Lima Hamilton Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Dec 7, 1949

87 N.L.R.B. 455 (N.L.R.B. 1949)

In the Matter of LIMA HAMILTON CORPORATION, EMPLOYER and INTER-
NATIONAL UNION, UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AIRCRAFT AND AGRICULTURAL
IMPLEMENT WORKERS Of, AMERICA, LOCAL 106, CIO, PETITIONER
Case No. 8-UA.-1751.Decided December 7,1949
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before Carroll Mar-
tin, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing
are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds:
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the National Labor Relations Act.
2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain
employees of the Employer.
3. The Petitioner is the exclusive bargaining representative of the
employees in the appropriate miit.
The Petitioner alleges, and we find, that more than 30 percent of the
employees in the unit represented by the Petitioner desire to authorize
the Petitioner to make an agreement with the Employer requiring
membership in the Petitioner as a. condition of employment in such
unit.
As the Employer currently recognizes the Petitioner, no question
affecting commerce exists concerning the representation of employees
of the Employer in the unit sought by the Petitioner.
We find that the requirements for a union-shop authorization elec-
tion, set forth in Section 9 (e) (1) of the Act, have been met.
4. We find, substantially in accord with the stipulation of the par-
ties, that all production and maintenance employees of the Lima
Works of the Employer, including all employees in the schedule de-
partment, shop timekeepers and shop time clerks under the super-
vision of the accounting department, employees in the blueprint room,
and locomotive messengers, but excluding all other employees
employed in the main office building, engineers and drafting employees
employed in the various departmental offices, storeroom and shipping
87 NLRB No. 65. 455
456 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
office clerks, employment clerks, tool draftsmen, clerks in the mainte-
nance engineer's office and tool supervisor's office, all employees em-
ployed in the branch offices, traveling representatives of the Employer,.
salesmen, servicemen, and material tracers, chief engineers in the
power plants, hospital and first-aid employees, garage attendants,.
chemists and laboratory employees, patternmakers, guards, profes-
sional employees, and supervisors as defined in the Act, constitute-
a unit appropriate for the purposes of Section 9 (e) (1) of the Act.
5. The parties disagree as to the voting eligibility of certain laid--
off employees. The Employer contends that they should be found
eligible to vote. The Petitioner, on the other hand, urges.that they be.
found ineligible.
The Employer manufactures steam and Diesel locomotives and-
related equipment at its plant in Lima, Ohio. Because of economic
conditions, the Employer's pay roll has gradually declined from ap-
proximately 2,672 employees on December 1, 1948, to approximately-
875 employees on August 1, 1949, during which period the number of
lay-offs, including sick employees and those on leave, increased from-
170 to 1,797 employees., Under the terms of a recently expired con-
tract, all laid-off employees are carried indefinitely on a seniority list
maintained by the Employer. However, their recall is subject to, and-
contingent upon, an improvement in business conditions and future
orders, the extent of which the Employer was unable to estimate at the
time of the hearing.
The Employer asserts that all individuals on the seniority list are
entitled to vote, as employees who have been temporarily laid off. In
support of its position, the Employer, relying upon the fact that these-
employees were deemed eligible to vote in the earlier representation
proceeding,2 contends that for this reason also they should be found
eligible to vote in any election directed in the present "UA'r
proceeding.
We find insufficient merit in the Employer's contention. The fact.
that the names of the employees in question appear on the seniority
list as employees temporarily laid off is not controlling. Nor is the
fact that these employees were by agreement of the parties included
among those eligible to vote at the election in the "RC" proceeding
in May, determinative of their voting eligibility in this proceeding .3
The parties stipulated an additional SO employees would be laid off on August 31, 1949.
= The Petitioner was certified as the bargaining representative for the Employer's produc-
tion and maintenance employees as the result of a consent election, conducted and won
by it on May 17, 1949. At the conference preceding the election, the parties stipulated
that all employees on the Employer's seniority list would be eligible to vote.
0 The Board has held that there is no requirement that all employees in a bargaining
unit be eligible to vote in a subsequent "UA" election. Tree Fruits Labor Relations Com-
mittee, 83 NLRB 93.
LIMA HAMILTON CORPORATION 457
The pertinent issue in determining eligibility is whether such em-
ployees now have a reasonable expectancy of reemployment with the
Employer in the near future 4 Under all the circumstances, it would
appear that the prospect of any recall of laid-off employees in the
immediate future is speculative in character.
We are, therefore, of the opinion that the employees in question as
a group have no reasonable expectancy of reemployment, and that their
lay-offs for eligibility purposes must be deemed permanent.5 Accord-
ingly, we find them ineligible to participate in the election hereinafter
directed.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Pursuant to Section 9 (e) (1) of the National Labor Relations Act,
an election by secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible,
but not later than 30 days from the date of this Direction, under the
direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Region in
which this case was heard, and subject to Sections 203.61 and 203.62
of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations, among. the
employees in the unit found appropriate in paragraph numbered 4,
above, who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately
preceding the date of this Direction of Election, including employees
who did not work during said pay-roll period because they were ill
or on vacation or temporarily laid off, but excluding those employees
who have since quit or been discharged for cause and have not been
rehired or reinstated prior to the date of the election, and also exclud-
ing employees on strike who are not entitled to reinstatement, to deter-
mine whether or not they desire to authorize International Union,
United Automobile, Aircraft and Agricultural Implement Workers of
America, Local 106, CIO, to make an agreement with Lima Hamilton
Corporation requiring membership in the aforesaid labor organization
as a condition of employment in such unit.
MEMBER MURDOCK took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Direction of Election.
U. S. Rubber Company (Milan Plant, Footwear Division), 86 NLRB 338.
6 Waterman Steamship Corporation, Repair Division, 78 NLRB 20; Martin J. Barry, Inc.,
83 NLRB 1146; F. C. Mason Company, 86 NLRB 71; U. S. Rubber Company (Milan
Plant, Footwear Division), supra.