Green Bay Drop Forge Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 19, 1944

57 N.L.R.B. 1417 (N.L.R.B. 1944)

In the Matter of GREEN BAY DROP FORGE COMPANY and UNITED FARM
EQUIPMENT AND METAL WORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO
'Case No. 13-R-2478.-Decided August 19, 1944
Mr. F. N. Trowbridge, of Green Bay; Wis., for, the Company.
Meyers & Meyers by Mr. H. E. Baker, of Chicago, Ill., for the CIO.
Padway & Goldberg by Mr. David Previant, of Milwaukee , Wis.,,
for the AFL. -
Miss Frances Lopinsky, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
ORDER
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon a petition duly filed by United Farm Equipment and Metal,
Workers of America, CIO, herein called the CIO, alleging that a,
question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation
of employees of -Green Bay Drop Forge Company, Green Bay, Wis-
consin, herein called the Company, the National Labor Relations
Board provided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice before
Russell Packard, Trial Examiner. Said hearing was held at Green
Bay, Wisconsin, on July 7, 1944. The Company, the CIO and Inter-
national Brotherhood of Blacksmiths, Drop Forgers & Helpers of
America, Local 93, AFL, herein called the AFL, appeared and par
ticipated.) All parties were, afforded full opportunity. to be heard,
to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence
bearing on, the issues. At the hearingAhe .AFL moved, for, the dis-
missal of the petition, alleging that the CIO made no showing of
interest among the employees of the Company and that an AFL con-
tract with the Company is a bar a present determination of
representatives. For reasons hereinafter given, the. motion is
granted.2 The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are,free
3 United Automobile Workers of America, C . I. O , also served with notice , did not appear:
2 We find no merit in the AFL 's contention that the CIO made no showing of interest in
the plant . Although the CIO's cards were not checked against the Company's pay roll,
they were sufficient to satisfy the Board that a hearing should be held.
57 N. L R . B., No. 220.
1417
1418 , DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. All parties were
.afforded an opportunity to file briefs with the Board. -
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS'OF THE COMPANY
Green Bay Drop Forge Company, a Wisconsin corporation, oper-
ates a drop forge plant at Green Bay, Wisconsin,. where it is engaged
in jobbing drop forge products. The Company maintains a machine
,shop and manufactures precision machinery. Raw materials used by
the Company are steel bars, fabricated metal sheets and forgings.
'During the 12-month period preceding the hearing, it purchased raw
.materials in excess of $100,000 in value, approximately 50 percent of
which was received from sources outside the State of Wisconsin. Dur-
ing the same period, its sales were in excess of $500,000, of which more
--than- 50 percent represented products= nialiufactured and shipped to
points outside the State of Wisconsin.'
The Company admits that 'it is engaged in commerce within the
,meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
II.' THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
United-Far-m- Equipment-and Metal.Workers of America, -affiliated
with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, is a labor organization
:admitting to membership employees of the Company.
International Brotherhood of Blacksmiths, Drop Forgers & Helpers
of America, Local 93, affiliated with the American Federation of Labor,
is a labor organization admitting- to membership employees of the
,Company.
M. THE ALLEGED QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
In 1933, the Company_ recognized the AFL as the exclusive bargain-
ing representative of its employees. From 1933 until\1935,'the Com-
-pany and the AFL operated under an oral agreement which was
reduced to writing in 1985,3 but was not signed by either party. On
August 11, 1941, the parties executed I- a memorandum ratifying, con-
firming, and approving the 1933 agreement' together with all subse-,
a This agreement was entitled "Shop Rules" but contained provisions for the regulation
of working conditions, seniority , grievances procedure , and other elements which normally
characterize a collective bargaining agreement.
* The AFL representative 's signature appeared on the memorandum under the word
"approved ." However, the Rules imposed certain obligations on the AFL, and in our
-opinion, the AFL by "approving" the Rules thereby bound itself.
GREEN -BAY DROP FORGE COMPANY 1419
-quent 'agreements -entered into between them up to and including the
date of the memorandum, and providing that the ratification should
4 for all intents and purposes bind said corporation as effectively as if
said ' agreement and subsequent agreements or amendments thereto
shall have been signed and sealed by said corporation."
Among the_•agreements' covered-by-the,said memorandum- were-the -
following, relating to vacation policy, termination date, and interim
negotiation of wages :
The Company is willing to consider once each year, in the spring
of the year, the allowance of some form of vacation with pay to
the men. Each year will be considered separately, no preceding
experience to be used as a criterion. The Board of Directors will
arrive at their determination each year upon the basis of the con-
dition of the Company financially and industrially for the year
the request is made.,
Rule 14
(a) Rule113 'is changed to read as follows : This agreement is in
effect as of March 1 , 1937, and shall remain in effect until March 1,
1938 , and for renewal periods of one (1 ) year thereafter unless
notice is filed by either party in writing , of a desire for a change
or modification , thirty days prior to expiration`of any such period.
(b) Starting February 1, 1938 , meetings will be held during the
month of February to establish rate schedules to apply as of March
1st, 1938. ( This • procedure will follow each year.)
(c) By arrangements with the committee during the months of
June and July the management will cooperate with the commit-
tee in quoting new business to secure information relative to the
possible increased prices that would permit rate advances during
the starting - contract periods e
In accordance with their usual practice, the parties to the contract,
in March 1944, began negotiations on the subject of a vacation schedule
for 1944. Agreement was reached on May 21, 1944, and was submitted
to the War Labor Board, for approval. The War Labor Board ap-
proved the vacation schedule on June 24, 1944. Also, in accordance
with their established practice, though not strictly in conformance with
the contract,' the parties began negotiations for a new wage scale in
September 1943. Agreement on a wage scale was reached in November
1943 and approved by the War Labor Board on May 10,1944.'
6 Letter written by the Company to the AFL June 17, 1938.
n Rules as revised February 6, 1936.
T The parties , without amending Rule 14 (b) and ( c) carried on the studies and the
negotiations . provided for therein without adhering to the dates,set by the contract for
such discussions.
1420 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR , RELATIONS BOARD
On May 25, 1944, the CIO, requested recognition as, the exclusive
bargaining representative of the employees of the Company. The
Company asked the CIO to establish proof of its contention that it
represented a majority of the employees of the Company. The AFL
contends that its contract is a bar to a present determination of rep-
resentatives, claiming that by operation of Rule 14 (a) of its contract
with the Company, the contract was renewed on or about February 1,
1944, for a term of a, year from March 1, 1944; that the negotiations
concerning wagesiand vacations did"not operate to nullify the auto=
matic renewal clause as contended by the CIO; and that, even if the
Board should find that the said clause was rendered, inoperative, all
negotiations had been completed and the contract if "opened" was
"closed" before the,ClO made its demand for recognition. At the
hearing the Company agreed with the AFL's contention. We also
agree.
Due to, the exigencies of the Company's business, wage scales and
vacation schedules must be renegotiated at intervals not necessarily
coinciding with the contract, term. Voluntary, negotiations, for amend-
ment of, 'a contract, where the parties, do not undertake to alter the
duration of-the contracts do not necessarily; preyent the; automatic re=
newal thereof pursuant to a provision, providing, for such,-renewal,
especially where, as in the instant case , the negotiations concern mat-
ters which are subject to constant change, contemplated by and pro-
vided for in the contract itself. Moreover, if it could be said that the
afore-mentioned negotiations, did have the effect of nullifying the auto-
matic renewal clause of the contract, the contract would- nevertheless
be a bar because, with exception, of approval by the War Labor Board
of the vacation schedule," all negotiations were, closed 10 prior .to- the
time the CIO made its,request for, recognition, and the contract re-
sulting from such negotiations did not prolong, beyond the term of the
original contract the period within which another organization is pre-
cluded from seeking a determination of representatives. Accordingly,
we shall dismiss the petition of the CIO; however,, such. dismissal as
without prejudice to the right-of the CIO to file a petition' a-reasonable
time prior to January 30, 1945, the next renewal date of the contract.
8 Cf. Matter of lVachuta Union Stockyards Co., 40 N L. R. B 369 ; Matter of Memphis
Furniture Manufacturing Company, 51 N. L R. B 1447.
9 The pendency of the agreement respecting a vacation schedule before the war Labor
Board is not , in our opinion , sufficient in itself to affect in any way the question of whether
or not the contract is a bai
11 The AFL and the Company constantly discuss upgrading certain individuals. we
regard such discussions in the nature of the settlement of grievances , not as negotiations
for amendment of a contract.
GREEN BAY DROP FORGE COMPANY 1421
ORDER
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and the entire
record in the case, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders
^that. the,petition for investigation ,and certification of representatives
of employees of Green Bay Drop Forge Company, Green Bay,'Wis-
consin, filed by United Farm Equipment and Metal Workers of
America, CIO, be, and it hereby is,dismissed.
CHAIRMAN MILUs took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Order.