Gale Products

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 21, 1948

77 N.L.R.B. 254 (N.L.R.B. 1948)

In the Matter of GALE PRODUCTS , EMPLOYER , and OFFICE EMPLOYEES
INTERNATIONAL UNION, LOCAL No. 221 ( AFL), PETITIONER
Case No. 13-RC-21.-Decided April 21, 1948
Mr. Charles R. Sprowl, of Chicago, Ill., and TIP . John M. Gross, of
Waukegan , Ill., for the Employer.
Mr. L. G. 'Nygren, of Minneapolis , Minn., for, the Petitioner.
Mr. Ralph L . Martin, of Galesburg , Ill., and Mr. Karl Daydie, of
Waukegan , Ill., for the Intervenor.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at Galesburg,
Illinois, on December 15, 1947, before Gustaf B. Erickson, hearing
officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from
prejudicial error and are he affirmed.
Upon the entire record in this case, the National Labor Relations
Board 1 makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
Gale Products, a Delaware corporation, is engaged in the manufac-
ture of various parts for the manufacture of outboard motors at its
plant at Galesburg, Illinois. During the past year, the Employer
purchased for use at its plant, raw materials valued in excess of
$2,000,000, of which more than 50 percent was shipped to the plant
from points outside the State of Illinois. During the same period, the
Employer sold from its Galesburg plant finished products valued in
excess of $6,500,000, of which more than 50 percent was shipped to
points outside-the State of Illinois.
We find that the Employer is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
i Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, the Board has delegated its
powers in connection with this case to a three -man panel consisting of the undersigned
Board Members [ Chairman Herzog and Members Reynolds and Houston).
77 N. L. R. B., No. 31.
254
GALE PRODUCTS
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
255
The Petitioner is a labor organization claiming to represent em-
ployees of the Employer.2
Local No. 3, Independent Marine and Machinists Union, herein
called the Intervenor, is an unaffiliated labor organization, claiming to
represent employees of the Employer.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Employer and the Intervenor contend that a collective bargain-
ing contract signed November 7, 1947, is a bar to this proceeding.
On January 15, 1946, the Intervenor and the Employer entered into
a contract to continue until October 31, 1946, and from year to year
thereafter unless either party should give written notice of a desire
to change or terminate the contract 60 days prior to the yearly expira-
tion date. On November 7, 1947, as a result of prior negotiations, the
parties modified the agreement with certain changes. However, on
October 24, 1947, before the modification of the original agreement,
the Petitioner 3 asked the Employer for recognition as the bargaining
representative of its employees, and on October 25, 1947, forwarded
a petition to the Board. This petition was returned by the Regional
Director on October 28, 1947, because it was filed on an obsolete form.
On November 7, 1947, or more than 10 days after the Employer re-
ceived Petitioner's claim,' the present petition was filed.
The Employer, relying upon the rule in the General Electric X-Ray
case,' contends that the Petitioner's prior request for recognition does
not prevent the agreement between the Employer and the Intervenor
front constituting a bar to this proceeding. In support of its position,
the Employer argues that the Petitioner did not file its petition within
10 days from the request for recognition as bargaining representative.
The Employer further argues that the petition itself cannot preclude
the agreement from operating as a bar, as it was filed-upon the same day
as that on which the agreement was executed and not upon some pre-
'The Employer argues that the Petitioner has no standing herein as it is not in com-
pliance with Section 9 (f) and (h) of the Act. We do not agree. The record shows that
the necessary forms were submitted at the time the petition was filed, and we find that it
is now in full compliance.
8 The demand was made by the AFL. The membership was later turned over to the
Petitioner, it being the International having jurisdiction over the employees in the unit
I Petitioner 's letter of October 24 , 1947, to the Employer was received on October 27, 1947.
Matter of General Electric X-Ray Corp :,'67 N. L R. B. 997
256 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ceding day as required under the rule established by the Board in
the Mississippi Lime Company case.6
The evidence discloses that the Petitioner originally filed its petition
within 10 days of its claim of representation, as required by the Gen-
eral Electric X-Ray rule. We have previously held that the date of
original filing of the petition should control where, as here, the peti-
tion was only technically defective and the defect was promptly
corrected.' Accordingly, we find that the contract of November 7,
1947, is not a bar to a present determination of representatives.
We find that a question affecting commerce exists concerning the
representation of employees of the Employer within the meaning of
Section 9 (e) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Petitioner seeks a unit of all office and clerical employees of the
employer at its Galesburg plant, excluding secretaries to executives,
executives, and professional and supervisory employees as defined by
the Act. The Petitioner wishes to include within the unit one general
ledger clerk, a senior accounting clerk and one time-study clerk. The
Employer contends that they are confidential employees and would
therefore exclude them. The Intervenor takes no position as to the
proposed inclusion of these employees.
The general ledger clerk handles general ledger work and prepares
the monthly financial statements for the corporation. The senior ac-
counting clerk has access to profit and loss statements of the Employer,
the assets statement, and the Employer's general financial position.
Although such information may be confidential from a business point
of view, it does not relate directly to labor relations matters.8 Accord-
ingly, we'find that the general ledger clerk and senior accounting clerk
are not confidential employees, and we shall include them.
The time-study clerk types and distributes to the various depart-
ments results of time studies made up by the regular time-study em-
ployees. She has access to all time-study files and performs other
clerical and secretarial duties in the time-study department. There is
no evidence that in the performance of her clerical duties she handles
any work pertaining to the labor relations of the Employer; she con-
6 See Matter of Mississippi Lime Company of Missouri , 71 N. L. it . B 472 , where the
Board held that in order to prevent a contract from becoming a bar to a representation
proceeding , a rival union must file its petition on or before the day preceding the consum-
mation of such contract.
T See Matter of Wilson-Jones Company, 75 N L. R. B . - 706 ; Matter of Essex County
News Co , Inc , 75 N L . it. B 697.
8 See Matter of Revere Copper and Brass, Inc ., 74 N. L it. B. 88 ; and cases cited therein.
GALE PRODUCTS 257
sequently is not a confidential employee under our definition.' We
shall, therefore, include her in the unit.
We find, in substantial agreement with the parties, that all office and
clerical employees of the Employer at its Galesburg, Illinois, plain
including the general ledger clerk,10 the senior accounting clerk,"
and the time-study clerk,12 but excluding secretaries to executives, exec-
utives, secretaries to the factory superintendent, personnel officer, vice
president and plant manager, chief accountant, chief engineer, and
factory manager, nurses, guards, assistant personnel manager, time-
study employees, draftsmen, engineers, chief tool designers, profes-
sional employees and supervisors as defined by the Act, constitute a,
unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the
meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION 73
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining with Gale Products, Galesburg, Illinois,
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 Thir-
teenth Region, and subject to Sections 203.61 and 203.62 of National
Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 5, 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 said pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation or
temporarily laid off, but excluding those employees who have since quit
or been discharged for cause and have not been rehired or reinstated
prior to the date of the election, and also excluding employees on strike
who are not entitled to reinstatement, to determine whether they
desire to be represented by Local No. 221, Office Employees Inter-
national Union (AFL), or by Local No. 3, Independent Marine and
Machinists Union, for purposes of collective bargaining, or by neither.
Matter of Ai t Metal Construction Company , 75 N L R. B 80
Phillip Lindbeck.
11 Robert Burgoyne.
12 Palma Gagg.
13 Any participant in the election directed herein may, upon its prompt request to, and
approval thereof by, the Regional Director, have its name removed from the ballot.