Eaton Manufacturing Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 9, 1954

108 N.L.R.B. 1269 (N.L.R.B. 1954)

EATON MANUFACTURING COMPANY 1269
EATON MANUFACTURING COMPANY and INTERNATIONAL
ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS, AFL and INTERNATIONAL
DIE SINKERS' CONFERENCE, INDEPENDENT, Petitioners.
Cases Nos. 8 -RC-2185 and 8 -RC-2213. June 9, 1954
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
Upon separate petitions duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the
National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Ralph
W. Tyner, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made
at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby
affirmed. i
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds:
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the mean-
ing of the Act.
2. The labor organizations named below claim to represent
certain employees of the Employer.2
3. 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.
4. International Die Sinkers' Conference, Independent, herein
called the Die Sinkers, wishes to represent as a separate unit
all employees who work on dies or parts of dies used in the
manufacture and completion of forgings at the Employer's
automotive parts manufacturing plant at Marion, Ohio, excluding
all supervisors. International Association of Machinists, AFL,
herein called the IAM; International Brotherhood of Boiler-
makers, Iron Ship Builders, Blacksmiths, Drop Forgers &
Helpers, AFL, herein called the Boilermakers; and International
Union, United Automobile, Aircraft & Agricultural Implement
Workers of America, CIO, herein called the CIO, contend that a
plant production and maintenance unit is appropriate. There is
no bargaining history for the employees at this plant.
The dieroom employees are separately located and super-
vised at the plant. They include skilled machinists and a welder;
and constitute a group which the Board has frequently held may
bargain on a separate basis apart from other production and
maintenance employees in the absence of prior bargaining
history. 3 On the other hand, the broader plant unit of production
'International Union. United Automobile. Aircraft & Agricultural Implement Workers of
America, CIO, herein called the CIO, intervened at the hearing. Its motion to vacate the
hearing and direct a new hearing is hereby denied. The record contains adequate evidence
for the resolution of the issues in this nonadversary proceeding. There is no evidence to
indicate that the CIO is prejudiced by late notice of the hearing.
2C. M. Bowman, an employee, testified that 16 employees on March 16, the day before the
hearing, and 21 on the day of the hearing, out of a group of approximately 23 dieroom em-
ployees, had signed a petition stating that they desired to represent the dieroom employees
and that they intended to form a labor organization and to comply with Section 9 (f), (g), and
(h) of the Act. He submitted the petition as evidence of showing of interest. The Regional
Director has received no evidence that these employees have organized as a labor organiza-
tion or that they have complied with the filing requirements of the Act. The Board therefore
finds that these employees do not presently constitute a labor organization within the meaning
of the Act. Therefore they may not intervene nor participate in the election in this proceeding.
3Ford Motor Company, Canton Forge Plant, Canton Ohio, 80 NLRB 1094 at 1095-1096.
108 NLRB No. 176.
1270 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
and maintenance employees , including the dieroom employees,
may also be appropriate.
In view of the foregoing , we make no final unit determination
at this time , but shall direct that the question concerning
representation of the Employer ' s employees be resolved by
separate elections , by secret ballot , among the employees in the
following groups of employees at the Employer ' s automotive
parts manufacturing plant at Marion , Ohio, excluding from each
group all office clerical employees, guards , professional em-
ployees, and supervisors as defined in the Act.
Voting group (A): All employees who work on dies or parts of
dies used in the manufacture and completion of forgings.
Voting group (B): All production and maintenance employees,
excluding employees in voting group (A).
If a majority of the employees in voting group (A) select the
union seeking to represent ' them separately , these employees
will be taken to have indicated their desire to constitute a sep-
arate bargaining unit and the Regional Director conducting the
election is instructed to issue a certification of representa-
tives to the labor organization seeking and selected by the em-
ployees in that group for such unit, which the Board in such
circumstances finds to be appropriate for purposes of collective
bargaining . On the other hand , if a majority of the employees in
voting group (A) "do not vote for the union which is seeking to
represent them in a separate unit, that group will be appro-
priately included in the production and maintenance unit and
their votes will be pooled with those in voting group (B). If the
votes are pooled , they are to be tallied in the following manner:
The votes for the union seeking the separate unit shall be
counted among the valid votes cast, but neither for nor against
the union seeking the more comprehensive unit; all other votes
are to be accorded their face value , whether for representation
by the union seeking the comprehensive unit , or for no union.
The Regional Director conducting the election is instructed to
issue a certification of representatives to the labor organization
selected by a majority of the employees in the pooled group,
which the Board in such circumstances finds to be a single unit
appropriate for purposes of collective bargaining.
[Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication.]
EL MUNDO BROADCASTING CORPORATION and GREMIO DE
PRENSA, RADIO , TEATRO Y TELEVISION DE PUERTO
RICO, INDEPENDIENTE . Case No . 24-CA -470. June 10,
1954
DECISION AND ORDER
On February 11, 1954 , Trial Examiner Thomas N. Kessel
issued his Intermediate Report in the above - entitled pro-
108 NLRB No. 186.