Burd Piston Ring Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jan 20, 1948

75 N.L.R.B. 879 (N.L.R.B. 1948)

In the Matter of BURR PISTON RING COMPANY , EMPLOYER and UNITED
AUTOMOBILE , AIRCRAFT & AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF
AMERICA (UAW-CIO), PETITIONER
Case No. 13-R-41436.-Decided January 20, 194.8
Messrs. F. M. White, A. H. Bates, and M. E. Wahlstrom, of Rock-
ford, Ill., for the Respondent.
Messrs. Harry Lehnert and Thomas E. Sullivan, of Rockford, Ill.,
for the Petitioner.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at Rockford.
Illinois, on July 24, 1947, before Max Rotenberg, hearing officer'
The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from preju-
dicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations
Board' makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
The Burd Piston Ring Company, an Illinois corporation, is engaged
in the manufacture of piston rings and automobile heaters at its two
plants in Rockford, Illinois, known as the main plant and the Harrison
Avenue plant, with which plants we are here concerned. The Em-
ployer annually purchases over $100,000 worth of materials from
points outside the State. Its annual sales exceed $150,000, of which
over $100,000 worth represents shipments to points outside the State.
The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
1 Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, the Board has delegated its
powers in connection with this case to a three-man panel consisting of the undersigned
board members [Houston, Murdock , and Gray].
75 N. L R. B, No. 110.
879
880 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
II. TIIE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
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 certain of its employees 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 DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
The employees whom the petitioner seeks to represent are described
by the parties as "shop production clerks who record units produced
and also record time spent on production." In the main plant they
are located at stations throughout the plant proper; at the Harrison
Avenue plant they are stationed in the main office and receive in-
formation from production employees by means of an inter-com-
munication system. It is their function to receive from the produc-
tion employees data concerning the number of units produced and
time consumed in the various operations. The reported data is then
prepared by them in triplicate, one, copy going to the Pay Roll De-
partment, another to the Production Department and a third to the
employee concerned. They also inform production employees of the
sequence of operations, a function which is routine in character and
apparently does not call for any exercise of discretion. It would
thus appear that the employees in question are in effect production
clerks whose duties include timekeeping, a classification customarily
regarded as timekeepers in determining an appropriate unite
The Employer opposes the establishment of a unit of these employees
on the grounds that: (1) in compiling information from which pay
rolls are made up, these production clerks are performing a function
of management, (2) these employees are excluded from the current
bargaining contract with the petitioning union covering the Em-
ployer's production and maintenance employees at both plants, and (3)
these employees constitute a numerically small group. As to ground
one, the Board has frequently rejected the contention that employees
engaged in timekeeping perform duties involving managerial func-
2 Matter o f New Jersey Worsted MtiUs, 63 N L R. B. 455.
BURD PISTON RING COMPANY 881
tions.3 As to the exclusion of these employees from the existing pro-
duction and maintenance unit, it would appear that the existing unit
was not established as a result of any Board proceeding: Moreover,
we have frequently held that the express exclusion of employees from
the coverage clause of a contract 4 does not constitute an agreement not
to seek to represent such employees and the contract does not bar a
petition for representation of these employees by the contracting
unions Accordingly, we find these contentions to be lacking in merit.
With respect to the contention as to the size of the unit, while we find
it unnecessary to pass upon that contention in view of our conclusion
herein, we wish to point out that we have frequently held that one
employee may not, but that more than one employee may, properly
constitute an appropriate units
As already noted, the employees whom the Petitioner seeks to repre-
sent have considerable community of interest with the production
employees and have duties analogous to those of plant clerical em-
ployees. Moreover, with particular reference to timekeepers, it has
become increasingly evident, since our decision in the Northwest
Engineering Corporation case 7 that, in the absence of an already
established unit of plant clericals, such employees are more properly
included in a production and maintenance unit." Therefore, we shall
establish a voting group of the requested employees and shall afford
them an opportunity to determine through an election whether or not
they desire to be represented as part of the production and maintenance
unit. If these employees select the Petitioner as their 'bargaining
representative, they will be taken to have indicated their desire to be
included in the existing unit of production and maintenance employees
and the Petitioner may bargain for them as part of such unit.
Accordingly, we shall direct an election among all shop production
clerks who record units produced and time spent on production, ex-
cluding relief operators 9 and supervisors.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining with Burd Piston Ring Company,
Rockford, Illinois, an election by secret ballot shall be conducted as
3 Matter of Northwest Engineering Corporation , 73 N L R 13.40.
4 Although the established unit does not expressly exclude this category it would appear
that the parties regarded the excluded categories as embracing these employees.
splatter of Standard Lime and Stone Company, 74 N. L R B.'893
9 Matter of A S. Campbell Co., Inc., 69 N . L. R. B. 1285.
7 See footnote 3, supra.
s Matter of International Detrola Co ., 73 N. L. It. B. 1358 ; Matter of P. A. Geier Co.,
74 N. L. It. B. 103, Matter of Art Metal Construction Co., 75 N. L. It. B. 80.
B No issue has been raised with respect to the exclusion of these employees who relieve
shop production clerks for short periods of time.
882 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
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 voting group described 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, 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, to determine whether or
not they desire to be represented by United Automobile, Aircraft
Agricultural Implement Workers of America, (UAW-CIO), for the
purpose of collective bargaining.