Ford Motor Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Oct 26, 1942

45 N.L.R.B. 70 (N.L.R.B. 1942)

In the Matter of FORD MOTOR COMPANY and UNITED PROTECTIVE
WORKERS, LOCAL 1
Case No. R-4162.-Decided October 26, 1942
Jurisdiction : ordnance manufacturing industry
Investigation and Certification of Representatives : existence of question : re-
fusal to accord petitioner recognition ; election necessary.
Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : plant-protection employees at en-
gineering laboratory and airport at one of Company's plants, including part-
time janitors and part-time switchboard operators, but excluding clerks in
service office, full-time janitors, full-time male and all female switchboard oper-
ators, foremen of janitor gangs, shift foremen and their assistants, and higher
officials.
Definitions: plant-protection employees made civiliarr'auxiliaries of military
police by virtue of directive order of war Department, held employees within
the- meaning of the Act.
Mr. Harold A. Crane field and Mr. Jerome H. Brooks, for the Board.
Mr. I. A. Capizzi and Mr. Edmund J. Gallagher, of Detroit, Mich.,
for the Company.
Mr. Daniel B. Foley, of Detroit, Mich., for the Union.
Mr. Louis A. Pontello, Jr., of counsel to the Board..
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon petition duly filed by the United Protective • Workers, 'Local
1, herein called the Union, alleging that a question affecting com-
merce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of Ford
Motor Company, Dearborn, Michigan, herein called the Company,
the National Labor Relations Board provided for an appropriate
hearing upon due notice before A. Bruce Hunt, Trial Examiner.
Said hearing was held at Detroit, Michigan, on August 12 and 13,
1942. The Company and the Union appeared, participated, and were
afforded full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine
witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues. At the
beginning of the hearing the Company filed a written notice to
45 N L. R. B., No. 15
70
FORD MOTOR COMPANY 71
dismiss the petition on the grounds that (1) the subject matter is
not within the jurisdiction of the Board, (2) the Union is not a repre-
sentative of the employees within the meaning of the Act, (3) the
bargaining unit alleged in the petition does not constitute an appro-
priate unit, and (4) the persons referred to in the petition are not
employees within the meaning of_ the Act. During the hearing, the
Company filed a written amendment to its motion to dismiss, in
which was set out the further ground that the employees referred to
in the petition are persons subject to or about to become subject to
military law during the period of their employment and, therefore,
the Board may not certify a labor organization as their representa-
tive. The Company also made an oral motion for dismissal on the
ground that the Union is not a labor organization but is a sham
organization, in reality w part of United Automobile, Aircraft and
Agricultural Implement Workers of America, affiliated with the
Congress of Industrial Organizations, herein called the UAW-CIO.
The Trial Examiner referred these motions to the Board. For
reasons appearing below, the motions are hereby .denied. On three
occasions during the course of the hearing the Trial Examiner
granted motions of the Union to amend its petition in order to set
forth correctly the desired-unit. The Trial Examiner's rulings made
at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
rihe Union and the Company filed briefs which the Board has
considered.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Ford Motor Company is a Delaware corporation having its prin-
cipal executive offices at Dearborn, Michigan. Until February 1942
it was principally engaged in the manufacture, assembly, sale, and
distribution of automobiles and automobile trucks and. various types
of automobile parts and accessories.' The Company owns, operates,
and maintains assembly plants in many States throughout the coun-
try. The plant involved in this proceeding is the Dearborn plant.
Since February 1942 the Company has been and is now engaged at
all of its plants in Detroit, Highland Park, and Dearborn, Michigan,
and at its new plant, known as the Willow Run Bomber plant situated
near the city of Ypsilanti, Michigan, principally in the manufacture
and/or assembly of ordnance and other materials for the armed
services of the United States. Not less than 10 percent, and varying
' See Matt er of Ford Motor Company and International Union, United Automobile Work-
ers of America., 14 N. L. R. B. 346.
72' DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
as high as 80` percent, in value of the productive materials, including
fabricated and partially fabricated articles, used in the manufactur-
ing or' assembly operation conducted in the above-mentioned plants,
the total value of which exceeds $1,000,000 monthly, is shipped to the
said plants from points outside the State of Michigan.
The Company concedes that it is engaged in interstate commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
- United Protective Workers, Local 1, is a labor organization admit-
ting to membership plant-protection employees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On March 17, 1942, the Union sent a letter to the Company stat-
ing that it represented a majority of the employees in an alleged
appropriate unit and that it desired to be recognized as the exclusive
representative of such employees. The receipt of the letter was
acknowledged by the Company, but it made no further reply to the
requests of the Union.
A statement made by an attorney for the Board at the hearing
discloses that the Union represents a substantial number of the
employees 2 in the unit hereinafter found-to be appropriate.3
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 Union contends that all plant-protection employees, part-time
janitors, and part-time switchboard operators in the Service Depart-
ment at the engineering laboratory, consisting of the engineering
laboratory and original Ford Airport, including clerks in the service
office and foremen, of janitor gangs, but excluding full-time janitors,
full-time male and all feinale switchboard operators, shift foremen and
their assistants, and higher supervisory officials, constitute an appro-
2 For reasons stated in Section IV, below, we reject the contention of the company that
plant-protection employees are not emplo3ecs within the meaning of the Act
'The attorney for the Board reported that the Union presented 214 authorization cards,
of which all but 3 were dated later than fanuaiy 29, 1942, 2 were dated January 3, 1942,
and 1 was undated. All the signatures appeared to be genuine original signatures; 163
of the signatures are the names of persons whose names appear on I of 3 lists furnished
by the Company, containing 2S0 names ; 46 of the cards bear names not appearing on any
of the 3 lists ; and 2 cards bear undecipherable signatures. Over 50 pmcent of the names
found on the list entitled "Miscellaneous Service Mlen" are names corresponding to those
on the cards , and approximately 10 to 15 of the names on the list entitled "Miscellaneous
Janitors" correspond to those found on the cards.
.
FORD MOTOR COMPANY 73
priate unit . The Company urges that plant-protection employees,
because of the confidential and disciplinary nature of the tasks as-
signed to them, are instruments of management and that the proper
performance of their duties precludes their inclusion as. employees in
a bargaining unit.
There are approximately 189 plant-protection ' inen employed by the
Company at the engineering laboratory and the airport . The chief
duties of the plant -protection employees are to protect the property
of the Company , and also that of the Company 's employees and of the
United States Government ; to check employees in and out of -the
plant; to keep out unauthorized visitors ; to report safety hazards; to
check all damage of machinery ; to report violations of the disciplin-
ary and safety regulations of the Company ; to check products manu-
factured by the Company as they leave the plant to ascertain if they
correspond to the bill of sale; to check incoming products; and to
investigate all subversive activities that might hamper the war work
of the Company.
- The War Department has recently issued a directive order, making
plant-protection employees at plants producing war materials civilian
auxiliaries of the military police. Under appropriate Army super-
vision, they are trained and equipped to meet the additional responsi-
bilities placed upon them. The Company contends that this military
regulation changes their employment status and that they are no 0
longer "employees " within the meaning of the Act. We do not agree.
The directive order specifically preserves the essential employment
relationship. The employer 's right to discharge for cause remains.
Hiring, compensation for services performed , and general working
conditions remain matters to be adjusted between the employer and
the employees through the usual employment contract.4
The Company contends that . the Union is not a bona fide organiza-
tion but is a "sham" organization created by the UAW-CIO to cir-
cumvent a contract in which the UAW-CIO is recognized as the
statutory representative of the production and maintenance employees
at the Company 's plants, excluding inter alia , the plant -protection
employees . The record in the instant case fails to support the Com-
pany's contention . Even were it shown that the Union is directly
affiliated with , or contemplates immediate affiliation with the UAW-
CIO, the Company 's argument would be rejected . The Act confers
upon employees the right to self-organization and to collective bar-
gaining through representatives of their own choosing.
We perceive no necessary conflict between self-organization for
collective bargaining and the faithful performance of duty. For
4 See Matter of Chrysler Corporation, highland Park Plant and Local Illl, United Auto-
mobile, Aircraft and Agricultwal Implement 1l'orbeos of America, affiliated ueth the C. 1. 0.,
44 N L R B 881
74 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
the reasons stated in the recent Chrysler case,5 we reject the argument
of the Company in this respect. We find, therefore, no reason to
deny the request of the Company's plant-protection employees to
constitute a separate bargaining unit and to deny them, as such, the
right to bargain collectively with their employer through a represent-
ative of their own choosing.
The parties agreed at the hearing that all full-time janitors, full-
time switchboard operators, and certain supervisory employees, -
should be excluded from the bargaining unit. We shall exclude
them. The Company contends that clerks, part-time janitors, and
part-time switchboard operators should not be included in the same
unit as plant-protection employees. It appears from the record that
there are some janitors and switchboard operators who work part
time as plant-protection employees. Since these employees have
interests in common with other plant-protection employees, we shall
include in the unit the part-time janitors and part-time switchboard
operators who also serve as plant-protection employees.
The Union seeks to include clerks who work in the Service Depart-
ment. These clerks are the private secretaries of the shift foremen,
and they also serve as assistants to the shift foremen. In the absence
of the shift foremen, the clerk discharges his duties. It appears
that although the clerks do not have the power to hire or discharge
C employees, they may recommend the dismissal of employees. The
clerks handle all confidential mail and communications of the shift
foremen and of the Service Department. In view of the semi-
supervisory authority possessed by the clerks and since they perform
confidential clerical work, we shall exclude them from the unit.
The Union wishes to include janitor gang foremen in the unit.
It appears from the record that their duties are in no way connected
with plant-protection work. We shall exclude them.
We find that all plant-protection employees employed by the Com-
pany at the engineering laboratory and airport at its Dearborn
plant, including part-time janitors and part-time switchboard opera-
tors who also serve as plant-protection employees, but excluding
clerks in _the service office, full-time janitors, full-time male and all
female switchboard operators, foremen of janitor gangs, shift foremen
and their assistants, and higher officials," constitute a unit appropriate
for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of
Section 9 (b) of the Act.
0 See footnote 4, supra
u The parties agreed, and we find, that the following are excluded as supervisory William
J. Theisen, the general foreman of the Service Depaitment; the assistant general foreman,
Kyle Moore ; the shift foremen, Glenn Tennis, Bert Williams, and one Yobske, and their
assistants, one Addis and one Campbell.
FORD MOTOR COMPANY
V. THE DETERMINATION OE REPRESENTATIVES
75
We shall direct that the question concerning representation which
has arisen be resolved by an election by secret ballot among the
employees 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 as set forth
in the Direction. -
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 Rela-
tions 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 to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Ford Motor
Company, Dearborn, 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 supervision
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 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 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 employees who have
since quit or been discharged for cause , to determine whether or not
they desire to be represented by United Protective Workers, Local 1,
for the purposes of collective bargaining.