Metco Plating Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Oct 27, 1954

110 N.L.R.B. 615 (N.L.R.B. 1954)

METCO PLATING COMPANY 615
METCO PLATING COMPANY and METAL POLISHERS , BUFFERS, PLATERS,
AND HELPERS INTERNATIONAL UNION , LoCAL No. 1 , AFL, PETITIONER.
Case No. 7-RC-2424. October 27,1954
Decision and Direction of Election
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a hearing was held before Emil C. Farkas, 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 that:
1. Metco Plating Company, hereinafter referred to as Metco, con-
tends that the Board lacks jurisdiction over it because its operations
do not affect interstate commerce within the meaning of the Act.
Metco performs finishing operations, including deburring, buffing,
and plating upon miscellaneous parts 1 for Ajax Manufacturing Com-
pany, hereinafter referred to as Ajax. Metco and Ajax are located in
Detroit, Michigan, in adjacent buildings. During the fiscal year
commencing July 1, 1952, Metco purchased materials and supplies in
the amount of $112,000, of which less than $300 worth was shipped to
Metco directly from out of State. During the same period Metco
rendered services to Ajax valued at approximately $200,000. Metco
engaged in no other work 2 Ajax in turn sells all its products, includ-
ing some on which Metco performs no services, directly to Chrysler
Corporation. During approximately the same period of time Ajax's
sales to Chrysler amounted to $1,200,000. All these products were
shipped to Chrysler plants in the State of Michigan, except for about
$4,000 worth, which were shipped to Chrysler in Canada.
Metco and Ajax are separately incorporated, and there is no com-
mon ownership of their stock nor is there any family relationship
between their owners. The president of Metco is also a director of
Ajax 3 Milton Pitts is the vice president and general manager of
Ajax and is also the assistant general manager of Metco. He is in
charge of overall labor and personnel policies for both corporations,
and performs active managerial duties for both corporations, includ-
ing determination of hours of work and overtime and the hiring and
discharging of 'employees. In his capacity as general manager of
Ajax, he determines how much work Metco will receive from Ajax.
He would represent both corporations in any negotiations with a labor
'These parts consist of hood ornaments, name plates, ashtrays, and similar accessories
for automobiles manufactured by the Chrysler Coiporation
2 There was testimony at the hearing that Metco is seeking other business so as to
become less dependent upon Ajax However, at the time of the hearing, its services were
still being performed exclusively for Ajax.
8 The only witness who testified as to the structure and relationship of the two corpora-
tions , Milton Pitts, stated that he believed that the president of Metco was also the sec-
retary-treasurer of Ajax, but that he was certain that he was at least a director of Ajax
110 NLRB No. 89.
616 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
organization. At the time of the hearing, he received all of his salary
from Ajax and no compensation from Metco; the record does not indi-
cate whether Metco compensates Ajax in any way for his services.
Each corporation keeps separate books, but office employees of Ajax
currently perform all clerical work for Metco, including preparation
of'.payrolls. Ajax employees also perform maintenance and janitorial
work for Metco. Both corporations employ the same auditor. Em-
ployees of both corporations punch a common time clock, but have
differently colored time cards. Each corporation leases its space sepa-
rately; however, the two rooms used for most of Metco's operations
are separated by a third room which Metco leases but Ajax uses. A
conveyor belt used by Metco passes through this room. In addition,
Metco's chemist works in a location leased by Ajax, and on occasion
Ajax stores property in parts of the space leased by Metco. A wall
between the Ajax and Metco buildings has been broken through for
access between the buildings. The record does not indicate whether
Metco compensates Ajax for its clerical and maintenance services or
whether any compensation is made by either corporation to the other
for use of space. The method used in determining Metco's compensa-
tion by Ajax for its services is not revealed in the record.
-Metco receives, on skid boxes or in large tubs, fabricated parts from
Ajax for finishing. Metco's employees take them directly from the
containers and deburr and buff them. The parts then are placed on
racks which move to an automatic plating machine. After they have
been plated, the parts are removed from the racks, inspected, and
placed on a conveyer belt leading directly into one of Ajax's rooms
where they are again inspected and either wrapped or sent on for
further processing by Ajax employees. On rare occasions girls em-
ployed by Metco as rackers are sent into the Ajax packing room to
pack finished parts for Ajax. No compensation is made by Ajax to
Metco for their services.
Upon the above facts, including particularly the interrelated char-
acter of the operations of both Metco and Ajax, the common con^r•'ol
of their labor relations, and the extent to which they have common
management, we conclude that, notwithstanding their separate owner-
ship, Metco and Ajax are operated as a single integrated business
enterprise. We therefore find that they constitute a single employer
for purposes of asserting jurisdiction.4 Accordingly, as Ajax fur-
nishes goods to Chrysler Corporation in excess of $1,000,000 in value,
we find that it will effectuate the policies of the Act to assert juris-
diction here.5
' See F Hilgeme¢er d Bro, Inc, 108 NLRB 352; Marvel Roofing Products, Incorporated,
et at., 108 NLRB 292 ; Rushville Metal Products , Inc, 107 NLRB 1146.
6 The Board has heretofore found that Chrysler Corporation is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the Act and ships far in excess of $50,000 worth of its finished
prod acts -directly into interstateicommerce. B. g., Chrys{er Corporation, 69 NLRB 1424.
METCO PLATING COMPANY 617
2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain em-
ployees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section (c)
(1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The Employer employs approximately 12 buffers, 2 polishers, 4
burrmen, 1 stockboy, 1 tankman, 1 buffing foreman, 1 plating foreman,
1 chemist, and 6 rackers and inspectors. The Petitioner seeks to repre-
sent all except the foremen, chemist, and rackers and inspectors as a
separate craft unit. The Employer contends that the employes sought
by the Petitioner are not a craft group and that the only appropriate
unit is a plantwide unit. There is no bargaining history for any of the
Employer's employees.
The burrmen remove burrs from zinc die castings received from
Ajax. The polishers also deburr parts a major portion of their time
and,, in addition, use polishing wheels to reach concave surfaces which
the burrmen cannot reach with deburring belts. After parts are de-
burred and polished, they move to the buffers who buff them in prepa-
ration for plating. They use buffing wheels and automatic buffing
machines in this operation. Buffed parts are placed on a conveyor
belt which carries them to the rackers and inspectors, who are located
in the same room as the buffers, polishers, and deburrers. The rackers
and inspectors, all of whom are women, remove the parts from the con-
veyer belt, inspect them, and place them on plating racks if they are
to be plated directly or in boxes for storage until they can be plated
at a later time. The stockboy does heavy lifting for the rackers and
inspectors and elsewhere around the shop. On occasion he deburrs
parts.
The racks containing parts to be plated are placed on a conveyer
belt which carries them to a separate room where the tankman removes,'
them and places them on an automatic plating machine. The machine
then carries the racks through the various plating solutions automati-
cally. After the parts have been plated the inspectors inspect them
and place them on a conveyer belt which returns them to Ajax.
The buffers are required to buff zinc die castings only, and handle no
other metals. They perform essentially the same repetitive operation
on all parts and work on a production line on a piece-rate basis. None
of them is required to do any plating or to exercise any of the other
skills normally associated with the polishing and buffing craft.
Although the Employer hires only buffers who have had previous
buffing experience, there is no apprenticeship program in the plant,
nor does it appear that the Employer requires that employees it lures
as buffers be journeymen. We conclude that the buffer employees are
not employed as craftsmen but at most perform highly specialized
618 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
production works The polishers' duties require even less experience
and skill than the buffers; the burrmen, tankman, and stockboy are
required to have no experience and perform tasks requiring little or
no skill or training. Accordingly, as employees in the proposed unit
"are not employed as craftsmen, we find that they do not constitute an
appropriate unit on a craft basis.
Nor does this group constitute an appropriate unit on any other
basis. Thus, the proposed unit neither conforms to lines of super-
vision nor is it confined to employees in a separate area in the plant.
For example, while the burrmen, polishers, buffers, and stockboy are
all supervised by the buffing foreman, the tankman, whom the Peti-
tioner would also include in its unit, is under the same supervision as
the rackers and inspectors whom it would exclude. In addition, the
tankman works in a separate location from the other employees in the
proposed unit, whereas the rackers and inspectors work in the same
room with them, emptying parts from conveyer belts leading directly
from the buffers and inspecting such parts. Accordingly, Ave find
that the unit sought by the Petitioner is inappropriate.
It is clear, however, that the plantwide unit of Metco employees, re-•
quested in the alternative, is appropriate, as such a unit is coextensive
with Metco's operations and comprises all employees- engaged in the
polishing, buffing, and plating operations. As the Petitioner has a
sufficient showing of interest therein, we will direct that an election be
held in the plantwide unit.
There remains for consideration the status of the plating foreman
as a supervisor. The Petitioner contends, contrary to the Employer,
that he is a supervisor within the meaning of the Act. The plating
foreman's principal duty consists of operating the automatic plating
machine and making necessary adjustments to it. In addition he tells
the rackers and inspectors which parts to place on the plating racks
and tells the tankman which racks to place on the machine. These in-
structions are derived from a production schedule established by the
assistant general manager. He has no authority to hire, discharge, or
discipline employees independently, and while he may make recom-
mendations as to discharge and discipline of the rackers and inspec-
tors and the tankman, all of his recommendations are independently
investigated by the assistant general manager before any action is
taken. Of the employees he instructs, only the tankman works in the
same area as he does; the rackers and inspectors work in a separate
area and it is not possible for him to observe them in the performance
of their duties. We find that the plating foreman does not responsibly
direct the work of any other employees and does not exercise any other
e Magio Chef, Inc., Federal Foundry Dvaasson , 108 NLRB 392; Kwikget Locks, Inc.,
107, 247.
SCHWABACHER HARDWARE COMPANY 619,
supervisory duties within the meaning of the Act.7 Accordingly, we
find that he is not a supervisor within the meaning of the Act and will
include him in the unit.
We find that the following unit of employees of Metco Plating Com-
pany , at its Detroit, Michigan, plant , is appropriate for,purposes of
collective-bargainng-withinthe meaning of Section 9 (b) ' of the Act :
All employees including buffers, polishers, burrmen, stockboy, tank-
man, rackers and inspectors , and the plating foreman, but excluding
the buffing foreman, the chemist," guards, and supervisors as defined in
the Act.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
MEMBERS PETERSON and BEESON took no part in the consideration of,
the above Decision and Direction of Election.
7 Cone Mills Corporation (Tabardrey Plant ), 107 NLRB 866 . The Employer 's assistant
general manager testified that the plating foreman received his classification at a time,
when the Employer had no automatic plating machine and employed a plating crew
which the plating foreman supervised . He added that since the Employer acquired the •
;avtema.tic plating °machine, the entire plating crew, except the tankman , has been dis-
charged and the plating foreman 's duties have been changed, but his classification has
remained the same.
8 Both the Employer and the Petitioner agree that the buffing foreman is a supervisor
;
and that the chemist is a professional employee. They are accordingly excluded from
the unit.
SCHWABACHER HARDWARE COMPANY and O'ICE EMPLOYEES INTERNA-,
TIONAL UNION , LOCAL No. 8, AFL, PETITIONER . Case No. 19-RC-'
1475. October , 7,1954
Supplemental Decision and Certification of Results of Election
Pursuant to a Decision and Direction of Election issued herein on
June 14, 1954,1 an election by secret ballot was conducted on June 30,
1954, under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director
for the Nineteenth Region, among the employees in the unit found
appropriate by the Board. Upon conclusion of the election, a tally of
ballots was furnished the parties. The tally shows that of the 26 bal-
lots cast in the election, 8 were for the Petitioner, 16 were against the
Petitioner, and 2 were void.
On July 8, 1954, the Petitioner filed timely objections to conduct
allegedly affecting the results of the election. In accordance with the
Board's Rules and Regulations, the Regional Director investigated
the objections and, on August 6, 1954, issued and duly served upon the
parties his report on objections. In this report, the Regional Director
found that the Petitioner's objections did not raise substantial or
i Not reported in printed volumes of Board Decisions and Orders.
110 NLRB No. 82.