Gemmer Manufacturing Company

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 29, 1939

12 N.L.R.B. 584 (N.L.R.B. 1939)

In the Matter of GEMMER MANUFACTURING COMPANY and INTERNA-
TIONAL UNION, UNITED AUTOMOBILE `YORKERS OF AMERICA, LOCAL
No. 80
Case No. R-1,304.-Decided April 29,1939
Automobile Parts Manufacturing Industry-Investigation of Representatives:
controversy concerning representation of employees : refusal of employer to recog-
nize union as exclusive representative of all the employees-Unfit Appropriate
for Collective Bargaining : hourly rated production employees and gang leaders
excluding all other salaried employees , office employees, watchmen , superin-
tendents , foremen, assistant foremen, and executive employees-Representatives:
proof of choice : comparison of pay roll with union cards -Certification of Rep-
resentatives : upon proof of majority representation.
Mr. Charles F. McErlean, for the Board.
Goodenough, Voorhies, Long & Ryan, by Mr. Paul Franseth, of
Detroit, Mich., for the Company.
Mr. Ernest Goodman, of Detroit, Mich., for the Union.
Mr. Theodore W. Kheel, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On November 14, 1938, International Union, United Automobile
Workers of America, Local No. 80, herein called the Union, filed with
the Regional Director for the Seventh Region (Detroit, Michigan)
a petition alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen
concerning the representation of employees of the Gemmer Manu-
facturing Company, Detroit, Michigan, herein called the Company,
and requesting an investigation and certification of representatives
pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49
Stat. 449, herein called the Act. On February 1, 1939, the National
Labor Relations Board, herein called the Board, acting pusuant to
Section 9 (c) of the Act and Article III, Section 3, of National
Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 1, as amended,
ordered an investigation and authorized the Regional Director to
conduct it and to provide for an appropriate hearing upon due
notice.
12 N. L. R. B., No. 68.
584
GEMMER MANUFACTURING COMPANY 585
On February 13, 1939, the Regional Director issued a notice of
bearing, copies of which were duly served upon the Company and
upon the Union. Pursuant to the notice, a hearing was held on
March 2 and 3, 1939, at Detroit, Michigan, before Edward Grand-
ison Smith, the Trial Examiner duly designated by the Board. The
Board, the Company, and the Union were represented by counsel
and participated in the hearing. Full opportunity to be heard,
to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence
bearing on the issues was afforded all parties. During the course
of the hearing the Trial Examiner made several rulings on motions
and on objections to the admission of evidence. The Board has
reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner and finds that no preju-
dicial errors were committed. The rulings are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
The Company, a Michigan corporation, is engaged in the manufac-
ture, sale, and distribution of steering gears for automobiles, trucks,
and boats. Its office, principal place of business, and manufacturing
plant are all located in Detroit, Michigan. For the year 1938, the
Company's receipts from sales totaled $1,876,889. Of this amount,
19.67 per cent came from sales of merchandise shipped outside the
State of Michigan. During the same period, the Company spent
$1,154,000 for raw materials. Of this amount, from 40 to 50 per cent
was expended on raw materials shipped to the Company from
sources outside the State of Michigan.
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
International Union, United Automobile Workers of America,
Local No. 80, is a labor organization admitting to its membership all
employees of the Company except employees who have the right to
hire, discharge, or discipline other employees.
M. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
During several years of negotiations, the Company continuously
refused to recognize the Union as the representative of all the em-
ployees. Shortly prior to the date of hearing, the Company offered
to enter into a contract with the Union which would provide as
follows :
The Company recognizes the Union as the bargaining agency
for its members who are employees of the Company on matters
586 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
of wages, hours, and conditions of work. During the term of
this agreement the Company will not bargain in relation to
matters covered by this agreement with any other organization
or group of employees unless required to do so by law.
The Company introduced evidence to prove either that the Union
had accepted the contract or might accept it at a meeting of its mem-
bership to be held on the week end following the date of hearing. It
also argued that for all practical purposes the above-cited clause gave
the Union the recognition required by the Act and therefore the Board
should dismiss the petition.
Section 9 (a) of the Act provides : "Representatives designated or
selected for the purposes of collective bargaining by a majority of
the employees in a unit appropriate for such purposes shall be the
exclusive representatives of all the employees in such unit...."
In view of this provision in the Act, the clause presents no bar to the
petition. Despite the limitation placed on the Company's right to
bargain with other organizations as to the matters covered by the
proposed contract, it is apparent that the Company has not offered to
accord the Union the recognition which the Act guarantees to a labor
organization that represents a majority of employees in an appro-
priate unit. Exclusive recognition is withheld and a contract grant-
ing less than exclusive recognition cannot operate to estop the Union
from asserting its right to such recognition under the. Act
We find that a question has arisen concerning the representation of
employees of the Company.
IV. THE EFFECT OF THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION UPON
COMMERCE
We find that the question concerning representation which has
arisen, occurring in connection with the operations of the Company
described in Section I above, has a close, intimate, and substantial rela-
tion to trade, traffic, and commerce among the several States and tends
to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce and
the free flow of commerce.
V. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
It was stipulated and agreed by all parties in interest, and we find,
that all the hourly rated employees and gang leaders of the Company,
excluding all other salaried employees, office employees, watchmen,
superintendents, foremen, assistant foremen, and all other supervisory
and executive employees, constitute a unit appropriate for the pur-
'Matter of White Sewing Machine Corporation and United Electrical, Radio and Machine
Workers of America, Local 721, 10 N L R. B. 802.
GEMMER MANUFACTURING COMPANY 587
poses of collective bargaining and that said unit will insure to em-
ployees of the Company the full benefit of their right to self -organiza-
tion and to collective bargaining and otherwise effectuate the policies
of the Act.
VI. TIIE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
The pay roll of January 8, 1939, and the Company's seniority list
were both introduced into evidence. The pay roll contained the names
of 502 employees within the appropriate unit and the seniority list, the
names of 580. The Union introduced into evidence cards signed by
employees of the Company designating the Union as their representa-
tive. The Company's personnel manager, together with a representa-
tive of the Union and the Board, compared the signature on each card
with the signature of the same employee on the Company's employ-
ment cards. At the completion of this comparison, the Company's
attorney admitted that the signatures appeared to be genuine.
While the Company did not contest the authenticity of the cards,
it urged that an election be directed on the ground that the cards,
which were revocable powers of attorney, had been signed at a
time too long prior to the date of hearing. The majority of the
cards were signed on or about November 9, 10, and 11, 1938, and the
remainder at later dates.
We do not find that this argument has merit. No evidence was
introduced to prove that any employee had revoked his designa-
tion. The persons who obtained the signatures to the cards were
cross-examined by the Company's attorney as to the circumstances
under which the signatures were secured. In the absence of proof
to the contrary, we are of the opinion that the employees who signed
the designations continue to desire the Union to represent them.2
A comparison of the cards with the pay roll of January 8, 1939, and
the seniority list shows that 339 employees within the appropriate
unit have designated the Union as their bargaining agency. It is clear,
therefore, that a majority of the employees of the Company within
the appropriate unit desire the Union to represent them for such
purposes.
We find that the Union has been designated and selected by a
majority of the employees in the appropriate unit as their representa-
tive for the purposes of collective bargaining. It is, therefore, the
exclusive representative of all the employees in such unit for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining, and we will so certify.
Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and upon the entire
record in the case, the Board makes the following :
2 Cf. Matter of Richfield Oil Corporation and Marine Engineers Beneficial Association
No. 79, 7 N. L. R. B. 639.
588 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. A question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the repre-
sentation of employees of the Gemmer Manufacturing Company,
Detroit, Michigan, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2
(6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act.
2. The hourly rated production employees and gang leaders but
excluding all other salaried employees, office employees, watchmen,
superintendents, foremen, assistant foremen, and all other supervisory
and executive employees, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes
of collective bargaining, within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the
National Labor Relations Act.
3. International Union, United Automobile Workers of America,
Local No. 80, is the exclusive representative of all the employees in
such unit for the purposes of collective bargaining, within the meaning
of Section 9 (a) of the National Labor Relations Act.
CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
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 8, of National Labor Relations
Board Rules and Regulations-Series 1, as amended,
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED that International Union, United Automo-
bile Workers of America, Local No. 80, has been designated and
selected by a majority of the hourly rated production employees and
gang leaders of the Gemmer Manufacturing Company, Detroit, Michi-
gan, excluding all other salaried employees, office employees, watch-
men, superintendents, foremen, assistant foremen, and all other super-
visory and executive employees, as their representative for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining and that, pursuant to the provisions of
Section 9 (a) of the Act, International Union, United Automobile
Workers of America, Local No. 80, is the exclusive representative of
all such employees for the purposes of collective bargaining in respect
to rates of pay, wages, hours of employment, and other conditions of
employment.