Chrysler Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jan 30, 1942

38 N.L.R.B. 749 (N.L.R.B. 1942)

In the Matter of CHRYSLER CORPORATION , CHRYSLER MOTOR DIVISION
and SOCIETY OF DESIGNING ENGINEERS , LOCAL #201, F . A. E. C. T.,
C. I. O.
Case No. R-33,55.-Decided January 30, 194y2
Jurisdiction : automobiles, parts, and accessories manufacturing industry.
Investigation and Certification of Representatives : existence of question : re-
fusal to accord union recognition ; election necessary.
Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : all employees engaged in design-
ing, detailing, tool engineering, and checking, and in layout, tool trouble, and
engineering record clerks' work in certain departments at one of the Com-
pany's plants, the employees engaged in plant layout work in one department
at another of the Company's plants, and the engineers in three departments
at a third plant of the Company, excluding supervisory, office workers, secre-
taries, and foremen's clerks.
Messrs. Larkin, Rathbone & Perry, by Mr. T. R . Iservian and 111r.
John O'Kiefe, Jr., of New York City, for the Company.
Messrs . Maurice Sugar and Jack N. Tucker, by Mr. Jack N. Tucker,
of Detroit , Mich., for the Union.
Mrs. Platonia P. Kaldes , of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On September 29, 1941, the Society of Designing Engineers, Local
#201, F. A. E. C. T., C. I. 0., herein called the Union, filed with
the Regional Director for the Seventh Region (Detroit, Michigan) a
petition and on October 25, 1941, an amended petition alleging that
a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representa-
tion of employees in the Chrysler Motor Division and the Bofors
Gun Division of the Chrysler Corporation, Detroit, Michigan, herein
called the Company, and requesting an investigation and certification
of representatives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act. On November 15,
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 Relations Board Rules and Regulations- Series
. 38N L . R B, No 144.
749
750 DE 'CISQONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
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 November 27, 1941, the Regional Director issued a notice of
hearing, copies of which were :duly ,served, upon the Company and
the ,Union. Pursuant to notice, a hearing was held,on December 4,
1941, before Harold Cranefield, the Trial Examiner duly designated
by the Chief Trial Examiner. The, Company and the Union were
represented by counsel and participated in the hearing. Full oppor-
tunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine -witnesses, and to
introduce -evidence bearing on the issues was' afforded all parties.
During the course of the hearing, the Trial Examiner made several
rulings' on, motions and on objections to the 'admission of evidence.
'The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner and finds
.that no prejudicial errors were committed. The rulings are hereby
affirmed., . I
On December 16, 1941, the Company filed a brief which the Board
has duly considered.
Upon the entire, record in the case, the Board makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Chrysler Corporation, a Delaware corporation havings its prin-
cipal office in Detroit, Michigan, is primarily engaged in the manu-
facture and sale of automobiles, parts, and accessories. The Company
stated at the hearing that its operations at the present time are
substantially the same as'those described in other proceedings before
the Board.'
This proceeding concerns employees at the Kercheval, Jefferson,
;and Bofors Gun plants of the Company.
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
Society 'of Designing Engineers, Local #201, Federation of Archi-
tects, Engineers, Chemists, and Technicians, is a labor organization
affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, admitting
to membership employees of the Company. ,
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On September 23, 1941, the Union wrote to the Company alleging
that it represented a majority- of the employees in an appropriate
unit and requesting meeting for the purposes of collective bargain-
"See, for example, Matter of Chrysler Corporation and United Automobile Worke>a•of
America, Local 971, C I. 0. (and companion cases ), 13 N. L R. B. 1303.
CHRYSIJETt CORPORAT1"ION 751
ing. On September 26, 1941, the Company informed the Union, that,
inasmuch as it had no evidence that the Union represented a majority
of the employees in question, it was unwilling to open bargaining
negotiations. A statement of the Regional Director introduced into
evidence indicates that the Union represents a substantial number
of employees in the unit hereinafter found to be appropriate.2
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 the appropriate unit should consist of
employees engaged in designing, detailing, tool engineering, and
checking, and in layout, tool trouble, and engineering record clerks'
work in Departments B-32, B-28, B-29,28,30,31, and 32 in the Master
Mechanics Division of the Jefferson and Kercheval plants of the Com-
pany, and the employees engaged in plant layout work in Depart-
inent 50 of the Plant Engineers Division of the Jefferson plant, and
the engineers in Departments D-28, D-31, and D-32 of the Bofors Gun
plant, excluding supervisors, office workers, secretaries, and foremen's
clerks. The Company is opposed to the inclusion' of the engineering
record clerks in the Master Mechanics Division of.the Jefferson and
Kercheval plants, the plant-layout employees in Department 50 of the
Plant Engineers Division of the Jefferson plant, and the engineers in
Departments D-28, D-31, and D-32 'of the Bofors Gun plant, but
otherwise agrees with the unit sought by the Union.
The Company argues that the engineering record clerks are "o$ici'
workers rather than technicians" and that they "ought not to be
included in a technical unit." The Company advanced the same
argument in a proceeding involving its Dodge Brothers Division. - We
2 The Regional Director reported that the Union had submitted to him 44 signed mein-
bership applications dated during August, September , and October , 1941. Forty-two of the
44 cards contained the names of persons who were employed by the Company during the
week ending October 31 , 1941. The list of employees submitted by the Company contains
the names of 98 persons in the alleged appropriate bargaining unit
RThese three departments are the tool engineering, tool designing, and tool trouble
departments , respectively.
752 D' 'CI'SSIONS OF 1,TA'1'IOKAL LABOR PVELATION-S BOARD
concluded therein, after reviewing the duties and functions of the
engineering record clerks, that they should be included in the unit.4
We do not believe that the duties of the engineering record clerks
herein are sufficiently different from those of the engineering record
clerks in the Dodge Brothers Division to warrant a contrary holding.
We shall, accordingly, include engineering record clerks in the
appropriate unit.
The plant layout men in Department 50 determine the location
for each operation in the production of automobiles. While they are
attached to the Jefferson plant, their work covers both the Jefferson
and Kercheval plants of the Company. These employees specify
where in the plants tools should be placed and fix the location of stock
piles, inspection operations, and storage space. In the performance
of their duties, these employees are required to fix the location of
tools and equipment designed by employees in the Master Mechanics
Division. Both the employees in the Master Mechanics Division and
the plant layout employees perform operations which must be com-
pleted before the actual production of automobiles begins. We are
of the opinion that the plant layout employees in Department 50
of the Plant Engineers Division should be included in the unit to-
gether with the employees in the Master Mechanics Division.
The engineers in the Bofors Gun plant, which is situated in the
same neighborhood as the Jefferson and Kercheval plants, are engaged
in defense work. The Company argues that they should be excluded
from the appropriate unit because "it would seem desirable for people
in a defense industry not to have their cofective bargaining activities
intermingled and confused with the collective bargaining activities of
people in a non-defense industry." We do not believe that the con-
tention advanced by the Company is sufficient reason for separating
the engineers in the Bofors Gun plant from the other employees
claimed by the Union as an appropriate unit .5 We shall, accordingly,
include in the unit the engineers in the Bofors Gun plant.
We find that all employees engaged in designing, detailing, tool en-
gineering, and checking, and in layout, tool trouble, and engineering
record clerks' work in Departments B-32, B-28, B-29, 28, 30, 31, and
32 in the Master Mechanics Division of the Jefferson and Kercheval
plants of the Company, and the employees engaged in plant layout
work in Department 50 of the Plant Engineers Division of the Jeffer-
son plant, and the engineers in Departments D-28, D-31, and D-32
4 Matter of Dodge B? others Division--Chrysler Corporation and Society of Designing
1Yngineers , Chapter No. 201-F. A. E. C. T.-C. I. 0., 33 N. L. R. B., No. 166.
*It is to be noted that on January 21, 1942, the Office of Production Management pio-
hibited the production of all light motor trucks and passenger automobiles after February
1, 1942. General Limitation Orders L-8-f and L-2-g signed by Donald If . Nelson, Director
of Priorities 7 Federal Register, 473 (Jan. 23, 1942).
CHRYS,LEIR CORPORATION 753
of the Bofors Gun plant, excluding supervisors, office workers, secre-
taries, and foremen's clerks, constitute a unit appropriate for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining. We find further that said unit will
insure to employees of the Company the full benefit of their right to
collective bargaining and otherwise will effectuate the policies of the
Act.
VI. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
We find that the question which has arisen concerning representa-
tion can best be resolved by, and we shall accordingly direct, an elec-
tion by secret ballot. We shall direct that the employees of the Com-
pany eligible to vote in the election shall be those in the appropriate
unit who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately pre-
ceding the date of the Direction of Election herein, subject to such
limitations and conditions as are set forth in the Direction hereinafter.
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 the Chrysler Corporation, Detroit, Michi-
gan, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7)
of the National Labor Relations Act.
2. All employees engaged in designing, detailing, tool engineering,
and checking, and in layout, tool trouble, and engineering record clerks'
work in Departments B-32, B-28, B-29, 28, 30, 31, and 32 in the Master
Mechanics Division of the Jefferson and Kercheval plants of the Com-
pany, and the employees engaged in plant layout work in Department
50 of the Plant Engineers Division of the Jefferson plant and the en-
gineers in Departments D-28, D-31, and D-32 of the Bofors Gun plant,
excluding supervisors, office workers, secretaries, and foremen's clerks,
constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining.
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 the Chrysler Corporation, Detroit, Michigan, 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-
438861-42-vol. 38-49
754 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
vision of the Regional Director for the Seventh 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 all
employees engaged in designing, detailing, tool engineering, and check-
ing, and in layout, tool trouble, and engineering record clerks' work
in Departments B-32, B-28, B-29, 28, 30, 31, and 32 in the Master
Mechanics Division of the Jefferson and Kercheval plants of the Com-
pany, and the employees engaged in plant layout work in Department
50 of the Plant Engineers Division of the Jefferson plant and the en-
gineers in Departments D-28, D-31, and D-32 of the Bofors Gun plant
who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding
the date of our Direction of Election, including 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 supervisors, office workers, secre-
taries, and foremen's clerks, and employees who have since quit or been
discharged for cause, to determine whether or not they desire to be rep-
resented by the Society of Designing Engineers, Local #201, Federa-
tion of Architects, Engineers, Chemists, and Technicians, affiliated
with the Coiigress of Industrial Organizations, for the purposes of
collective bargaining.