General Finance Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 10, 1950

88 N.L.R.B. 1031 (N.L.R.B. 1950)

In the Matter of GENERAL FINANCE CORPORATION, EMPLOYER and
OFFICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION, LOCAL No. 10, AFFILIATED
WITH THE AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR, PETITIONER
Case No . 7-ML-735.Decided March 10, 1950
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before George A.
Sweeney, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the
hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor
Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with
this case to a three-member panel [Chairman Herzog and Members
Houston and Reynolds].
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer, with its home office in Chicago, Illinois, and
branch offices in Michigan, New York, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania,
Indiana, Georgia, and Virginia, is engaged in consumer financing,
largely through purchases from automobile dealers of the paper on
which their credit sales are made. The Employer operates through
three subsidiaries, each with offices in several States : General Finance
Loan Company of Delaware; and Mid-State Insurance Company and
General Inspection Company, both in Chicago, Illinois.
During 1948 the Employer's Detroit office, which alone is involved
in this proceeding, purchased office materials and supplies valued in
excess of $10,000, of which approximately 80 percent was shipped from
the Chicago home office. During the same period the Detroit office
extended more than $1,000,000 of credit per month to finance purchases
of automobiles outside the State of Michigan.
We find, contrary to the contention of the Employer, that it is
engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act.'
2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain em-
ployees of the Employer.
1 Transit Casualty Company, 83 NLRB 857; and cases cited therein.
88 NLRB No. 189.
1031
1032 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9
(c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The Employer and the Petitioner agree that office and clerical
employees at the Employer's Detroit, Michigan, office, excluding the
regional manager, the operations manager, guards, and supervisors,
constitute an appropriate collective bargaining unit. The parties dis-
agree as to the inclusion, in this unit, of inside and outside collectors
and new business salesmen, whom the Employer would include and
the Petitioner would exclude. The parties further disagree with re-
spect to the unit placement of certain persons, discussed below.
As noted above, the Employer is engaged in consumer financing,
largely through purchases from automobile dealers of the paper on
which their credit sales are made. The Employer's Detroit, Michigan,
office, which alone is involved in this proceeding, has approximately
35 employees and is organized into several highly integrated depart-
ments under the general supervision of the operations manager, who,
in turn, is responsible to the general manager.
Inside and outside collectors: Of the eight persons employed in the
collections department at the Detroit office, three are inside collectors,
four are outside collectors, and one acts as both an outside and inside
collector. Inside collectors, working in the office, effect collections by
means of office correspondence and the use of office telephones; on
occasion they assist outside collectors in the field. Outside collectors,
spending 75 percent of their working time away from the office, effect
collections through direct contacts and repossess cars of defaulting
purchasers; the remainder of their time they spend at the office, pre-
paring detailed records of their activities in the field, checking delin-
quent accounts, and performing the work of inside collectors. Inside
and outside collectors receive higher pay than the other office em-
ployees and differ in their conditions of employment, largely due to
the nature of the work they perform.2 On the other hand, the func-
tions of inside and outside collectors to a considerable extent overlap
those of employees in the office whose work is of a more routine clerical
nature; for example, collectors and office employees telephone requests
for payments on delinquent accounts, accept payments at the office, and
perform clerical operations in connection with collections. Further-
more, inside and outside collectors may perform work for other de-
partments, and vice versa during frequent rush periods. We find that
the work of outside collectors is closely allied with that of inside col-
lectors, and we further find that the work of inside and outside col-
2 Collectors record "present" and "absent" on their time cards, whereas the other office
employees record the times of their arrivals and departures ; collectors receive no overtime
compensation , as do the other office employees.
GENERAL FINANCE CORPORATION 1033
lectors is highly integrated with that performed in the other office
departments. We shall therefore include inside and outside collectors
in the unit which we herein find appropriate.3
New business salesmen: 4 The three new business salesmen, operating
outside the office, solicit new business and collect overdue interest on
dealers' accounts. They also spend a substantial amount of time in
the office, preparing rate charts and dealer reports and agreements; in
addition, they frequently assist in the work of the collections and
credit departments during rush periods, which may occur as often as
once a week. The work performed by new business salesmen is closely
integrated with, and frequently the same as, that performed by col-
lectors and regular office employees. We shall therefore include new
business salesmen in the unit herein found appropriate.'
Helen Smullen, whom the Employer seeks to include, and the Peti-
tioner, to exclude, is a secretary to the regional manager, who handles
the Employer's labor policies. Smullen is a confidential employee6
and we shall therefore exclude her as such from the unit.
Rudolph Freyhan and Cornelia Dillon, whom the Employer seeks
to include and the Petitioner to exclude, perform work of a clerical
nature in connection with Consumers Home Equipment, one of the
Employer's accounts. The office of that customer, where these two
employees used to work, is closed and, as a result, they have working
space on a second floor balcony of the Employer's Detroit office, along
with the Employer's switchboard operator, whereas the Employer's
other office employees work on the first floor. Because Freyhan and
Dillon perform work similar to that of employees included in the unit,
we shall include them.
Arthur T. Prew, a new business salesman, is a son of the regional
manager. We shall exclude him from the unit on the basis of this
relationship?
May Andrews, Richard Yantis, Richard Pless, Jack Thompson, and
Larry Holton: The Employer contends that Andrews, Yantis, Pless,
Thompson, and Holton should be included in the unit; the Petitioner
contends that they are supervisors and should be excluded from the
unit. Andrews signs checks, does branch accounting, assists in the
office wherever she is needed, and trains and instructs office employees.
Although she has no official title, she is regarded by several of the office
employees as the office manager and was so referred to by the regional
manager at one of the Employer's staff meetings a few years ago.
' Credit Bureau of Greater Boston, Inc ., 73 NLRB 410.
New business salesmen are sometimes referred to as "dealer contact men."
B. H. Sargent and Company, 72 NLRB 220.
8 1V. K. B. H., Inc., 81 NLRB 63.
7 Broadway Iron and P ipe Corporation, 83 NLRB 942.
1034 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
There is evidence that she may reprimand employees and effectively
recommend their promotion and discharge. We find that Andrews
is a supervisor and shall exclude her from the unit. Yantis, Pless, and
Holton are employed in the collections department, the new business
department, and the credit department, respectively. It does not ap-
pear that any of these employees have official titles or exercise super-
visory functions.8 We shall therefore include Yantis, Pless, and
Holton in the unit. Thompson, employed in the loan department, is a
son-in-law of the operations manager. He exercises no supervisory
functions; we shall, however, exclude him from the unit on the basis
of his relationship .9
We find that all office and clerical employees at the Employer's
Detroit, Michigan, office,19 including inside and outside collectors and
new business salesmen, but excluding confidential employees, guards,
Arthur T. Prew, Jack Thompson, the regional manager, the opera-
tions manager, and other supervisors, constitute a unit appropriate
for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Sec-
tion 9 (b) of the Act.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining with the Employer, an election by
secret ballot shall be conducted at such time as the Board shall in the
future direct, upon advice from the Regional Director that an election
may appropriately be held, under the direction and supervision of
the Regional Director for the Region in which this case was heard, and
subject to Sections 203.61 and 203.62 of National Labor Relations
Board Rules and Regulations, among the employees in the unit found
appropriate in paragraph numbered 4, above, who were employed
during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of this
Direction of Election, 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 has 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 or not they
desire to be represented, for purposes of collective bargaining, by
Office Employees International Union, Local No. 10, affiliated with
the American Federation of Labor.
8 Although the regional manager testified, at one point in the hearing, that he might
on occasion be influenced by Yantis' recommendations relative to the hire and discharge of
employees , he further testified that he would rely only on a recommendation from the oper-
ations manager.
9 Win. P. McDonald Corporation, 83 NLRB 427.
10 Included as office and clerical employees are Freylian, Dillon, Yantis , Pies ,;, and Holton.