIE AND TOOL MAS.ERs
LODGE No . 113, OF THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS
(A. F. L.)
Case No. R40744.-Decided August 8, 1941
Jurisdiction : tool manufacturing industry.
Investigation and Certification of Representatives : existence of question: re-
fusal to accord union recognition until it is certified by the Board ; election
necessary.
Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : production and maintenance em-
ployees, including tool designers, excluding supervisory employees, superin-
tendent, foremen, office and clerical employees.
Fyffe & Clarke, by Mr. Albert J. Smith, of Chicago, Ill, for the
Company.
Mr. Arthur A. Netre f a, of Chicago, Ill., for the Union.
Mr. Marvin C. Wahl, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On June 12, 1941, Die and Tool Makers Lodge No. 113 , of the Inter-
national Association of Machinists (A. F. L.), herein called the
Union, filed with the Regional Director for the Thirteenth Region
(Chicago, Illinois ) a petition alleging that a question affecting com-
merce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of Brust
Tool Mfg. Co .,' Chicago, Illinois, herein called the Company, and
requesting an investigation and certification of representatives, pur-
suant to Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat.
449, herein called the Act. On July 8, 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' Rela-
tions 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 July 10 , 1941 , the Regional Director issued a notice of hearing,
copies of which were duly served upon the Company , the Union, and
i At the hearing, the name of the Company was corrected to read as appears above.
34 N. L. R. B., No. 2,
24
33RUST MFG. CO. 25
United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America, affili-
ated with the C. I. 0.2 Pursuant to notice, a hearing was held on
July 17, 1941, at Chicago, Illinois, before Charles F. McErlean, the
Trial Examiner duly designated by the Chief Trial Examiner. The
Company was represented by counsel, the Union by its representative;
both 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 all
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
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Brust Tool Mfg. Co. is an Illinois corporation engaged in the manu-
facture of tools, dies, gauges, and special machinery and fixtures.
Steel and castings are the principal raw materials which it uses. For
the 6 months period ending June 30, 1941, the Company purchased
$26,000 worth of such materials. During that period, the Company
sold manufactured products valued at approximately $300,000, of
which 61 percent were shipped to points outside the State of Illinois.
H. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
Die and Tool Makers Lodge No. 113, of the International Associa-
tion of Machinists is a labor organization affiliated with the American
Federation of Labor which admits to membership employees of
the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRES.:NTATION
On June 11, 1941, the Union's representative requested the Com-
pany to enter into a collective bargaining agreement with it. The
Company refused to do so until the Union was certified by the Board
as the exclusive bargaining representative of the Company's em-
ployees. A statement on the record by the Trial Examiner shows
that the Union represents a substantial number of employees in the
unit hereinafter found to be appropriate.3
S The latter union neither appeared nor was represented at the hearing.
3 The statement shows that the petitioner submitted 76 membership application cards
to the Trial Examiner, 37 of which were dated between April and July, 1940, and 39 of
which were undated. Sixty-nine of the cards bore genuine, original signatures , and 57 of
those appeared on the Company 's June 16, 1941, pay roll , which contained 86 names in all.
26 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
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 commerce
and the free flow of commerce.
V. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Union contends that all production and. maintenance employees;
including tool designers, but excluding supervisory employees, the
superintendent, foremen, and office and clerical employees constitute
an appropriate unit. The Company does not take any position as
to what employees should be included within the unit.
We find that all production and maintenance employees of the
Company, including tool designers, but excluding supervisory em-
ployees, the superintendent, foremen, and office and clerical employees,
constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargain-
ing, and that said unit will insure to employees of the Com-
pany the full benefit of their right to self-organization and to collec-
tive bargaining and otherwise effectuate the policies of the Act.
VI. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
We find that the question which has arisen concerning the repre-
sentation of employees of the Company can best be resolved by an
election by secret ballot. The Union requests that elegibility to vote
in the election be determined as of the last week of June or the
first week of July, on the ground that there is a constant turn-over
in the Company's employees, and that that date would represent a
point midway between the date of the filing of the petition and the
hearing. The Company requests that eligibility be determined by
the pay roll for the period immediately preceding the Direction of
Election. We find no compelling reason to depart from our usual
practice in this regard. Accordingly, we shall direct that those
eligible to vote in the election shall be employees within the appro-
priate unit who were employed by the Company during the pay-roll
period immediately preceding the date of the Direction of Election,'
subject to such limitations and additions as are set forth in the Direc-
tion hereinafter.
BRUST MFG. CO. 27
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 Brust Tool Mfg. Co ., Chicago, Illinois,
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 of the Company,
including tool designers, but excluding supervisory employees, the
superintendent , foremen, and office and clerical employees , consti-
tute 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, 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
bargaining with Brust Tool Mfg. Co., 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 of Election,
under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for
the Thirteenth Region, acting in this matter as agent for the Na-
tional Labor Relations Board, and subject to Article III, Section 9,
of said Rules and Regulations , among all production and mainte-
nance employees who were employed by the Company during the
pay-roll period immediately preceding the data of this Direction of
Election , including tool designers and employees 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 supervisory employees, the
superintendent , foremen, and office and clerical employees and em-
ployees who have since quit or been dischargd for cause , to determine
whether or not they desire to be represented by Die and Tool Makers
Lodge No. 113, of the International Association of Machinists
(A. F. L.) for the purposes of collective bargaining.