John Deere Harvester Works of Deere & Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Sep 23, 1942

44 N.L.R.B. 335 (N.L.R.B. 1942)

,In the Matter of JoiiN DEERE HARVESTER WORKS OF DEERE & COMPANY
and INTERNATIONAL UNION, UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AIRCRAFT & AGRI-
CUL' URAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO
In the Matter of JOAN DEERE SPREADER WORKS OF DEERE & COMPANY
and INTERNATIONAL UNION, UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AIRCRAFT & AGRI-
CULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO
In the Matter of UNION MALLEABLE IRON WORKS OF DEERE & COMPANY
andANTERNATIONAL UNION, UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AIRCRAFT & AGRI-
CULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO
In the Matter of DEERE & MANSUR WORKS OF DEERE & COMPANY
and FARM EQUIPMENT WORKERS ORGANIZING COMIMITTEE, CIO
Cases Nos. R-41611 to R-4167, inclusive, respectively.Decided Sep-
tember 03,194P,
Jurisdiction : farm implement and munitions manufacturing industry.
Investigation and Certification of Representatives : existence of questions. re-
fusal to accord petitioners recognition until certified by the Board; contracts
with individual employees held no bar ; Company's contention that petitions
should be dismissed on ground that petitioners did not i epresent a majowwty of
employees held without merit ; elections necessary.
Units Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : four single-plant units held appro-
priate despite Company's request for a company-wile unit in view of the
history of collective batagming, the oignmzation of employees involved, and
the nature of Company's operations, spccafied inclusions and exclusions.
Mr. H. JV. Pike, of Moline, Ill., for the Company.
Mr. Harland D,,Burcham, of Rock Island, Ill., for the U. A. W.
Meyers & Meyers, by Mr. Ben Meyers, of Chicago, Ill., for the
F. E. W. O. C.
Mr. Robert E. Tallman, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon three petitions drily, filed by International Union; United
Automobile , Aircraft , & Agricultural Implement Workers of America,
44 N. L R . B., No. 62.
335
336 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS `BOARD
CIO, herein called the U. A. W., and one petition filed by Farm Equip-
ment Workers Organizing Committee, CIO, herein called the F. E.
W. O. C., each alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen
concerning the representation of employees of Deere & Company,
Moline, alid East Moline, Illinois, herein called the Company, the.
NationalLLabor Relations Board provided for appropriate hearings
upon due notice before Lester Asher, Trial Examiner. Said hearings
were held at Moline, Illinois; on August 17 and 18, 1942. The Conmi-
pany and the U. A. W. appeared and participated in three hearings
dealing respectively with the Company's John Deere Harvester Wrorks,
John Deere Spreader Works, and its Union Malleable Iron Works,
all'located in East Moline, Illinois; the Company'and'the F. E. W. O. C.
appeared and participated in the hearing dealing with the Company's,
Deere & Mansur Works, Moline, Illinois. In each hearing, the'parties
were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-
examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues.
The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hearings are free from
prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. On September 2 and 3,
1942, respectively, the Company,and the U. A. W. filed briefs which
the Board has considered.
At the close of the last of the four hearings, the U., A. W. and the'
Company inoved that the four cases be consolidated. That motion is
hereby granted and the cases are hereby consolidated.
Tlw, Company moved at the hearings to dismiss each of the four
petitions, on the ground that the statements of the Regional Director
concerning authorization claims demonstrate that neither the F: E.
W. O. C. nor the U. A. W. presently represents a majority of the
cmployees in any of the four plants of the Company herein involved.
For the reasons stated in Section III, infra, this motion is hereby
denied.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Deere & Company, having its principal office in Moline, Illinois, is
an Illinois corporation engaged in the manufacture, sale and distribu-
tion of farm equipment and munitions. The Company has five plants
in Moline, Illinois, and three plants in East Moline, Illinois. One
of the Moline plants 1 and the three East Moline plants 2 are involved
1 The Deere & Mansur works , herein called the Mansur works.
•2 The John Deere Harvester Works, the John Deere Spreader works and the, iinion
Malleable Iron works, herein called respectively, the Harvester, Spreader , and-2%I alleable
works.
JOHN DEERE HARVESTER WORKS 337
in these proceedings. The principal raw materials used by the Com-
pany are iron, steel, and lumber. During the year 1941, the total
value of such raw materials purchased by the Company was far in
excess of $1,000,000, and not less than 70 percent of such materials was
shipped to the plants from points outside the State of Illinois. 'Dur-
ing the same year, the total sales of farm equipment and munitions
manufactured by the Company were far in excess of $1,000,000, of
which at least 70 percent represents products shipped from the plants
to points outside the State of Illinois.
The Company admits that in its operations at each of the four
plants involved in these proceedings it is engaged in commerce within
the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
International Union, United Automobile, Aircraft & Agricultural
Implement Workers of America is a labor organization affiliated with
the Congress of Industrial Organizations. It admits to membe. ship
employees of the Company.
Farm Equipment Workers Organizing Committee is a labor or-
ganization affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations.
It admits to membership employees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTIONS CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On April 30, 1942, the U. A. W. informed the Company by letter
that it represented a majority of the employees at the Company's
Harvester Works and asked the Company for recognition. - The Com-
pany, in effect, referred the U. A. W. to the Board. Similar requests
were thereafter made by the U. A. W. with respect to the employees
of the Company's Malleable Works and by the F. E. W. O. C.-with
respect to the employees of the Conipany,'s Mansur Works. These,
requests met similar responses. The U. A. ^ W. did not send the Com-
pany a letter regarding the Spreader Works allegedly because of the
attitude of the Company in response to the letter concerning the
Harvester Works.
At each of its plants, the Company has individual contracts with
a number of its employees. The Company's position is that these
individual contracts are valid and binding, and the Company believes
that it has no power to cancel them. It does not, however, contend
that they constitute a bar to.a certification of representatives for pur-
poses of bargaining in respect to matters not covered by the contracts
or for their modification. ' The Board has consistently held that 'indi-
vidual contracts do not constitute a bar to a determination of repre-
4S7498-42-vol 44-22
338 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
sentatives.for_the purposes of negotiating collective bargaining con-
tracts." We so find in these proceedings.%
Statements of the Regional Director, introduced in evidence at
the hearings, supplemented by statements of the Trial Examiner made
at the hearings, indicate that the U. A. W. and the F. E. W. O. 0.
each represents a substantial number of employees in the unit or
units each contends to be appropriate .4
We find that questions affecting commerce have arisen concerning
the representation of employees of the Company, within the meaning
of-Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE, UNITS
11 .1
The principal unit issue presented by these proceedings is whether
there should be separate plant units or a single multiple-plant unit.
The U. A. W. and the F. E. W. O. C. propose that the employees of
each of the four plants named in their petitions constitute separate
appropriate units. The Company contends, on the other hand, that
these'four plants, together with its four other, plants, should comprise
a single appropriate unit.
Dispute arose also concerning the inclusion or exclusion of two
categories of employees. All the parties agree that the unit or units
should include production and, maintenance employees, and, should
exclude supervisors, foremen, assistant foremen, office and clerical
workers, all salaried employees, pattern makers and pattern-maker
apprentices, and watchmen. The F. E. W. O. C. would 'also exclude,
whereas the Company and the U. A. W. would include, tool and die
1 4 Matte of J I Case Co and lutes national Union, United Automobile Aircraft & Agri-
cultui al Implement We, ers of America ( C I 0 ), 38 N L. R B 522; Matter of The
Gates Rubber Company and Denver Printing Pressmen and Assistants Union No 40, and
Denver Typographical Union, No 49, 8 N L R B. 303.
These statements may be summarised as follows
Plant Union
Total cards Employees Cards in
submitted in the unit the unit
harvester Works_ _______ U A W______________ 659 1,807 606
Spreader Works __________________ U A W______________ 205 552 183
Malleable Works_________________ U A IV 201 , 542 182
Mansur Works________ ___________ F E W 0 C-------- 162 383 152
The Company contended that on the basis of the above figures, neither the U. A. W.
nor the F E . W. O. C presently represents a majority of the employees in any of its
plants , and therefore the petitions should be dismissed. This contention is «ithont merit.
As we have frequently stated, authorization or membership cards are iequned, not as
proof of the precise number of employees who desire to be represented by a labor organi-
zation , or as a basis for determining the appropilate representative , but simply to provide
a reasonable safeguard against the indiscriminate institution of iepieseutation proceedings
by labor organizations which have little or no membership in the unit claimed to be
appropriate Matter of II G Hill Stores, Inc. Warehouse and Local 2-7, International
Longclioaenen's and Waiehoasemen's Union, affiliated with the C 1 0, and cases cited
therein , 39 N L R. B 874. j
JOHN DEERE HARVESTER WORKS 339
makers (and learners). The F. E. W. 0. C. and the U. A. W. would
exclude, whereas the =Company would include, experimental depart-
ment employees. The Malleable Works, alone, of'the plants named
in the petitions, has no experimental department and no tool and die
department.
The Company's four operating plants in Moline, Illinois,5 are located
on the same street within a distance of approximately a half mile.
About 4 miles distant, in East Moline, the Harvester and the Spreader
Works likewise front a common street and are separated only by a
railroad track. The Malleable Works is approximately a half mile
from the Harvester Works
The individual plants operate under, separate managements which
exercise no authority over the employees of any of the other plants.
The management of each plant does its own hiring and discharging,
handles its own labor problems, and to a large extent determines its
own pay rates.' Provisions regarding seniority apply upon a plant-
wide basis.
Prior to the entry of the United States into the war, six of the seven
plants then in operation were engaged in the manufacture of distinct
lines of agricultural implements and negotiated their own production
contracts. The seventh plant, the Malleable Works, produced, and
continues to produce, iron castings for use in the other plants. After
the entry of the United rStates into the war, the Company commenced
the manufacture of munitions and other war materials. As of the
time of the hearings, 50 percent of the production of it's plants was in
the nature of war materials ; the Company anticipates that 80 per-
cent of the productive capacity of the plants will be converted to the
manufacture of war materials.
-
I - '
The Company's contention that a multiple-plant is appropriate
rests almost entirely upon the changes allegedly wrought by the con-
version of its plants from peace-time production to production in aid
of the war effort, for the Company freely admits that when the plants
were devoted to the production of farm implements they were virtu-
ally autonomous units. Thus the Company envisages as one result
of the conversion an increasing tendency toward central direction and
supervision. The Company also, foresees an inevitable trend leading
to considerable interdependence and interrelation of the operations
of the several plants. As evidence of the tendency toward centralized
control, the Company indicates that it, and not the separate plants,
is making all the war production contracts with the Federal Govern-
°A fifth plant, an assembly plant, was still under construction at the time of the
hearings.
0 The Company maintains a central personnel office, one section of which has supervised
to some extent the pay rates established in the several plants. Thus, the various plant
managers consult with that section, propose their sates, and after a comparison make
some attempt at correcting inequalities.
340 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
went. The work required under these contracts is then allocated to
the several plants after an appraisal of their capacity and equipment,
and after a consultation with all the nmanagers. Approximately 80
percent of the n-ar contracts are of such a nature that no one plant
can handle a single contract. Thus, according to the Company, sev-
eral of the plants may be working on one company contract now,
whereas before they worked on their own contracts; likewise, one
plant may perform some work on an article and pass it to another plant
for further work. The Company points to these changes as evidence
of the new community of interest existing among the employees at the
several plants.
Although-the impact of the war has wrought changes in the Coin-
pany's plants, we are of the opinion that separate plant units are
appropriate at this time. The Company has no history of collective
bargaining relations with any labor organization upon a company-
wide basis. The two labor organizations participating in these pro-
ceedings are organizing the employees upon the basis of separate plant-
wide units. and there is no labor organization contending for a larger
unit. During peace-time operations the plants have operated as inde-
pendent units; and while there now appears, as a result of war 'pro-
duction, to be a trend toward greater interdependence and interrela-
tion of the operations of the plants, that trend has not progressed to
such an extent as to render separate plant units inappropriate for
purposes of collective bargaining.
Tool and die makers (and learners): The F. E. W. O. C. contends
that tool and die makers (and learners) should be excluded from
the appropriate unit. At the hearing it gave no reason for desiring
their exclusion other than to indicate their possession of a high degree
of skill. The U. A. W. desires to include tool and die makers iii' the
units for which it is contending. The Company considers that tool
and die makers should not be excluded since they are maintenance
employees, and since no other labor organization is seeking to repre-
sent them. Only 12 employees are included in the tool and die de-
partment of the Mansur Works. In view of these facts, we shall
include tool and die makers in the appropriate units.
Experimental employees: Both the F. E. W. O. C. and the U. A. W.
would exclude the experimental ^'department employees from the ap-
propriate unit or units. The Company would exclude only the sal-
aried employees in the experimental departments but would include
the hourly paid employees working in those departments. The groups
of hourly paid employees in the, experimental departments are com-
posed of a variety of skilled craftsmen, su'c'h 'as machinists, weldersi
and blacksmitlis, with a scattering of less skilled laborers. The, super-
iiitendent of the 1Vlansur'Works testified that among the qualifications
of persons in the salaried groups is the possession of a degree of inven-
JOHN DEERE HARVESTER WORKS 341
tive genius, mechanical skill, designing skill, and an ability to read
blue prints. Among other employees in the salaried groups are line
designers (engineers) and draftsmen.
Under peace-time conditions, the experimental department em-
ployees, instead of producing the same type of machine or part of a
machine' day after day, were engaged in the process of^building, tear-
ing down, rebuilding, and ultimately perfecting one machine. Once
the machine was perfected, they followed the sane process on another
type of machine, until it, too, was perfected. Most of the hourly paid
experimental department employees are transferred from other parts
of the plants. Production employees seem to regard a transfer to the
experimental department as a promotion, believing that the pressure
of work is less there and that advancement is easier.
In the Mansur, the Spreader, and the Harvester Works, the experi-
mental departments are set off from the other departments by closed
doors and "No Admission" signs. In the Mansur Works, there are
5 employees in the experimental department, of whom 4 are hourly
paid; in the Spreader Works there are 30 to 35 employees, of whom
12 to 15 are hourly paid; and in the Harvester Works there are ap-
proximately 125 employees, of whom approximately 100 are hourly
paid.
Under the circumstances, we are of the opinion and find that the
employees in the experimental department should be excluded from
the appropriate units.
We find that all production and maintenance eriiployees in the
Company's Harvester, Spreader, Malleable, and Mansur Works includ-
ing tool and die makers (and learners), if any, but excluding super-
visors, foremen, assistant foremen, office and clerical workers, all
salaried employees, pattern makers and pattern-maker apprentices;
watchmen, and experimental department employees, if any, constitute
four separate units appropriate for the purposes of collective bargain-
ing, within the meaning 'of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
We shall direct that the questions concerning representation which
have arisen be resolved by elections by secret ballot. The parties were
in agreement that the July 18, 1942, pay roll submitted by the Com-
pany to the Board should be used as a basis for determining eligibility
to vote. However, we are of the opinion that no substantial reason
exists in this case for departing from our usual practice, and we 'shall
direct that those eligible to vote shall be the employees in the appro-
priate units who were employed during the pay-roll periods immedi-
ately preceding the date of our Direction of Elections, subject to the
limitations and additions set forth therein.
342 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
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, and pursuant to Article III, Section 8, of National Labor Rela-
tions Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigations to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Deere & Company,
Moline and East Moline,. Illinois, elections by secret ballot shall be
conducted as early as possible, but not later than thirty (30) clays from
the date of this Direction of Elections, under the direction and super-
vision of the Regional Director for the Thirteenth. Region, acting in
this matter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and sub-
ject to Article III, Section 9, of said Rules and Regulations, among
the following groups of employees of'the Company who were employed
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 any who have since quit, or been permanently transferred
from the plant involved, or been discharged for cause :
1. All_ employees of the John Deere Harvester Works, the John
Deere Spreader Works, and the Union Malleable Iron Works, in the
units found appropriate in Section IV, above,-to determine whether
or not they desire to be represented by International Union, United
Automobile, Aircraft & Agricultural Implement Workers of America,
CIO, for the purposes of collective bargaining; and '
2. All employees of the Deere & Mansur Works in the unit found
appropriate in Section IV, above, to determine, whether or not they
desire to be represented by Farm Equipment Workers Organizing
Committee, CIO, for the purposes of collective bargaining.
MR. WM. M. LEIsERSON took no part in the consideration of the
above Decision and Direction of Elections.
J