General Mills, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 5, 1948

77 N.L.R.B. 474 (N.L.R.B. 1948)

In the Matter of GENERAL MILLS, INC., MECHANICAL DIVISION, EM-
PLOYER and INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS, DISTRICT
77, PETITIONER
Case No. 18-RC-12.-Decided May 5, 1948
Mr. D. E. Balch, of Minneapolis, Minn., for the Employer.
Mr. James Ashe, of St. Paul, Minn., for the Petitioner.
Mr. Douglas Hall, of Minneapolis, Minn., for the Intervenor.
DECISION
AND
ORDER
Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at Minne-
apolis, Minnesota, on December 18, 1947, before Erwin Peterson, hear-
ing officer. At the hearing the Employer moved to dismiss the petition
on theground'that the unit sought by the Petitioner was inappropriate.
The hearing officer referred the motion to the Board. For reasons dis-
cussed in Section III, infra, the motion is granted. The hearing
officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and
are hereby affirmed.'
Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations
Board 2 makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
General Mills, Inc., Mechanical Division, a Delaware corporation,
is engaged in the manufacture of precision tools and machinery for
1 United Electrical , Radio, and Machine Workers of America , Local 1140 , CIO, herein
called the Intervenor, was permitted by the hearing officer to intervene only to the extent
of contending that its contract with the Employer was a bar to this proceeding The Inter-
venor has not complied with Section 9 (f), (g), and (h) of the Act. We have held that
a noncomplying union; with a contractual interest may intervene and be heard on all
relevant issues Matter of American Chain and Cable Co, Case No. 4-R-2752, issued
February 17, 1948. However, in view of our decision herein and the completeness of the
testimony and evidence in the record relating to the position of the Intervenor, we find that
the hearing officer 's ruling, under these circumstances , was not prejudicial Matter of
Baldwin Locomotive Works, 76 N. L R. B 922.
2 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 con-
sisting of Chairman Herzog and Members Reynolds and Murdock.
77 N. L. R. B., No. 82.
474
GENERAL MILLS, INC. 475
the United States Army and Navy, and sundry home appliances
at its principal office and place of business at Minneapolis, Minnesota.
During the year 1947 the Employer purchased raw materials valued
in excess of $4,000,000, of which more than 10 percent derived from
sources outside the State of Minnesota. During the same period the
Employer sold finished products valued in excess of $4,000,000, of
which more than 10 percent was shipped to points outside the State
of Minnesota.
We find that the Employer is engaged in commerce within the mean-
ing of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
The Petitioner is a labor organization, claiming to represent
employees of, the Employer.
United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America, Local
1140, herein called the Intervenor, is a labor organization affiliated
with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, claiming to represent
employees of the Employer.
III. THE ALLEGED APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Petitioner seeks a unit of employees employed primarily in the
toolroom of the Employer's tool engineering department,3 including
tool and die makers, toolroom machinists, tool and gage grinders, jig
bore operators,4 machinery repair employees, and the helpers, appren-
tices, and leadmen in the above classifications; but excluding the tool
design employees,5 pattern workers,° clerks, stenographers, all salaried
employees, and supervisors. The Intervenor and the Employer con-
tend that the proposed unit should not be severed from the existing
production and maintenance unit, that it does not comprise a sepa-
rate, clearly identifiable craft group and, moreover, that many of the
toolroom employees perform substantially the same duties as those of
other employees in the production department, whom the Petitioner
does not seek to include.
3 At the hearing the Petitioner moved to amend its petition to include carboloy grinding
employees and also requested the Board to consider the advisability of including employees
in the tool crib. Both the Intervenor and the Employer objected to this amendment on
the ground that the tool-crib employees were already included as part of the production and
maintenance unit under the terms of the Intervenor's proposed new contract with the
Employer. The hearing officer referred the motion to the Board. We find it unnecessary
to rule on this motion in view of our decision 'that the unit sought by the Petitioner is
otherwise inappropriate
No employees are presently employed in this classification in the toolroom.
5 Represented in a separate unit by International Federation of Technical Engineers,
Architects and Draftsmen, A F L
6 Not represented by any labor organization
476 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
The history of collective bargaining reveals that the employees
sought in this petition have been represented as part of the existing
unit of the Employer's production and maintenance employees since
1941. In 1946 the Intervenor replaced the Petitioner as the certified
bargaining representative for the plant-wide unit.
The Petitioner does not contend that the proposed unit constitutes a
craft unit within the tool engineering department. Apparently, it
relies upon supervision and superior skill to distinguish between these
employees and machine shop employees in the production and main-
tenance unit. The toolroom employees are paid from 5 to 10 cents more
per hour than the machine shop employees in comparable classifica-
tions.
The various sections of the tool engineering department are under
the general supervision of a Chief Tool Engineer. The employees in
the toolroom are directly supervised during the day shift by the Assist-
ant Chief Engineer, who supervises, in addition, the machinery repair
section, the tool design shop, and the pattern shop. On the second shift
a foreman supervises the toolroom, the machinery repair section and
the tool crib, the only sections in the tool engineering department
operating on two shifts.
We have customarily found inappropriate units of skilled em-
ployees, regardless of craft characteristics, where the unit did not in-
clude employees in other departments who possessed similar skills and
were engaged in the same or comparable operations.7
In the instant case the record shows that the only employees in the
toolroom who possess exceptional skills are the tool and die makers.
The work of the toolroom machinists and the tool and gage grinders is
duplicated to a large extent by skilled machinists and grinders in the
machine shop of the production department. Machines identical to
those used in the toolroom are used in large numbers in the machine
shop. There is constant interchange of work and materials between
the two shops. Although the toolroom normally manufactures special
machinery, the same machines may and frequently are reassigned for
manufacture in the machine shop. Toolroom machines are regularly
recruited from similar classifications in the machine shop. Present
plant seniority rules permit transfers either on a departmental or
plant-wide basis.
' See Matter of Lockheed Aircraft Corporation , 57 N. L . R B 41, wherein the Board
denied craft severance to a proposed unit of wood and metal pattern workers because it did
not include employees similarly employed in other departments in the plant ; Matter of
Voss Brothers Manufacturing Company , 62 N L . R. B 915 ; Matter of Gulf Oil Corporation,
77 N L R B 308. Cf Matter of The Norge Division, Borg Warner Corporation,
72 N. L R B. 1020, Matter of 0 V. Hill & Company, Inc, 76 N L R B 158.
GENERAL MILLS, INC. 477
The three machinery repair employees work throughout the plant
repairing equipment and machinery in the industrial manufacturing
department, home appliance department, and the toolroom. They are
physically located outside of the toolroom. However, most of their
time is spent in repairing machines and equipment used in the manu-
facturing department.
From these facts we conclude that the employees sought by the Peti-
tioner are not a separate, clearly identifiable department or subdivi-
sion distinguishable from the other production and maintenance em-
ployees. At most the requested unit comprises merely a segment of
a craft group. It is therefore inappropriate. Accordingly, we shall
dismiss the petition.
We find that no question affecting commerce exists concerning the
representation of employees of the Employer in a unit appropriate for
the purposes of collective bargaining.
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for investigation and certifica-
tion of representatives of employees of General Mills, Mechanical
Division, Minneapolis, Minnesota, filed by International Association
of Machinists, District 77, be, and it hereby is, dismissed.
CHAIRMAN HERZOG took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Order.