Ford Motor Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 5, 1943

49 N.L.R.B. 492 (N.L.R.B. 1943)

In the Matter of FORD MOTOR COMPANY ( LINCOLN PLANT) and
UNITED PROTECTIVE WORKERS OF AMERICA
Case No. R-5141.-Decided May 5,1943
Messrs. I. A. Capizzi and Henry G. O'Donnell , both of Detroit,
Mich ., for the Company.
Mr. Frank N . McLean, of Detroit, Mich ., for the United.
Mr. Herbert E. Munro, of Detroit , Mich ., for the Association.
Mr. David V. Easton, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon petition duly filed by United Protective Workers of America,
herein called the United, alleging that a question affecting commerce
had arisen concerning the representation of employees of Ford
Motor Company (Lincoln Plant), Dearborn, Michigan, herein called
the Company, the National Labor Relations Board provided for an
appropriate hearing upon due notice before Frederick P. Matt,
Trial Examiner. Said hearing was held at Detroit, Michigan, on
April 8, 1943. The Company, the United, and Plant Protection
Association, herein called the Association, 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 commencement of the hearing, the Company filed a
written motion to dismiss the petition on the grounds that (1) the
subject matter is not within the jurisdiction of the National Labor
Relations Board, (2) United Protective Workers of America is not
a representative of employees within the meaning of the National
Labor Relations Act, (3) the bargaining unit alleged in the peti-
tion for investigation and certification of representatives filed in
the above-entitled proceeding is not an appropriate unit for the
purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning and scope
of the Act, and (4) the persons referred to in said petition for
investigation and 'certification of representatives are persons acting
49 N. L. R. B., No. 67.
492
FORD MOTOR COMPANY 493
in the interests of the Ford Motor Company and are not employees
within the meaning of the Act. The Trial Examiner reserved ruling
on the motion for the Board. For reasons appearing below, the
motion is hereby denied., The Trial Examiner's rulings made at
the hearing are free from prejudicial error ;and are hereby affirmed.
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 principal
executive offices at Dearborn, Michigan. Until February 1942 it was
principally engaged in the manufacture, assembly, sale, and distribu-
tion of automobiles and automobile trucks, and various types of auto-
mobile parts and accessories. The Company owns, operates, and
maintains assembly plants in many States. The plant involved in this
proceeding is the Lincoln Plant, located in Detroit, Michigan.
Since February 1942 the Company has been and is now engaged at
all its plants in Detroit, Highland Park, and Dearborn, Michigan, and
in 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 to as high as 80
percent in value of the productive material, including fabricated and
partially fabricated articles used in the manufacturing or assembling
of articles at the above-mentioned plants, the total value of which
exceed $1,000,000 monthly, is shipped to the said plants from points
outside the State of Michigan. We find that the Company is engaged
in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
United Protective Workers of America, and Plant Protection Associ-
ation are labor organizations, each admitting to membership employees
of the Company.
i The motion to dismiss is predicated on substantially the same grounds as similar mo-
tions filed by the Company in Matter of Ford Motor Company and United Protective
Workers, Local 1, 45 N L. R B, 70; Ford Motor Company, Highland Park Plant and
United Protective Workers of America, Local No 1, 47 N. L R. B, 209; Ford Motor,
Willow Run Bomber Plant and United Plant 11uotection/and Firemen's Union of America,
48 N L. R B , 413 The denial of the motion herein is based upon grounds previously
set forth in the above-mentioned eases
494 D'EICISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATI-ONES BOARD
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING'REPRESENTATION
,0n March 19, 1943, the United addressed a communication to the
Company requesting recognition as the exclusive bargaining repre-
sentative of the plant-protection employees and firemen. The Com-
pany made no reply to this request. On April 5, 1943, in a telephonic
communication, the Association requested the Company to recognize
it as the exclusive bargaining representative of the plant-protection
employees and the firemen. The Company advised the Association
that it was not in i position to do anything with regard to the recogni-
tion of a bargaining representative for these employees in view of the
pendency of the instant proceeding. -
Statements of the Regional Director, introduced into evidence at
the hearing, indicate that the United and the Association each repre-
sents a substantial number of the employees in the unit hereinafter
-found to be appropriate1.2
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 United and the Association have agreed that all• plant-protec-
tion employees of the Lincoln Plant, including firemen but excluding
sweepers, clerical and supervisory employees, constitute an appropriate
unit. The Company does not object to the composition of the unit
agreed upon by-the unions, but contends that it is'inappropriate because
plant-protection employees are not "employees" within the meaning
of the Act, in view of their duties and since they are auxiliaries to the
military police.
The duties of the Company's plant-protection employees and firemen
at the Lincoln Plant are similar to those of employees engaged at like
duties in its other plants. We have heretofore found in proceedings
involving other plants of the Company, that plant guards and firemen
hired and paid by the employer, are employees within the meaning of
the Act and may designate a representative for the purposes of collec-
tive bargaining, even though some are auxiliaries of the military police.
or subject to its. regulations.3 'Accordingly, this contention of the,
Company is rejected.
2 The Regional Director reported that the United submitted 63 authorization cards con-
raining apparently genuine original signatures, of which 54 bore names appeasing upon
the Company's pay roll of April 5, 1943. This pay roll contained 116 names of employees
in the appropriate unit The 54 cards all bore dates between January and March 1943.
The Regional Director further reported that the Association submitted 79 application
cards containing apparently genuine original signatures , of which 76 bore names appearing
upon the above -mentioned pay roll . The 76 cards all bore March and April 1943 dates.
3 See footnote 1, supra '
FORD MOTOR COMPANY 495
There is dispute, however, with regard to the inclusion of leaders
and assistant leaders in the plant-protection department and the cap-
tains and lieutenants in the fire department.4 The United contends
that they should be excluded. because of the supervisory authority
which they exercise ; the Association contends that they properly fall
within the unit because of the nature of their work; the Company takes
no position with regard to these employees. The record discloses that
plant-protection leaders sometime have a regular beat assigned to them,
and, on occasions, they act in a relief capacity for other plant-protec-
tion employees. Although they do not have the right to hire and
discharge, they do transmit instructions and orders from admittedly
supervisory employees to the regular plant-protection employees and
the Company expects these regular employees to carry out such orders
and instructions. Although the leaders and assistant leaders are not
specifically instructed to recommend discipline, the Company stated
that these person's have a higher duty to it than the regular plant-
protection employees with regard to the reporting of irregularities.
Each of the plant-protection leaders is called upon from time to time
to work on Sundays, at which time he is acting in all respects as an
admittedly supervisory employee. The duties of the captains and
lieutenants in the fire department are similar to those of the plant-
protection leaders and assistant leaders. On the first and third shifts
in the fire department a captain and a lieutenant are in immediate
charge of the fire department employees on those shifts under the plant-
protection foreman. Leaders, assistant leaders, captains, and lieu-
tenants are usually employees of long standing with the Company, and
are paid at a higher rate than the ordinary employees working in these
departments.
We find that these employees have substantial supervisory duties.
We shall therefore exclude them from the unit.
In accordance with the above we find that all plant-protection em-
ployees of the Company at its Lincoln Plant, including firemen, but
excluding sweepers, clerical and supervisory employees, leaders, cap-
-tains, assistant leaders, and lieutenants, constitute a unit appropriate
for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section
9 (b) of the Act.
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
We shall, in accordance with our usual procedure, direct that the
question concerning representation which has arisen be resolved by
an election by secret ballot among the employees in the appropriate
unit. The United contends that eligibility to vote in the election
4 Captains and lieutenants in the fire department correspond to leaders and assistant
leaders in the plant -protection department
496 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
should be determined as of March 24, 1943, the date of the filing of
the petition herein, basing, its contention upon the possibility that the
Company might transfer plant-protection and fire department em-
ployees to and from the other plants which it owns, and thus affect
the election which may be ordered. The Company disclaimed any
such intention, and there is no showing that it proposes to effect such
transfers. In accordance with our usual practice, we shall direct that
the election be held among the employees who were employed during
the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of the Direction
of Election, subject to the limitations and additions set forth therein.'
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 9, of National Labor Rela-
tions 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 (Lincoln Plant) 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 10, 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, including any such employees
who did not work during said pay-roll period because they were ill
or on vacation or temporarily laid off, and including employees in the
armed forces of the United States who present themselves in person
,at the polls, but excluding any who have since quit or been discharged
for cause, to determine whether they desire to be represented by
United Protective Workers of America, Local No. 4, or by Plant
Protection Association, Lincoln Unit,,for the purposes of collective
bargaining, or by neither.
MR. GERARD D.- REILLY ' took no part in the consideration of the
above Decision and Direction of Election.
e The United requested that it be listed on the iballot as `United Protective Workers of
America , Local ,No. 4; the Association made a request to be listed on the ballot as Plant
Protection Association, Lincoln Unit . Both requests are hereby granted.