Ingram-Richardson Mfg. Co. of Indiana, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Oct 14, 1938

9 N.L.R.B. 200 (N.L.R.B. 1938)

In the Matter Of INGRAM -RICHARDSON MFG. CO. OF INDIANA , INC. and
AMALGAMATED ASSOCIATION OF IRON, STEEL & TIN WORKERS, LOCAL
1774
In the Matter Of INGRAM-RICHARDSON MFG. CO . OF INDIANA, INC. and
INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF FOUNDRY EMPLOYEES , LOCAL No.
64, AFFILIATED WITH THE A. F. OF L.
Cases Nos. R-991 and R-992, respectively.Decided October 14, 1938
Porcelain and Enamel Products Manufacturing Industry-Investigation of
Representatives : controversy concerning representation of employees* rival
organizations ; employer 's refusal to grant either union exclusive recognition
until one is designated by Board-Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining:
production and maintenance employees , exclusive of truck drivers , clerical
employees , and supervisory employees ; agreement as to : controversy as to
inclusion of 13 employees within unit-Representatives : proof of choice: com-
parison of membership cards of unions with pay roll-Certification of Repre-
sentatives : upon proof of majority representation
Mr. Lester M. Levin, for the Board.
Mr. Thomas M. Ryan, of Frankfort, Ind., for the Company.
Mr. Frank S. Pryor, and Mr. Hollis G. Davison, of Frankfort,
Ind., for the International.
A1.19. James Robb, Indianapolis, Ind., for the Amalgamated.
Mr. Allan Lind, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On June 29, 1938, Amalgamated Association of Iron, Steel, and
Tin Workers, Local No. 1774, herein called the Amalgamated, and
on July 19, 1938, International Brotherhood of Foundry Employees,
Local No. 64, herein called the International, filed with the Regional
Director for the Eleventh Region (Indianapolis, Indiana) separate
petitions each alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen
concerning the representation of employees of Ingram-Richardson
Manufacturing Company of Indiana , Inc., Frankfort, Indiana,
herein called the Company, and requesting an investigation and cer-
9 N. L. R . B., No. 31.
200
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 201
tification of representatives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act. On July 30,
1938, 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
1, as amended, ordered an investigation and authorized the Regional
Director to conduct it and to provide for an appropriate hearing
upon due notice. The Board, acting pursuant to Article III, Section
10 (c) (2), of said Rules and Regulations, further ordered that the
cases be consolidated for purposes of hearing.
On August 5, 1938, the Regional Director issued a notice of hear-
ing, copies of which were duly served upon the Company, upon the
Amalgamated, and upon the International. Pursuant to the notice,
a hearing was held on August 15, 1938, at Frankfort, Indiana, be-
fore Thomas H. Kennedy, the Trial Examiner duly designated by
the Board. The Board, the Company, the Amalgamated, and the
International were represented by counsel 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 af-
forded all parties. During the course of the hearing, the Trial
Examiner made several rulings on 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 committed.
The rulings are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Ingram-Richardson Manufacturing Company of Indiana, Inc., is
an Indiana corporation with its principal place of business located
in the city of Frankfort, Indiana. The Company is engaged in the
manufacture,' sale, and distribution of porcelain table tops, enameled
stove and refrigerator parts, and frit. The raw materials used by
the Company in its manufacturing operations consist of flat steel,
enameling stock, acids, sands, glass, mine products, oxides, light
chemicals, packing supplies, and gasoline. During the year 1937, the
cost of said raw materials amounted to $765,000, of which 85 per
cent were shipped to the Company from points outside the State of
Indiana. During the same year, the Company produced 448,000,
pieces of metal; 270,000 porcelain table tops; 5,330,000 square feet
of enameled steel stove parts; 3,500,000 pounds of enameled cast-
iron stove parts; and 10,700,000 pounds of frit. The estimated value
of such finished products amounted to approximately $900,000. Ap-
proximately 75 per cent of the finished products were shipped to
points outside the State of Indiana.
-202 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
Amalgamated Association of Iron, Steel, and Tin Workers, Local
No. 1774, is a labor organization affiliated with the Committee for
Industrial Organization, admitting to its membership production and
maintenance employees of the Company, exclusive of truck drivers,
clerical employees, and supervisory employees.
International Brotherhood of Foundry Employees, Local No. 64, is
a labor organization affiliated with the American Federation of
Labor and admits to its membership production and maintenance
,employees of the Company, exclusive of truck drivers, clerical em-
ployees, and supervisory employees.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
Early in 1937, both the Amalgamated and the International con-
ducted organization campaigns among the employees of the Com-
pany. Later in the same year, the Company entered into contracts
with these unions, whereby the Company recognized each as the col-
lective bargaining representative for its members. On May 24, 1938,
the Amalgamated requested the Company to renew the 1937 agree-
ment with it and to recognize it as the exclusive representative of all
the production employees. The Company refused to grant such
recognition but extended the 1937 agreement, which would have ex-
pired in June 1938, to September 1, 1938, pending the determination
of whether the Amalgamated was entitled to exclusive recognition.
In July 1938, the International likewise requested exclusive bargain-
ing rights for the same employees when its contract with the Com-
pany should expire in October 1938. The Company similarly refused
to grant such exclusive bargaining rights to the International.
We find that a question has arisen concerning representation of
employees of the Company.
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 com-
merce and the free flow of commerce.
V. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
All parties agreed at the hearing that the appropriate unit should
consist of "production department employees" of the Company, exclu-
sive of truck drivers, clerical employees, and supervisory employees.
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 203
From the record it is apparent that by the term "production depart-
ment employees" the parties intended to include production and main-
tenance employees. Both unions admit to membership the employees
in the unit they claim to be appropriate and we see no reason for
departing from such unit. We find that all the production and main-
tenance employees of the Company, exclusive of truck drivers, cleri-
cal employees, and supervisory employees constitute a unit appro-
priate for the purposes of collective bargaining and that said unit
will insure to employees of the Company the full benefit of their
right to self-organization and to collective bargaining and otherwise
effectuate the policies of the Act.
The Company introduced into evidence its pay roll as of August t2,
1938, which purported to show that there were 236 employees within
the appropriate unit. The Amalgamated claimed, however, that 13
of such individuals should be excluded from the unit. The Inter-
national did not take any position with respect to the status of these
13 employees. These employees, who are discussed below, were all
excluded from terms of the 1937 contracts between the unions and the
Company as being foremen, assistant foremen, firemen, watchmen,
fixed salaried employees, clerical employees, and supervisors.
The question for our determination is whether these 13 employees
are within the unit which was agreed upon and which we have found
to be appropriate.
llildreth Mavity supervises the quality of enamel production in the
laboratory department. He was excluded from the 1937 contracts as
a supervisory employee, and the record shows that his duties have not
been changed. We shall exclude him from the unit.
Roy McClure is engaged as a fireman, firing boilers at the Com-
pany's plant. The record does not clearly indicate whether firemen
are considered production or maintenance employees within the de-
scription of the unit we have found to be appropriate. The contracts
made by the Company in 1937 with the Amalgamated and the Inter-
national excluded firemen from their terms. No reason was advanced,
however, to show that firemen are not maintenance employees within
the unit we have found above to be appropriate, and it is apparent
that such employees are maintenance employees. We shall therefore
include Roy McClure within the unit.
Leo Cecil Toney and Charles C. Pittman were both assistant fore-
men in 1937 and as such were excluded from the terms of the 1937
contracts. At the time of the hearing, due to a reduction in the plant
force, both had been demoted to the position of "fuser, box furnace"
which is classified as a production position. There is a possibility
that if production increases they will be returned to their former posi-
tions as assistant foremen. In view of their present status as produc-
tion employees, however, we shall include them within the unit.
204 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Oliver -Coin was excluded in the 1937 agreements between the Amal-
gamated and the Company as a salaried employee in the "control
laboratory." His status had not been changed at the time of the
hearing and there was no clear showing that he is a production or
maintenance employee within the definition of the appropriate unit.
We shall therefore exclude him from the unit.
Paul Hauser, Fred Parnell, and Richard Smith were excluded from
the terms of the 1937 agreements as salaried employees. Since then
they have been placed on an hourly basis. They are classified as
"production chasers." It is their duty to see that certain items
-ordered by customers for a particular time go through the production
process at the plant according to the order. They are not themselves
-engaged,in production work and it would appear that their duties are
supervisory in character. We shall therefore exclude them from the
unit.
Clayton Johnson and Forrest M. Melling were classified as super-
visors in the 1937 agreements. There has been no change in their
work. It is their duty to check the "packers," who pack the finished
-products for shipment, and see that the orders are correctly filled by
the packers. We find that Johnson and Melling are supervisory
-employees and we shall exclude them from the unit.
George I. Dukes was a watchman and janitor at the time of the
hearing. Although janitors are included within the unit as mainte-
nance employees, watchmen, not being so classified, are excluded. The
--record does not indicate in which capacity Dukes spends most of his
-time. Since we cannot determine whether he is to be considered as a
production or maintenance employee and since neither union claims
he is within the appropriate unit, we shall exclude him from the unit.
• Irwin C. Gosewehr is an assistant millwright or maintenance fore-
man. We find that Gosewehr is a supervisory employee, and we shall
exclude him from the unit.
Abraham Hamilton was a watchman at the Company's plant at the
time of the hearing. We find that Hamilton is not a production or
maintenance employee and we shall exclude him from the unit.
VI. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
The Company's pay roll as of August 12, 1938, the last pay-roll
date preceding the hearing, showed that there are 226 employees
within the appropriate unit.' The Amalgamated and the Interna-
tional submitted their membership cards and application cards in
support of their respective claims to represent a majority of the em-
ployees involved. It was agreed by all parties at the hearing that
1 This figure was arrived at by excluding those employees whom the Company designated
as being supervisory employees and truck drivers and those whom we have found not to
,be within the appropriate unit.
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 205
132 signatures on the Amalgamated 's cards were genuine and were
those of employees on the Company's pay roll as of August 12, 1938.
The same agreement was made regarding 69 of the cards submitted
by the International.
We have examined the signatures on the cards of the two unions
and find that 16 employees have signed cards of both unions. As-
suming that those 16 employees intended to join the International,
it would appear that the Amalgamated still represents 116 of the 226
,employees in the appropriate unit and therefore a majority of them.
Under the circumstances , it is not necessary to determine the status
,of the 16 employees who have apparently joined both unions. We
find that the Amalgamated has been designated and selected by a
majority of the employees in the appropriate unit as their repre-
sentative for the purposes of collective bargaining . It is, therefore,
the exclusive representative of all the employees in such unit for the
purposes of collective bargaining , and we will so certify.
Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and upon the entire
record in the case, the Board makes the following :
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. A question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the repre-
sentation of employees of Ingram -Richardson Manufacturing Com-
pany of Indiana , Inc., Frankfort , Indiana, within the meaning of
Section 9 (c) and Section 2 ( 6) and (7) of the National Labor
Relations Act.
2. The production and maintenance employees of the Company,
exclusive of truck drivers , clerical employees, and supervisory em-
ployees , constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective
bargaining , within the meaning of Section 9 ( b) of the National
Labor Relations Act.
3. Amalgamated Association of Iron, Steel , and Tin Workers,
Local No. 1774 , is the exclusive representative of all the employees
in such unit for the purposes of collective bargaining , within the
meaning of Section 9 ( a) of the Nadonal Labor Relations Act.
CERTIFICATION OF iiEPRESENTATIVES
By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National
Labor Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Rela-
tions Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 8, of National Labor
Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 1, as amended,
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED that Amalgamated Association of Iron,
Steel , and Tin Workers, Local No. 1774, has been designated and
selected by a majority of the production and maintenance employees
of Ingram -Richardson Manufacturing Company of Indiana, Inc.,
206 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Frankfort , Indiana, exclusive of truck drivers , clerical employees,
and supervisory employees , as their representative for the purposes
of collective bargaining and that, pursuant to the provisions of Sec-
tion 9 ( a) of the Act, Amalgamated Association of Iron, Steel, and
Tin Workers, Local No. 1774, is the exclusive representative of all
such employees for the purposes of collective bargaining in respect
to rates of pay, wages , hours of employment, and other conditions of
employment.