Frank Kent Manufacturing Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 28, 1945

61 N.L.R.B. 816 (N.L.R.B. 1945)

In the Matter of FRANK KENT MANUFACTURING COMPANY and INTER-
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS , LODGE # 791, AFL
Case No. 16-R-1179.-Decided April 08,19J1,5
'Mr. Rice M. Tilley, of Fort Worth, Tex., for the Company.
Mr. C. L. Mulholland, of Dallas, Tex., and Mr. Frank Black, of Fort
Worth; Tex., for the Union.
Mr. Harry Nathanson, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon a petition duly filed by International Association of
Machinists, Lodge #791, AFL, herein called the Union, alleging that
a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representa-
tion of employees of Frank Kent Manufacturing Company, Fort
Worth, Texas, herein called the Company, the National Labor Rela-
tions Board provided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice
before Lewis Moore, Trial Examiner. Said hearing was held at Fort
Worth, Texas, on March 13 and 14, 1945. The Company and the
Union appeared and participated. All parties were afforded full
opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and
to introduce evidence bearing on the issues. At the hearing the Com-
pany moved to dismiss the petition and the Trial Examiner referred
the motion to the Board for determination. For reasons set forth
in Sections I, III, and IV, infra, the motion is denied. The Trial
Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial'
error and are hereby affirmed. All parties were afforded an oppor-
tunity to file briefs with the Board.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Frank Kent Manufacturing Company, a Texas corporation with its
principal office and plant located at Fort Worth, Texas, is engaged
61 N. L . R. B., No. 130.
816
FRANK KENT MANUFACTURING COMPANY 817
in the building and rebuilding of machinery and machine parts and
the assembly of airplane propellers. During the 12-month period
ending June 30, 1944, the Company purchased approximately $180,000
worth of raw materials, of which approximately 10 percent originated
from sources outside the State of Texas. For the same period the
Company sold approximately $448,000 worth of its finished products
of which approximately 4 percent was shipped outside the State of
Texas. The Company is also a subcontractor for Globe Aircraft
Company, Consolidated-Vultee Aircraft Corporation and North
American Aviation Company, all of which are prime war contractors.
We find, contrary to its contention, that the Company is engaged
in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations
Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
International Association of Machinists, Lodge #791, affiliated with
the American Federation of Labor, is a labor organization admitting
to membership employees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On January 18, 1945, the Union filed its petition herein.'
A statement of a Field Examiner, introduced into evidence at the
hearing, indicates that the Union represents a substantial number of.
employees in the unit hereinafter found appropriate.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 Union seeks a unit of all employees in the Company's machine
shop department, excluding clerical and office employees, guards, and
supervisory employees. The Company contends that only a plant-
wide unit is appropriate.
The Company's plant is located on one floor of a building and is
divided into three departments known as the machine shop, sheet
metal shop, and propeller shop. Each shop is set apart from the others
and has its own foreman. While it appears that certain categories of
'The Company asks that the petition be dismissed because the Union failed to request
recognition prior to the filing thereof . It is clear , however, that the Company refuses to
recognize the Union in the absence of certification by the Board. Consequently, we do not
believe that dismissal is warranted . See Matter of Revere Copper and Brass, Incorporated
( Dallas and Ordnance Divisions ), 61 N. L. R. B 392.
2 The Field Examiner reported that the Union submitted 14 authorization cards bearing
apparently genuine signatures and that there were 18 employees in the alleged appropriate
unit.
818 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
employees may be transferred between the machine shop and sheet
metal shop, there is no evidence that such interchange is frequent. It
is clear that the employees sought by the Union form a well defined,
homogeneous group under separate supervision. Moreover, the
Union's recent organizational activities have been among the machine
shop workers, and the Company's brief notes that earlier attempts by
the Union to organize on a plant-wide basis were unsuccessful.3 Un-
der these circumstances, we are of the opinion that the purposes of
the Act will best be effectuated by making collective bargaining an
immediate possibility for the machine shop employees .4 We conclude
that a unit of employees, limited in scope to the machine shop, is
appropriate. However, our finding does not preclude a later determi-
nation that a larger or plant-wide unit is also appropriate.5
We find that all the Company's machine shop employees, excluding
clerical and office employees, guards, and all supervisory employees
with authority to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise
effect changes in the status of employees, or effectively recommend such
action, 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 direct that the question concerning representation which
has arisen be resolved by an election by secret ballot among the em-
ployees 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 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 Relations
Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor Rela-
tions Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3, as amended, it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Frank Kent Manu-
facturing Company, Fort Worth, Texas, 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-
vision of the Regional Director for the Sixteenth Region, acting in
3 We also note that a petition filed by the Union in 1942 alleging a plant-wide unit to be
appropriate, was withdrawn.
4 See Matter of Ladish Drop Forge Company, 57 N. L. R. B 1468; ef. Matter of Newnan
Cotton Mrolls, 57 N L R. B. 917.
5 See Matter of Indianapolis Water Company, 48 N. L. R. B. 1399.
FRANK KENT MANUFACTURING COMPANY 819
this matter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and
subject to Article III, Sections 10 and 11, of said Rules and Regula-
tions, 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 employees who did not
work during the said pay-roll period because they were ill or on vaca-
tion 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 those employees who have since quit or been dis-
charged 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 International Association of Machinists, Lodge #791,
AFL, for the purposes of collective bargaining.