General Cable Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 19, 1946

67 N.L.R.B. 538 (N.L.R.B. 1946)

In the Matter of GENERAL CABLE CORPORATION and INTERNATIONAL
BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, A. F. OF L., LOCAL 334
Case No. 3-R-971.Decided April 19,134,6
Messrs. A. Leon Fergenson and Milton G. Johnson, of New York
City, for the Company.
Mr. Jerome Winterhalt, of Rome, N. Y.., and Mr. Thaddeus Naagh-
ton, of Malverne, N. Y., for the Union.
Mr. Donald H. Frank, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEDIMNT OF THE CASE
Upon a petition duly filed by International Brotherhood of Elec-
trical Workers, A. F. of L., Local 334, herein called the Union, alleg-
ing that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the
representation of employees of General Cable Corporation, Rome, New
York, herein called the Company, the National Labor Relations Board
provided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice before Eugene
von Welisheim, Trial Examiner. The hearing was held at Rome, New
York, on September 11, 12, and 13, 1945. The Company and the Union
appeared and participated.2 All parties were afforded full oppor-
tunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to
introduce evidence bearing on the issues.
At the hearing, the Company moved the dismissal of the petition.
For the reasons stated in Section IV, infra, the motion is hereby
denied. The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are free
from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. All parties were af-
forded an opportunity 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
General Cable Corporation is a New Jersey corporation, engaged in
the manufacture of electrical cable and wire at its Rome, New York,
^ The name of the Union appears herein as corrected on the record.
2 The Cable Guild Independent Union, herein called the Cable Guild, and Interstate
Copper & Brass Workeis Union were served with Notice of Hearing, but failed to appear
or participate.
67 N. L. R. B., No. 69.
538
GENERAL CABLE CORPORATION 539
plant, the sole operation of the Company involved in this proceeding.
During the year 1944, the Company used in its manufacturing opera-
tions at its Rome plant raw materials valued in excess of $1,000,000, of
which more than 50 percent was shipped to the Rome plant from points
outside the State of New York. During that year, the Rome plant
produced finished products valued in excess of $1,000,000, of which
more than 50 percent was shipped to points outside the State of New
York.
The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the National Labor Relations Act, and we so find.
H. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 334, affili-
ated with the American Federation of Labor, is a labor organization
admitting to membership supervisory employees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Company has refused to grant recognition to the Union as the
exclusive bargaining representative of certain of the Company's super-
visory employees.
A statement of a Board agent, introduced into evidence at the hear-
ing, indicates that the Union represents a substantial number of em-
ployees in the unit sought.'
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 the Company's supervisory employees in
the production, maintenance, plant-protection, inspection, and labora-
tory sections 4 of the Rome plant, including assistant division superin-
tendents, general foremen, foremen, and supervisors,' but excluding the
plant manager, assistant plant manager, section heads, assistant section
heads, division superintendents, and all other employees. In addition
to its contentions concerning the composition of the proposed unit, the
Company asserts that the petition should be dismissed on the ground
(1) that supervisory employees are not "employees" within the mean-
' The Field Examiner repotted that the Union submitted 143 application cards, and that
there are approximately 225 employees in the unit sought.
' These units of the plant organization were variously referred to in the record as divi-
sions and departments They are referred to herein as "sections" in order to distinguish
them from the divisions and departments under them The Company refers to the main-
tenance section as "Engineering ," to the production section as "Manufacturing ," and to
the laboratory section as "Technical."
In its petition , the Union sought to include assistant foremen. There are no longer
any assistant foremen in this plant.
540 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ing of the Act, (2) that supervisory employees do not constitute an
appropriate unit, and (3) that the Union may not represent these em-
ployees because it is a local of an international organization, capable
of representing the Company's rank and file employees e In view of
our Decisions in Matter of Jones cZ Laughlin Steel Corporation, Vesta-
Shannopin Coal Division,7 and other recent cases,' we find no merit in
the Company's contentions and we have therefore denied the Com-
pany's motion to dismiss the petition.
There remains the problem of the proper grouping of the super-
visory employees sought to be represented. The Company is a large
corporation, many of the decisions concerning which are made at
company headquarters. The Rome plant is headed by a plant man-
ager and an assistant plant manager under whom there are 10 sec-
tion heads.e A few of these section heads also have assistants.
Some of the section heads are in charge of sections which are divided
into divisions. These are headed by 20 division superintendents.
Under the division superintendents come the following employees
the Union seeks to represent: approximately 25 assistant division
superintendents, 31 general foremen, 80 foremen, and 63 supervisors.
The Company contends that the assistant division superintendents and
the supervisors should be excluded from the proposed unit. The
Company would exclude the assistant division superintendents on the
ground that they are on the same supervisory level as the division
superintendents, whom the Union would exclude. The former cate-
gory of employees work the night shifts while the latter work days.
Although the assistants appear to be responsible to their division
superintendents, they perform the same functions on their shifts.
We are of the opinion that their interests are more closely linked to
their division superintendents than to the general foremen beneath
them, and we shall therefore exclude them from the unit hereinafter
found appropriate.1°
The Company would exclude the supervisors on the ground that
they are included in the rank and file units, as illustrated by the Cable
6Production and maintenance employees at the Rome plant were represented by the
Cable Guild at the time of the hearing. As the result of a consent election in January
1946, in Case No. 3-R-1106, the production and maintenance employees are now repre-
sented by United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America, C I 0 The
I. B. E W., but not this local, sought to represent these workers but was defeated in that
election.
66 N. L R. B. 386.
Matter of L. A. Young Spring & Wire Corporation, 65 N. L , R B 289 ; Matter of The
B. F. Goodrich Company, 65 N. L R. B. 294.
° At the hearing , no organizational chart of the Company 's activities or hierarchy were
submitted, but the parties agreed that, should the Company thereafter submit such charts,
they could be admitted into evidence Those charts have since been received, and are
hereby made a part of the record
10 Matter of Jones & Laughlin Steel Corporattion , Vesta-Shannopsn Coal Division, supra;
Matter of Simmons Company , 65 N. L. R. B. 984 ; cf. Matter of The Midland Steel Products
Company, Parish 4 B2ngham Division , 65 N. L. R. B. 997.
GENERAL CABLE CORPORATION 541
Guild's contracts. We note that the Cable Guild did not intervene
in this proceeding to protect any interest it may have claimed in these
employees. The 1945 Cable Guild contract covering production and
maintenance employees read , "excluding . . . assistant foremen, fore-
men, and all others in a capacity of equal or greater supervisory
authority." Many of the supervisors , the record shows, received that
designation, without any change in authority or duties, when the
designation "assistant foremen" was abolished. We are of the opin-
ion, therefore, that supervisors are not included in the unit of rank
and file employees and properly belong in units of supervisory em-
ployees.11 We shall include them in the unit hereinafter found
appropriate.
The Union originally requested a unit of the supervisory employees
in the production section, but at the hearing amended its petition,
over the objection of the Company, to include in the unit the super-
visory employees in the maintenance, inspection, laboratory, and
plant-protection sections.12 We have considered the question of the
appropriate grouping of supervisory employees in several recent
cases, and have concluded that the best results are to be achieved by
following, generally, the pattern established by the Board for units
of rank and file employees 13 We shall, therefore, exclude from the
unit hereinafter found appropriate the laboratory and plant protec-
tion supervisory personnel.'' Moreover, although the record does not
detail specifically the status of inspectors or the duties of their super-
visors in this plant, it reveals that the inspectors are separately bar-
gained for, and we shall therefore exclude their supervisors without
prejudice to a later reconsideration of this determination 1s
We find that all the Company's supervisory employees in the produc-
tion and maintenance sections of the Rome plant, including general
foremen, foremen, and supervisors, but excluding the plant manager,
assistant plant manager, section heads, assistant section heads, division
superintendents, assistant division superintendents, and all other em-
"In the afore-mentioned consent election in Case No 3-R-1106, the Regional Director
excluded supervisors from the production and maintenance unit
]' The record does not reveal, however, whether the Union desires separate elections
among those supervisory employees who we hereinafter determine may not appropriately
be included in the unit of production and maintenance supervisory employees
"Matter of Westinghouse Electric Corporation (East Springfield Worhs), 66 N I, R B
1297 , Matter of Federal-Mogul Corporation, 66 N L. R. B 532 , Matter of The Midland
Steel Products Company , Parish d Bingham Division, supra.
The Cable Guild Ras designated by the Board as the representative of production and
maintenance, inspection, plant-protection, and laboratory units of the Company's emploi ees
as a result of a series of consent elections and cross checks conducted between September
1941 and June 1944 In 1945, the last Cable Guild contract, covering all hourly rated
and salary employees" specificalli excluded guards. The contract does not reveal whether
or not laboratory workers have been contracted for separately, but we shall nevertheless
e^ elude their supervisors from the unit found appropriate
is We note additionally, that the Decision in Matter of General Cable Corporation, 62
N L R. B 437 , shows that the Company has a special policy of segregating its inspectors
from its other employees
542 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ployees, 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 Elec-
tion 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 Relations
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 General Cable
Corporation, Rome, New York, 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 Third Region, acting in this matter as
agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Article
III, Sections 10 and 11, 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 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 and have not
been rehired or reinstated prior to the date of the election, to deter-
mine whether or not they desire to be represented by International
Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, A. F. of L., Local 334, for the
purposes of collective bargaining.
Mn. GERARD D. REILLY, dissent ing :
For the reasons stated in my dissenting opinions in Matter of Pack-
ard Motor Car Company," and Matter of Jones & Laughlin Steel
Corporation, 1'e•yta-Sltannopin Coal Division,17 I any constrained to
disagree with the majority opinion.
'"6l N L R B 4
" 66 N L R B. 386