James Vernor Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Dec 9, 1941

37 N.L.R.B. 388 (N.L.R.B. 1941)

In the Matter of JAMES VERNOR COMPANY and UNITED CONSTRUCTION
WORKERS ORGANIZING COMMITTEE, LOCAL 297, AFFILIATED WITH, THE
C. I. O.
Case No. R-2978.Decided December 9, 1941
Jurisdiction : ginger ale manufacturing industry
Investigation and Certification of Representatives : existence of question: re-
fusal of Company to negotiate with petitioning union because of existing
contract with other union ; held, neither original contract terminable at any
time nor renewal made subsequent to petition bars present investigation;
separate elections necessary.
Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : determination of appropriate unit
suspended pending ascertannnent of wishes of branch' employees concerning
inclusion in unit with metropolitan aiea employees, pi ovcded only union desiring
to-represent former succeeds in election among latter; elections directed. (1)
among metropolitan area employees; and (2) among employees at each branch
separately; prospective appropriate unit to embrace all distribution, production,
and maintenance employees, warehousemen, and retail store clerks, excluding
company executives, department heads, branch managers, foremen, assistant
sales managers, sales supervisors, office, accounting or tabulating room em-
ployees, telephone order clerks, and all other employees classified as clerical
(except salesmen)
Clark, Klein, Brucker and Waples, by Mr. TVilber M. Brucker, of
Detroit, Mich., for the Company.
Mr. G. S. Jones, of Detroit, Mich., for the C. I. O.
Mr. Philip Weiss, of Detroit, Mich., for the Associated.
Mr. Ray E. Teichmann, of Detroit, Mich., for International Union
of United Brewery, Flour, Cereal and Soft Drink Workers, Local #41.
Mr. Armin Uhler, of,counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On July 3 and August 29, 1941, respectively, United Construction
Workers, Organizing Committee, Local 297, affiliated with the C. 1. 0.
herein called the C. I. 0., filed with the Regional Director for the
Seventh Region (Detroit, Michigan) a petition and amended petition
alleging that a question affecting commnierce had arisen concerning the
37 N. L R B, No 65.
388
JAMES VERNOR COMPANY 389
,representation of employees of JamesVernor Company, Detroit, Mich-
igan, herein called the Company, and requesting an- investigation and
certification of representatives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the Na-
tional Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act. On
August 21, 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 Re-
giolial Director to conduct it and to provide for an appropriate hear-
ing upon due notice.
- On August 29, 1941, the Regional Director issued a notice of hearing,
copies of which were duly served upon the Company, the C. I. 0., the
Associated Beverage Workers of America, herein called the Associ-
ated, the International Union of United Brewery, Flour, Cereal and
Soft Drink Workers of America, Local #41, A. F. L., and upon Inter-
national Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and
Helpers of America, A. F. L., Local 337,1 labor organizations claiming
to represent employees directly, affected by the investigation. Pur-
suant to notice, a hearing was held on September 8, 1941, at Detroit,
Michigan, before Robert J. Wiener, the Trial Examiner duly desig-
nated by the Chief Trial Examiner. The Company, the C. I. 0., and
the Associated were represented by counsel or official representatives
and participated in the hearing. International Union of United
Brewery, Flour, Cereal and Soft Drink Workers of America, Local
#41, A. F. L., appearing through counsel, moved to intervene. The
Trial Examiner denied the motion for want of evidence of representa-
tion among the employees involved in the proceeding. The ruling is
hereby affirmed.2 Full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-
examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues was
afforded all parties. During the course of the hearing the Associated
moved to dismiss the petition because of the existence of a contract
between it and the Company anti for the further reason that the C. I.
0. had not made a sufficient showing of membership among the em-
ployees it seeks to represent. The Trial Examiner reserved ruling on
the motion for the Board. The motion is hereby denied for the reasons
set out below. During the course of the hearing the Trial Examiner
made various rulings on other motions and on objections to the admis-
Sion 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. Subsequent to the hearing, the parties
'International Brotherhood of Teamsters , Chauffeurs , Warehousemen and Helpeis of
America, A. F L , Local 337, did not appear at the hearing
2 Intel national Union of United Biewery, Flour, Cereal and Soft Drink workers of
America, Local #41, A. F L, makes no further claims than that it represents cei tam
employees of the Company located in various branches of the Company in States other than
the State of Michigan.
41125 7--4 2-vor. 37-26
390 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
stipulated that certain- specified -correctibiis -should be made in ° the
transcript of the hearing. The stipulation is hereby made a part of
the record in the case.
On September 25 and 26, 1941, respectively, the Company and the
Associated filed briefs which the Board has considered.
Upon the entire record in the case the Board makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
" I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
James Vernor Company is a Michigan corporation with its prin-
,cipal office and plant at Detroit, Michigan. The Company also main-
tains various other offices, warehousing, and distribution facilities in
the State of Michigan,' and in other States of the United States.-
The present investigation is concerned exclusively with the Company's
employees within the State of Michigan.
The Company is engaged in the manufacture, sale, and distribution
of ginger ale and ginger ale extract. The principal materials used
by the Company in its business are ginger ale extract, sugar, citric acid,
carbonic gas, and crowns. During the fiscal year ended October 31,
1940, the Company used within the State of Michigan materials valued
at $154,349.61, of which materials valued at $129,848.83 were received
from points outside the State of Michigan. During the same period
materials valued at $131,800.82 were used in the • Company's opera-
tions at Detroit, of which materials valued at $122,631.03 were
received from outside the State of Michigan. During the above fiscal
year the Company sold from its places of business within the State
.of Michigan manufactured products -aggregating in value $1,030,-
558.68. The value of deliveries to customers outside the State of,
Michigan amounted to $349,575.24. During the same period the Com-
pany sold from its Detroit plant products valued at $770.110.09, of
which $349,575.24 represent deliverie's to customers outside the State
'of Michigan.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
United Construction Workers Organizing Committee, Local 297,
is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress of Industrial
Organizations, admitting to membership employees of the Company.
Associated Beverage Workers of America is an independent labor
organization admitting to membership employees of the Company.
3 Pontiac, Ann Arbor, Flint, Saginaw, Jackson, Port Huron, Kalamazoo, Lansing, and
Monroe
s Toledo, Columbus, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Dayton, Akron, and Mansfield, Ohio: Buffalo
:and Niagara Falls , New Yoik , Pittsbuigh Pennsglv . inia, and Sacramento , California
JAMES VERNOR - COMPANY 391
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On June 29, 1941, the C. L' O. communicated to the Company by
telegram its claim of majority representation among certain employees
'of the Company and requested that the Company enter upon nego-
tiations with a view to establishing contractual relations. The Corn-
pany on June 30, 1941, replied that it was under contract with the
Associated, suggesting that the C. I. O. cooperate in a consent elec-
tion under the direction of the Board. Thereafter, on July 3,.1941,
the C. I. O. filed its original petition herein.
On January 3, 1938, the Company and Employees' Association of
the James Vernor Company executed an exclusive recognition con-
-tract purporting'to cover all employees of the Company in the Detroit
-metropolitan area. By its terms the contract was to be effective` from
the date of its execution until terminated upon 30 days' notice by either
party. At a subsequent time, in a manner not specified in the record,
the Associated succeeded to the rights and duties of the Employees'
Association under the contract. Since May 1940, a number of "memo-
randurn agreements" have been entered into between the Company
and the Associated. Two of these agreements effectuate certain minor
amendments to the original contract not here material, while 11
separate agreements served the purpose of establishing wages and
-working conditions for an equal number of separate classifications of
•employees.5 After the filing of the petition herein the parties to
the foregoing agreements on July 12, 1941, entered into a new con-
tract and supplementary agreements substantially similar to those
above described. The contract of July 12, 1941, provides that it is
to be operative retroactively as of June 29, 1941, and the record indi-
cates that the wages established in the supplementary wage agree-
ments went into effect on that date. However, the Associated, in
contending that the present proceeding is barred, relies entirely-on the
original contract of January 3, 1938, and not upon its renewal of
July 12, 1941. Since after the C. I. O. filed its petition the original
,contract was superseded by the contract of July 12, 1941, and since
the original contract was terminable at any time, upon 30 days' •noticb,
we find that neither it nor the renewal contract constitutes a bar to a,
present determination of representatives.e
The Associated also asserts insubstantiality of representation on the
part of the C. I. O. in the unit allegedly appropriate. The C. I. O.
at the hearing introduced 131 application-for-membership cards 7 as
8 See footnote,24, infra
9 See Matter of American Radiator &_Standard Sanitary Corporation and United Elec-
.trical,,Radio & Machine Workers of America, Affiliated with the Congress of Industrial
organizations , 35 N L R P , No -38
'The record shows that according to a count made] at the hearing 129 cards were
.introduced in evidence by the C 1 0 ; the count apparently was erroneous
392 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL'- LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
evidence of representation among -the employees whom it seeks to
represent. An analysis of this evidence discloses that 74 of these
cards bear aplip-ently genuine signatures of over' 50 per cent of the
employees named oil the, Company's August 23, 1941, pay roll, in the
unit found appropriate in Section V below."
We find that a question has arisen concerning the representation of
employees of the Company.
lv. 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, find 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 C. I. O. desires to establish a bargaining unit comprising all
regular and seasonal production, maintenance, and distribution em-
ployees of the Company 9 in the Detroit metropolitan area, as well as
at the Company's branches within the State of Michigan.10 The unit
claimed would exclude supervisory,h1 office, and clerical employees, and
1 etail store clerks.12
The Company and the Associated, on the other hand, request that
the unit be confined to regular employees within the Detroit metro-
politan area,13 engaged in production, maintenance, and distribution.
The contentions of the Company and the Associated coincide with
those of the C. I. O. in respect to the desired exclusion of supervisory,
3 A statement of the Regional Du ectoi introduced in evidence which was prepai ed in for
to the hearing sets forth that the C I 0 had submitted 129 application cards, 122 of
which bear the apparently genuine signatures of employees on the Company's pay roll
for July 24, 1941, in the unit claimed by the C I 0 in its petition The July 24, 1941,
pay- roll has not been introduced in en idence The Regional Directoi s statement also
recites that the Associated submitted certain evidence in suppoi t of its claim of substan-
tial membership. The nature of the evidence is not disclosed The Associated, relying
chiefly on its contract, testified through its president that by estimation it counted
appioximately 150 niembeis among some 165 employees who aie subject to the contract.
i The emplovees claimed by the C I 0 would correspond to the employees classified
On the Company's pay roll as distribution pioduction, and maintenance employees, ware-
housemen and sales supervisors
10 Ann Arboi, Pontiac, Flint, Saginaw, Jackson, Poit Huron, Kalamazoo, Lansing, and
Monroe
11 The pai ties stipulated at the hearing that Company executives, department heads,
blanch managers, foremen, and assistant sales manageis should be deemed supervisory
enipiol eel
12 At the hearing, the president of the petitioning C I 0 local on the witness stand
insisted, contraiv to the allegations in the petition that retail Store clerks should be-
inclnded in the unit However, the witness denied haling authority to amend the petition -
131 e , Detioit, Rayne County, and envnons
JAMES VERNOR "COMPANY 393
office, and clerical employees. However, they differ as to the groups
of employees falling within these classifications. Contrary to the
position taken by the C. I. O, the Company and the Associated main-
tain that "sales supervisors'; are supervisory employees and should,
tlierefore; be excluded from the unit. Concerning office and clerical
employees, the C. I. O. apparently desires the exclusion of all em-
ployees listed' by the Company as "Clerical" on its pay roll,14 whereas
the Company asks for the inclusion of telephone order clerks and the
Associated for the inclusion of telephone order clerks and accounting
or tabulating-room employees. Furthermore, the Company and the
Associated desire the inclusion of retail store clerks whom the C. I. O.
seeks to exclude from the alleged appropriate unit.
A. Relation of branches to 'the Detroit area
The Company at its main plant at Detroit manufactures ginger ale
extract and bottles draft ale. Retail sales of ginger ale are made
through the medium of a store connected with the Detroit plant, while
wholesale distribution within the Detroit metropolitan area is effected
by means of a sales organization consisting of drivers , salesmen, and
sales supervisors who are ultimately responsible to a sales manager.
Outside the Detroit metropolitan area the Company distributes its
product through a number of branches in various States .11 Within the
State of Michigan the Company maintains branches at Pontiac and
Flint for the purpose of manufacturing draft ale, warehousing, and
retail' distribution ; at Saginaw for warehousing and retail distribu-
tion; at Jackson for manufacturing draft ale and warehousing; and
at Port Huron , Lansing , Monroe, and Ann Arbor for warehousing
only. Another branch is maintained at Kalamazoo . ", The evidence
introduced indicates that, while the managers in charge of these
branches have a certain autonomy in regard to general and employ-
ment policies, the branches engage in functions similar to, and are
under the same central management as, that of the Detroit plant.
The contract entered into on January 3, 1938 , by the Company and
Employees' Association of the James Vernor Company was expressly
limited in its operation to the Detroit plant . However, specific wage
scales and working conditions do not appear to have been established
by the contract 17 until it was taken over by the Associated , at a time
and in a manner not elucidated by the record . According to testi-
14 The Company's auditor testified that the classification "Clerical' on the Company's
pay-roll records includes clerical and accounting employees and sales personnel , including
telephone order clerks
15 See Section I, supra
16 The record does not disclose the nature of the business conducted at Kalamazoo
17 The contract in Art. 8 refers to a "schedule of rates of pay and hones to be lsolked
by all of the employees " No such schedule is attached tb the contract in evidence
394 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD I
mony, ,"present contractual relations" encompass th'e. Ann. Arbor. and:
Pontiac branches which form a convenient geographical unit with the
Detroit metropolitan area.
According to the record the Associated disclaims any- interest in
the representation of branch employees, including those at Pontiac
and Ann Arbor. On the other hand, the C. I. O. has extended its
organization to a majority of the Company's Michigan, branches and
represents a substantial number of these employees 18
We are of the opinion that under all the circumstances the inclusion,
of the Company's Michigan branches in a unit with Detroit metro-
politan area employees should depend upon the express desires of
the regular employees 19 of the respective branches. We shall there-
fore direct an election to be held among Detroit metropolitan area
employees and separate elections at each of the Company's branches.
within the State of Michigan. In the Detroit election the C. I. O. and
the Associated shall be named on the ballot. Since the Associated,
does not wish to participate in an election among branch employees,,
these employees shall cast their votes either for or against the C. I. O._
If a majority of the employees at any one of these branches cast their
vote in favor of the C. I. 0., they will be included in a single unit with
the Company's employees in the Detroit metropolitan area, provided
the C. I. O. shall obtain a majority of the votes cast in the election to,
be directed among Detroit metropolitan area employees. If the
C. I. O. does not obtain such a majority, then those branches which
shall have designated the C. I. O. as their representative shall together
constitute a separate unit'20 unless within 10 days from the date of our-
Direction of Elections the C. I. O. shall have notified the Board in
writing that it does not desire to be certified as the representative of
said unit.21
B. Inclusions and exclusions of disputed categories of employees
The remaining questions to be determined concern the inclusion in
or exclusion from the voting units herein of sales supervisors, retail
store clerks, certain office and clerical employees, and seasonal em-
ployees, as variously requested by the parties. The original contract
of January 3, 1938, which we have held not to constitute a bar to this
investigation, purports to embrace "all of the employees of the De-
18 It appears from the application cards introduced in evidence'that the C I 0 repre-
sents 4 out of 8 regular employees at Flint , 3 out of 4 such employees at Jackson, and
I regular employee each at Kalamazoo, Pontiac, and Port Huron with 1, 5, and 2, such
employees , respectively.
19 Seasonal employees are hereinafter excluded from the units herein.
20 However, no branch employing only one employee in the appropriate unit shall be set
up as a separate bargaining unit.
21 See Matter of First National Stores, Inc, Providence Division and Industrial Union
and Mercantile Beneficial Association of Providence, Rhode Island, 26 N. L. It. B., No. 117.
JAMES VERNOR COMPANY' 395,
troit plant," 22 and,refers to a ",schedule of rates of pay and hours to.
be worked by all of the employees." 23 No such schedule is attached
to the contract in evidence nor has it otherwise been brought to our
attention. The record indicates that bargaining under the contract
did not result in the establishment of wages, hours, and other work-
ing conditions until the contract was taken over by the Associated.
Between May 1940 and April 1941, the Associated secured the succes-
sive execution of 11 separate "memorandum agreements" establishing
wages and working conditions for an equal number of separate groups
of employees.24 It is clear that a number of indeterminate groups of
employees have been without the benefit of similar agreements, even.
subsequent to July 12, 1941, when additional agreements were exe-
cuted in connection with the renewal contract of that date.'5 Under
these circumstances the contract clearly has not established a definite
and stable bargaining unit. We conclude, therefore, that the contract
should not in this case be given controlling weight in our determina-
tion of the categories of employees who should constitute an appro-
priate bargaining unit.26
,Sales supervisors. Employees classified by the Company as sales
supervisors are sought to be included in the unit by the C. I. 0. The
Company and the Associated insist that they are supervisory em-
ployees and should therefore be excluded, notwithstanding the fact
that a separate wage agreement was executed in their behalf under
the contract .1 The record shows that those employees have substan-
tial supervisory duties. Sales supervisors are placed in charge of in-
dividual territories within the Detroit metropolitan area and are
responsible for their development and all operations therein. Each
of these employees supervises the work of at least one salesman and
one driver. Sales supervisors participate in confidential conferences
with company executives in which company policies are discussed.
The Company considers them "representatives to the trade" and "part
22 Article 1
21 Article 8
24 Agreements were signed on behalf of
Supervisors City drivers
Highway drivers Salesmen
Shipping room Tank repair
Country men Garage men
Bottlers Engineers and firemen
Machine shop
21 It is not possible to determine the precise employee groups whose wages and working
conditions had not been established either immediately before or after July 12, 1941,
especially because of the varying employee classifications used for pay-roil purposes, in
the agreements, executed prior to and those executed after that date
2O Cf St Louts Atirplane Division, Curtis-Wright Corporation and International Asso-
ciation of Machinists, District No 9, 28 N. L. R B, No 11 ; Meadow Valley Lumber Comte
pany and,Saw Mill Workers Union, Local! #12626, 32 N L R. B, No 21,; MaldenElectric
Company and Brotherhood of Utility Workers of New England, Inc, 33 N L. R. B., No 16.
27A new agreement relative to conditions of employment of sales supervisors was
executed in connection with the agreement of July 12, 1941.
396 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
of the executive force." While they do not have the power to hire or
discharge their subordinates, their recommendations in this respect
are followed whenever they appear to be sound.18 We believe That
sales supervisors perform essentially supervisory duties and should
be excluded from the voting unit embracing Detroit metropolitan area
employees.
Retail store clerks. The C. I. 0. requests the exclusion of retail store
clerks from the appropriate unit,20 whereas the Company and the
Associated desire the inclusion of these employees because of their
intimate relation to the production department. The record discloses
that retail store clerks are engaged in selling Vernor's Ginger Ale at
retail on.the Company's premises. They are frequently interchanged
and at times change shifts with production employees, and the rate of
pay of these two groups of employees has been equalized. A supple-
mental agreement fixing wages of retail store clerks was executed in
connection with the contract of July 12, 1941. Under these circum-
stances we shall include retail store clerks in the voting units.
O ice and clerical employees. All parties are in agreement concern-
ing the exclusion of office and clerical employees. However, the Com-
pany classifies as clerical, among others, certain accounting or tabulat-
ing-room employees, as well as sales personnel, including telephone
order clerks.30 Telephone order clerks are sought to be included by
both the Company and the Associated, and the Associated further
desires to have accounting or tabulating-room employees included in
the unit.31 The -last named group. of employees, according to the
record, performs ordinary clerical duties concerned with recording
various operations which the Company considers confidential. Tele-
phone order clerks solicit and take orders over the telephone. Inas-
much as they are classified by the Company as clerical employees, we
shall exclude them from the voting units herein, together with account-
ing or tabulating-room employees and all other employees classified
as clerical by the Company. 32
Seasonal employees. The C. I. 0. requests that seasonal employees
be included in the unit, whereas the Company and the Associated
28 Similaily , assistant sales managers, whose exclusion was stipulated by all parties, do
not have power to hire and discharge but may make recommendations in this respect
20 The record shows that these employees are eligible to membership in another branch
of the Congress of Industrial Organizations
30 See footnote 14, supra
81 In connection with the contract of July 21, 1941 , a 10 per cent wage increase for
"accounting department employees ," specified as general office employees and telephone
order clerks, was agreed upon
32 In view of the testimony that the Company' s list of clerical employees "could probably
be broken down between sales, clerical and accounting ' it is not entirely clear whether
or not the parties desire the inclusion of salesmen in the unit . Since under both the
original contract and the renewal of July 21, 1941, separate wage agreements were exe-
cuted in their behalf, and none of the parties requests their exclusion , we shall include
them in the units herein
I
JAMES VERNOR COMPANY 397
desire their exclusion., The Company's business is highly seasonal
and'"from'May-to `October each-year a large percentage' of temporary
employees must be added to its pay roll.33 Many of these seasonal em-
ployees are college students and teachers and no special effort is made
by the Company to reemploy the same seasonal employees from year
to year. Another class of seasonal employees is hired from day to
day as needed in the ,course of the season.34 No seasonal employees
attain status as regular employees, even though they may have been
employed during,two or more successive seasons. Past bargaining has
not included seasonal employees of the Company and' the C. I. O.
has secured only an insubstantial number of members among seasonal
employees on the Company's pay roll during the last peak season.31
Under all the circumstances we shall exclude seasonal employees from
the voting units.
We find that all regular employees of the Company in the Detroit
metropolitan area, classified as distribution, production, and mainte-
nance employees, warehousemen, and retail store clerks, excluding
company executives, department heads, branch managers, foremen,
,assistant sales managers, sales supervisors, office, accounting, or tabu-
lating-room employees, telephone order clerks, and all other employees
classified as clerical by the Company (except salesmen), may consti-
tute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining which
would insure to employees of the Company the full benefit of their
right to self-organization and to collective bargaining and otherwise
would effectuate the policies of the Act. As indicated above, em-
ployees in the foregoing classifications employed at the Company's
branches within the State of Michigan may or may not be included
within the above unit depending on the results of the elections we shall
order. We shall, therefore, make no determination of the appropriate
unit or units pending the elections to be conducted among branch
employees.
VI. THE' DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
We find that the question which has arisen concerning the repre-
sentation of employees of the Company can best be resolved by means
of elections by secret ballot. At the hearing the C. I. O. requested
that July 1, 1941, should be used as the pay-roll date for determining
eligibility in order to afford to seasonal employees an opportunity to
vote in the elections. The Company and the Associated are in agree-
m The Company's pay roll for August 23, 1941, lists 216 regular as compared with 166
seasonal employees throughout the State of Michigan
i4Another group of employees is hired by the Company regulail3 each summer but is
in the employ of different employers during the winter months These employees are
considered by, the Company, as, and we find that they are, regular employees
35 According to the cards submitted' by the C I O , 19 of the signatures secured are
those of seasonal employees, whereas the Company carried 166 seasonal employees
on its August 23, 1941, pay roll for the 'State of Michigan
398 DECISIONS OF'-NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ment that a current - pay roll be used for the purpose of determining
eligibility . Since we have excluded seasonal employees from the
voting units, we find no reason for departing from our usual practice.
Accordingly , we shall direct that the employees of the Company
eligible to vote in- the elections shall be those in the voting units who
were employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the
date of our Direction of Elections herein , subject to the limitations and
additions 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 representa-
tion of employees of James Vernor Company, Detroit, Michigan,
within the meaning of Section 9 ( c) and Section 2 (6) and ( 7) of the,
National Labor Relations Act.
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National Labor
Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations
Act, 49 Stat . 449, and pursuant to Article III, Section 8, of National
Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended,
it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation authorized by the Na-
tional Labor Relations Board to ascertain representatives for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining with James Vernor Company , Detroit,
Michigan , separate elections 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 Relations Board, and subject to Article III, Sec-
tion 9, of said Rules and Regulations , among all regular employees
of the Company, classified as distribution , production , and mainte-
nance employees , warehousemen , and retail store clerks , who were
employed by the Company at the locations described below during
the ,pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of this Direction,
including employees who did not work during such pay-roll period
because they were ill or on vacation or in the active military service
or training of the United States, or temporarily laid off , but excluding
company executives , department heads, branch managers , foremen,
assistant sales managers , sales supervisors, office, accounting , or tabu-
lating-room employees , telephone order clerks, and all other employees
JAMES VERNOR COMPANY 399
classified by the Company as clerical (except salesmen) and employees
who have since quit or been discharged for cause :
1. All such employees within the Detroit metropolitan area to deter-
mine whether they desire to be represented by United Construction
Workers Organizing Committee , Local 297,affiliated with the C. I, O.,
ror by Associated Beverage Workers of America, for the purposes
of collective bargaining , or by neither.
2. All such employees at the Company 's branches at Pontiac , Flint,
Saginaw, Jackson, Port Huron, Lansing, Monroe , ' Ann Arbor, and
Kalamazoo , within the State of Michigan , each branch voting sep-
arately, 'to determine whether or not the employees at each branch
desire to be represented by United Construction Workers Organizing
Committee , Local 297, affiliated with the C. I. 0., for the purposes
of collective bargaining.