Great Lakes Engineering Works

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 26, 1941

34 N.L.R.B. 1303 (N.L.R.B. 1941)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
In the Matter of GREAT LAKES ENGINEERING WORKS and LOCAL 2407,
STEEL WORKERS ORGANIZING COMMITTEE , C. I. 0.
Case No. R-2815.-Decided August 26, 1941
Jurisdiction : shipbuilding and ship repairing industry.
Investigation and Certification of Representatives : controversy concerning rep,
resentation of employees ; rival labor organizations : employer's refusal to
grant recognition to union on ground of subsisting contracts with rival
unions; contracts terminable upon 30 days' notice no bar to investigation and
certification ; election necessary.
Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : election ordered to determine
whether machine shop employees and the remaining employees of the Com-
pany shall constitute a single unit or two separate units.
Mr. Orville H. Foster, Jr., of Detroit, Mich., for the Company.
Mr. Maurice.Sugar, by Mr. Ned Smokier, of Detroit, Mich.; Mr.
Charles Z. Cowl, Mr. Charles Purkis, and Mr. Victor Young, of
Detroit Mich., and Mr. Michael E. Tierney, of Lincoln Park, Mich.,
for the S. W. 0. C.
Mr. William S. McDowell, of Detroit, Mich., and Mr. Henry P.
Laskowske, of River Rouge, Mich., for the Association.
Mr. Carl S. Carlson, of Detroit, Mich., and Mr. J. J. Murphy,
of Cleveland, Ohio, for the I. A. M.
Mr. J. H. Gutridge, of Milwaukee, Wis., for the Boilermakers.
Mr. Frederic B. Parkes, 2nd, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
On June 26, 1941, Local 2407, Steel Workers Organizing Com-
mittee C. I. 0.,' herein called the S. W. 0. C., filed with the Rigional
Director for the Seventh Region (Detroit, Michigan) a petition
alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning
the representation of employees of Great Lakes Engineering Works,
River Rouge, Michigan, herein called the Company, and requesting
an investigation and certification of representatives pursuant to Sec-
1 After the hearing Local 2407 , Steel Workers Organizing Committee , C. I. 0., was trans-
ferred to Industrial Union of Marine and Shipbuilding Workers of America.
34 N. L. R. B., No. 125.
1303
1304 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
tion 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein
called the Act. On July 14, 1941, the National Labor Relations
Board, herein called the Board, acting pursuant to Section 9 (c)
of the Act, and Article III, Section 3, of National Labor Relations
Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, ordered an
investigation and authorized the Regional Director to conduct it and
to provide for an appropriate hearing upon due notice.
On July 16, 1941, the Regional Director, issued a notice of hearing,
copies of which were duly served upon the Company and the S. W.
O. C. and upon Down River Shipbuilders Association, herein called
the Association, and International Association of Machinists, herein
,called the I. A. M., labor organizations claiming to represent em-
ployees directly affected by the investigation. Pursuant to notice,
a hearing was held on July 24, 25, 28, and 29, 1941, at Detroit,
Michigan, before Harold A. Cranefield, the Trial Examiner duly
designated by the Chief Trial Examiner. At the commencement of
the hearing, International Brotherhood of Boiler Makers, Iron Ship
Builders and Helpers of America, affiliated with the American Feder-
ation of Labor, herein called the Boilermakers, renewed a motion
to intervene which had been filed with the Regionar Director. The
Trial Examiner denied the motion for the reason that the Boiler-
makers submitted no evidence to show that it represented employees
of the Company directly affected by the investigation. At the be-
ginning of the hearing the Association filed a motion to intervene,
which was granted by the Trial Examiner. The Company, the
S. W. O. C., the Association, and the I. A. M., were represented by
counsel or official representatives 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. At the hearing, the Association and the I. A. M. moved to
dismiss the petition. The Trial Examiner reserved rulings on these
motions for the Board. The motions are hereby denied for reasons
set forth below. During the course of the hearing the Trial Ex-
aminer made various rulings on other motions and on objections to
the admission of evidence. The Board has reviewed the rulings of
the Trial Examiner and finds that no prejudicial errors were com-
mitted. The rulings are hereby affirmed.
Pursuant to notice, a hearing for the purpose of oral argument was
held before the Board on August 12, 1941, as Washington, D. C.
The Company, the S. W. O. C., the Association, and the I. A. M.
were represented by counsel and presented argument. The Company,
the Association, and the S. W. O. C. filed briefs which have been
considered by the Board.
GREAT LAKES ENGINEERING WORKS 1305
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY'
Great Lakes Engineering Works, a Michigan Corporation with its
principal office and plant at River Rouge, Michigan, is engaged in
shipbuilding and ship repairing. Other plants of the Company are.
located at Ashtabula, Ohio, and Detroit, Michigan; however, only the
employees of the Company's plant at River Rouge, Michigan, are in-
volved in this proceeding. Three bulk freight and ore carriers are
now under construction at the Company' s River Rouge plant for the
Pittsburgh Steamship Company, Cleveland, Ohio. During 1940 the
Company purchased $759,500 worth of raw materials , 68.9 per cent of
which were shipped to it from points outside the State of Michigan.
Although the Company did not build any ships during 1940, it re-
ceived an income of $2,275,000 during such period for repairing
vessels, $1,293,000 of which represented income from customers
outside the State of Michigan. The Company employs more than
600 employees at its River Rouge plant.
H. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
Local 2407, Steel Workers Organizing Committee, is a "labor or-
ganization affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations,
admitting employees of the Company to membership.
Down River Shipbuilders Association is an unaffiliated labor or-
ganization, admitting employees of the Company to membership.
International Association of Machinists, District Lodge No. 60, is a
labor organization affiliated with the American Federation of Labor,
admitting employees of the Company to membership.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The S. W. O. C. commenced its organizational activities at the
Company's plant the latter part of 1940. In a letter, dated May 26,
1941, the S. W. O. C. informed the Company that it represented a
majority of the Company's employees and requested the Company to
set a date for a conference. Two conferences between the Company
and the S. W. O. C. were held on June 12 and 24, 1941, respectively.
Prior to the latter meeting, the S. W. O. C. submitted its membership
cards to the Company which checked them with its pay roll and
found that the S. W. O. C. apparently represented more than a ma-
jority of the Company's employees. The Company, however, refused
8 See Matter of Great Lakes, Engineering Works and Down River Shipbuilders Association,
32 N. L R B. 809.
1306 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
to bargain with the S. W. O. C. until it had been certified by the
Board, for the alleged reason that it had valid subsisting contracts
with the Association and the I. A. M., covering the employees whom
the S. W. O. C. claimed to represent. On July 17, the S. W. O. C.
called a strike which was settled on July 25, 1941.
In 1937 the Board certified the I. A. M. as the statutory representa-
tive of the Company's machine-shop employees, and United Associa-
tion of Journeyman Plumbers and Steamfitters of the United States, af-
filiated with the American Federation of Labor, herein called the Jour-
neyman Plumbers, as exclusive collective bargaining representative of
the Company's plumbers, pipefitters, and steamfitters,3 and the Asso-
ciation as the statutory representative of the Company's electricians 4
Thereafter, the Company entered into a contract with the Associa-
tion and a separate contract with the I. A. M. and the Journeyman
Plumbers jointly, covering the units certified. In 1938, the Board cer-
tified the Association as the statutory representative of the welders.'
On March 12, 1940, the Company entered into a new contract with
the Association covering all its employees except the machinists,
plumbers, and steamfitters.6 The contracts contain no provision spe-
cifically limiting their respective duration, but each provides that it
may be amended upon 30 days' notice by either party. Amendments
to the I: A. M.-Journeymen Plumbers' contract, limited to changes
in the wage scale, were executed on January 6, 1939, and March 15,
1940, respectively.
In the early part of 1941, the Company, .the I. A. M., and the Asso-
ciation met in several conferences to negotiate changes in the
existing contracts. In February 1941, they ceased these negotiations,
upon the request of the Secretary of the Navy and the Chairman of
the Maritime Commission, pending the outcome of the proposed
Great Lakes Shipbuilding and Repair Stabilization Conference which
would set basic wage and other labor standards. On May 16, 1941,
however, the Company, the I. A. M., and the Association agreed that
the wage scale to be decided upon by the Great Lakes Conference
should be paid the Company's employees retroactively from May 4,
1941. They further agreed upon granting a week's vacation with pay
to employees who had accumulated a certain amount of seniority.
8 See Matter of Great Lakes Engineering Works and Detroit Metal Trades Council,
3 N. L. R. B. 825.
4 See Matter of Great Lakes Engineering Works and Detroit Metal Trades Council, 4
N. L. R. B. 191.
B See Matter of Great Lakes Engineering Works and Welders International Association,
6 N L. R B. 539.
8 In February 1941, the Regional Director of the Board after a payroll check certified
the Association as the representative of the plumbers, pipefitters , and steamfitters, but no
amendment to the contract was made. The Association testified that it has acted as
representative for those employees. It appears that the Journeymen Plumbers , who had
originally been certified ' as the statutory representative df such employees had ceased
functioning at the Company 's plant sometime previously.
GREAT LAKES ENGINEERING WORKS 1307
The results of such agreements were incorporated in a letter written
in June, but dated May 16, 1941, by the Company's director of per-
sonnel and sent to the Association and the I. A. M. The letter stated
that such agreements should become part of the existing contracts.
The Great Lakes Conference commenced on April 23, recessed to
April 26, and reconvened on June 30, 1941. Representatives of the
United States Government, shipbuilding and ship repairing com-
panies, and labor organizations in the Great Lakes area participated
in the conference. On July 11, 1941, the Great Lakes Conference
issued its Report and its Great Lakes Shipbuilding and Repair Zone
Standards Agreement, conditioned upon its approval by the Office of
Production Management, the Navy Department, and the U., S. Mari-
time Commission, and upon ratification by the shipbuilders and ship
repairers and the labor organizations in the Great Lakes Zone.s The
Zone Agreement sets forth basic provisions regarding hours of em-
ployment and other labor policies and prohibits strikes and lock-outs.
It provides, "The Zone standards established herein shall continue in
force and effect for a period of 2 years from the date upon which these
zone standards become effective and may be continued in force there-
after by mutual agreement." Provision is made, however, for the
future adjustment of the wage scale. In a letter, dated July 16, 1941,
to the Company, the Association accepted the Zone Agreement and
made it a part of its contract.
The Association and the I. A. M. contend that but for the cessation
of their negotiations early in 1941 at the request of officials of the
United States Government, they would have concluded contracts prior
to the date the S. W. O. C. requested recognition. The Association
also contends that the agreement made on May 16, 1941, 10 days before
the S. W. O. C.'s demand for recognition, incorporating the wage scale
to be established by the Zone Agreement, made that agreement a part
of the original contract, and that since the standards established by
the Zone Agreement are to be in effect for a period of 2 years, the
Association's contract with the Company was renewed on May 16 for
a period of 2 years. The I. A. M. also contends that its contract with
the ' Company precludes a present investigation and certification of
representatives. It appears that the I. A. M. has also ratified the Zone
Agreement.
The S. W. O. C., on the other hand, claims that a question concern-
ing representation exists and that the original contracts of the Asso-
ciation and the I. A. M. do not constitute a bar to this proceeding since
7 Office of Production Management , Department of Labor, Navy Department , and United
States Maritime Commission.
8 Similar zone agreements for the Atlantic Coast, Pacific Coast , and Gulf Coast areas had
previously been promulgated.
1308 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
they are terminable upon 30 days' notice. The Company takes no
position on this issue.
As indicated above, the Company's contracts with the Association
and the I. A. M. contain no provision limiting their respective duration
to a definite term. Both contain almost identical provisions for
amendments to the existing contracts upon 30 days' notice given by
either party. In our opinion, the equitable plea of the Association
and, the I. A. M. that they would have completed new contracts or
amendments to the existing contracts before the S. W. 0. C.'s demand
for recognition if their negotiations had not been halted by the offi-
cials of the United States Government, must fail. Although the Asso-
ciation and the I. A. M. assert that nearly all the amendments to the
existing contracts had been agreed upon before the negotiations were
suspended, had the new contracts been so completed, they would have
clearly been terminable on 30 days' notice, and therefore, no bar to an
election. Nor do we agree with the Association's contention that the
effect of the agreement on May 16, 1941, to incorporate the wage scales
which should be established by the Zone Agreement into the contract.
had the effect of superseding the 30-day clause by a 2-year contract.
That agreement as set forth in the letter previously mentioned was
limited solely to the wage scales to be established by the Zone Agree-
ment. The parties did not agree to incorporate any of its other pro-
visions. It is thus apparent that the Zone Agreement, as such, did not
become a part of the contracts of May 16, 1941, and consequently, that
the Association's contention that its contract may not be disturbed
during the 2-year term must fail. Since the existing contracts are
actually terminable upon 30 days' notice, we are of the opinion and
find that such contracts do not constitute a bar to a present investiga-
tion and determination of representatives.9
A report of the Regional Director and a statement of the Trial
Examiner introduced in evidence at the hearing show that the
S. W. 0. C. represents a substantial number of the Company's
employees."
We find that a question has arisen concerning the representation of
employees of the Company.
9 See Matter of Union Switch and Signal Company and United Electrical , Radio and
Machine Workers of America, Local 610, 30 N. L. R. B 212, and cases cited therein.
11 The S. W O. C. submitted 500 authorization cards to the Regional Director, who
reported as follows :
231 cards signed and dated between April 12 and July 22, 1941.
116 cards signed, bearing no date.
76 cards bearing names on the pay roll but neither signed nor dated.
19 cards not signed , but dated between April 12 and July 22, 1941.
18 cards bearing printed signatures and no dates.
11 persons filled out duplicated cards.
1 person filled out cards in triplicate.
28 cards bore illegible names and could not be identified.
GREAT LAKES ENGINEERING WORKS 1309
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
relation 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
The S. W. 0. C. claims that all hourly rated and piece-work em-
ployees of the Company, excluding executive, supervisory, clerical,
and plant-protection employees and piece-work counters, constitute
a unit appropriate for collective bargaining.h1 The Association and
the I. A. M. deny the appropriateness of the unit sought by the
S. W. 0. C. and .urge the dismissal of the petition. The Association
contends that the appropriate unit consists of all the employees, of
the Company with the exception of machinists, machinists' helpers
and apprentices, foremen, assistant foremen, company executives,
clerical and office employees, persons empowered to hire and dis-
charge employees, day and night watchmen, janitors, timekeepers,
and piece-work counters. The I. A. M. claims that machinists, ma-
chinists' apprentices and helpers, erector machinists, steam-crane
operators,12 and tug engineers 13 constitute a unit appropriate for
All the names of the 472 people for whom the union presented identifiable cards were
found to appear on the pay roll of the Company for the period ending July 12, 1941, con-
taining the names of 632 hourly paid employees . All the 347 signatures affixed to the
cards appear to be original genuine signatures and are names of persons whose names
appear on the Company 's July 12, 1941, pay roll . There are approximately 632 employees
in the unit sought by the S W. O. C. The S. W. O. C. submitted to the Trial Examiner
69 authorization cards of members employed in the Company 's machine shop. The Trial
Examiner compared 50 of them with the pay roll and found 31 to bear genuine signatures
corresponding to names on the machine-shop pay roll ; 2 bore genuine signatures, but on
the incorrect line, corresponding to names on the machine -shop pay roll; 3 cards bore
printed signatures, corresponding to names on the machine -shop pay roll ; 14 bore names
on the pay roll, but were unsigned . There are approximately 69 employees in the machine
shop.
11 The original petition alleged that the appropriate unit consisted of all hourly rate
'employees , excluding all executive , supervisory, clerical, and plant -protection employees,
but it was amended at the hearing to include piece-work employees as well as the hourly
rate employees . At the hearing before the Board, the S W. O. C. agreed to the exclusion
of piece-work counters.
13 See Matter of Great Lakes Engineering Works and Down River Shipbuilders Asso-
ciation, 32 N. L. R. B. 809 , where steam-crane operators were found to be part of the
unit represented by the I. A. M. -
13 See Matter of Great Lakes Engineering Works and Tug Firemen, Linemen and Oilers
Protective Association of America , affiliated with the International Longshoremen Asso-
cvation and the American Federation of Labor, 31 N. L R. B 520. It appears that tug
engineers work as erecting machinists part of the time and have been represented by the
I. A. M. for the purposes of collective bargaining.
1310 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
the purposes of collective bargaining.14 The Company takes no posi-
tion as to the appropriate unit.
The Company's employees are divided into approximately 20 de-
partments, in which practically all the mechanical crafts are rep-
resented. The various departments are coordinated by and are under
the control of a general superintendent of the hull division and a
general superintendent of the mechanical division. At the beginning
and end of each day's work, the employees report to their respective
departments. During the day they are dispersed and intermingled,
working together in the various parts of the plant.
The machine shop, however, is located in a building apart from
the other departments of the plant and employs approximately 32
employees, whose work rarely requires them to leave the shop. In
addition to these workers, there are approximately 37 erecting ma-
Shinists, including the steam-crane operators, who are part of the
machine-shop department but who work outside the machine shop
in the construction and repair of ships.
As indicated in Section III, above, the I.-A. M. has for more than
3'years been recognized as the exclusive bargaining agent for the
employees of the machine-shop department and has in fact bar-
gained for them. For approximately the same period of time, the
Association has similarly been recognized as the statutory represent-
ative of almost all the remaining employees of the plant and has
bargained for them.
From the foregoing it appears that the" employees of the Com-
pany's plant might properly constitute a single unit or two separate
bargaining units. We shall direct that two elections be held, one
among the machinists, machinists' apprentices and helpers, erector
machinists, steam-crane operators and tug engineers, to determine
whether they desire to be represented by the S. W. 0. C., by the
I. A. M., or by neither, and the other among the remaining employees
of the Company's plant to determine whether they desire to be rep-
resented by the S. W. 0. C., by the Association, or by neither. If
the employees voting in the two elections select the same represen-
tative, they will constitute a single appropriate unit. If they choose
different representatives, they will constitute two separate and.
distinct appropriate units.
There remains for consideration the question of whether certain
employees should be included in the voting units. Foremen, assistant
foremen, executives, clerical and office employees, persons empowered
to hire and discharge employees, day and night watchmen, janitors,
timekeepers, and piece-work counters were excluded from the unit
14 There is apparently no conflict as to the appropriate unit between the Association
and the I. A. M.
GREAT LAKES ENGINEERING WORKS 1311
covered by the contract between the Company and the Association.
It appears that the parties are in substantial agreement that such em-
ployees should be excluded from the unit each urges to be appropri-
ate. We shall exclude such employees from the appropriate units.
VI. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
The S. W. O. C. and the Company iequest the use of the pay roll
of July 12, 1941, for the purpose of determining eligibility to vote
in accordance with an agreement made between them upon the settle-
ment of the strike. The I. A. M. and the Association take no position
as to the pay roll to be used for such purpose. We find no reas9n
to depart from our usual practice and shall, accordingly, direct that
the employees of the Company eligible to vote in the elections shall
be those who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately
preceding the date of the Direction of Elections herein, subject to
such limitations and additions as are set forth in the Direction.
Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and upon the entire
record in the case, the Board makes the following:
CONCLUSION OF LAW
A question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the represen-
tation of employees of Great Lakes Engineering Works, River Rouge,
Michigan, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6)
and (7) of the Act.
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National
Labor Relations Board by Section 19 (c) of the National Labor Rela-
tions Act and pursuant to Article III, Section 8, of National Labor
Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, it is
hereby
DIRECTFA that, as part of the investigation authorized by the Board
to ascertain representatives for the purpose of collective bargaining
with Great Lakes Engineering Works, River Rouge, Michigan, elec-
tions 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 Seventh
Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National Labor Rela-
tions Board, and subject to Article III, Section 9, of said Rules and
Regulations, among all employees of the Company's plant in each of
the two groups-described below who were employed during the pay-
roll period immediately preceding the date of this Direction, includ-
ing employees who did not work during such pay-roll period because
they were ill or on vacation or in the active military service or train-
1312 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ing of' the United States, or temporarily laid- off, but excluding
foremen, assistant foremen, executives, clerical and office employees,
persons empowered to hire and discharge employees, day and night
watchmen, janitors, timekeepers, piece-work counters, and employees
who have since quit or been discharged for cause :
1. Among all machinists, machinists- apprentices and helpers,
erector machinists, steam-crane operators, and tug engineers to deter-
mine whether they desire to be represented by Local 2407, Steel
Workers Organizing Committee, affiliated with the Congress of
Industrial Organizations, or by International Association of Machin•
ists, District Lodge No. 60, affiliated With the American Federation
of Labor, for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by neither;
and
2. Among all remaining employees of the Company not desig-
nated in paragraph 1, above, to determine whether they desire to-be
represented by Local 2407, Steel Workers Organizing Comfnittee,
affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, or by Down
River Shipbuilders Association, for the purposes of collective
bargaining, or by neither.
MR. EDWIN S. SMrrx took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Direction of Elections.