Minneapolis-Honeywell Regulator Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 17, 1942

40 N.L.R.B. 633 (N.L.R.B. 1942)

In the Matter Of MINNEAPOLIS -HONEYWELL REGULATOR COMPANY and
MINNEAPOLIS PRINTING PRESSMEN & ASSISTANTS UNION No. 20, AFFIL-
IATED WITH I . P. P. & A. U. OF N. A., A. F. OF L.
In the Matter Of MINNEAPOLIS -HONEYWELL REGULATOR COMPANY and
MINNEAPOLIS TYPOGRAPHICAL UNION No. 42
In the Matter of MINNEAPOLIS -HONEYWELL REGULATOR COMPANY and
UNITED ELECTRICAL , RADIO AND MACHINE WORKERS OF AMERICA,
LOCAL 1145
In the Matter of MINNEAPOLIS-HONEYWELL REGULATOR COMPANY and
LOCAL 1145, UNITED ELECTRICAL, RADIO & MACHINE WORKERS OF
AMERICA; MINNEAPOLIS HONEYWELL REGULATOR EMPLOYEES ASSOCIA-
TION; AND MINNEAPOLIS PRINTING PRESSMEN AND ASSISTANTS' UNION
No. 20
Cases Nos. R-3157 to R-3159, inclusive, respectively, and RE-32
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION
AND
ORDER
April 17, 19 2
On August 22, 1941, Minneapolis -Honeywell Regulator Company,
herein called the Company, Minneapolis Printing Pressmen & Assist-
antsUnion No. 20, affiliated with I. P. P. & A. U. of N. A.; A. F. of L.,
herein called the Printing Pressmen, Minneapolis Typographical
Union No. 42, A. F. of L., herein called the Typographers, United
Electrical, Radio & Machine,Workers of America, Local 1145, herein
called the United, Honeywell Employees Federal Local Union No.
22849, affiliated With the A. F. of L., herein called the Federal, Book-
binders & Bindery Women Local Union No. 12, A. F. of L., herein
called the Bookbinders; and the Regional Attorney in the Eighteenth
Region (Minneapolis , Minnesota ) of the National Labor Relations
Board, herein called the Board , entered into a STIPULATION FOR CERTI-
FICATION UPON CONSENT ELECTION in the above -entitled consolidated
proceedings. Pursuant to the stipulation, an election by secret ballot
was conducted on September 11, 1941, under the direction and super-
vision of the Board's Regional Director for the Eighteenth Region
40 N. L R. B., No. 114.
633
634 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
among the production and maintenance employees of the Company,
employees of the warehouses, stores, shipping and receiving depart-
ments, cost department counters and weighers, watchmen, inspectors
other than supervisory inspectors, employees in the planning cribs
other than supervisory employees, employees in the model shop of
the engineering department, and excluding all foremen, assistant
foremen, other supervisory employees, guards, employees whose work
places them in a confidential relation to management, employees of
the general office, all employees of the engineering department, except
as specified above, all employees in the production office, and all desk
girls, to determine whether they desired to be represented by the
United, or by the Federal, or by neither.' On September 15, 1911, the
Regional Director, acting pursuant to the parties' stipulation and
Article III, Section 9, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and
Regulations-Series 2, as amended, issued his Election Report, copies
of which were duly served on the parties.
As to the balloting and its results, the Regional Director reported
as follows :
Total on eligibility list ------------------------------------ 2, 227
Total ballots cast----------------------------------------- 2,106
Total ballots challenged----------------------------------- 133
Total blank ballots---------------------------------------- 0
Total void ballots----------------------------------------- 0
Total valid votes cast------------------------------------- 1,973
Votes cast for Honeywell Employees Union, Local No. 22849,
A. F. of L---------------------------------------------- 962
Votes cast for United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers
of America, Local 1145---------------------------------- 947
Votes cast for neither organization------------------------ 64
In his Election Report, the Regional Director, in accordance with
paragraph VI (c) of the stipulation of August 22, 1941; did not rule
on 94 challenges which had been made on the ground that the em-
ployees in question were supervisory, but referred them to the Board.
Of the remaining 39 challenges made on other grounds, the Regional
Director referred 2 to the Board because some showing was made
that the employees who had cast the ballots in question were super-
visory. The Regional Director recommended, further, that 6 of the
remaining challenges be overruled and that 31 be sustained.
I Pursuant to the same stipulation , separate elections were also conducted on September
11, 1941, under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director among : (1) the
printing pressmen and typographical employees in the Company' s printing room, and
(2) the bookbinders in the Company' s printing room . On January 28, 1942, the Board
issued a Decision and Certification of Representatives based on the results of these
separate elections , certifying the- Printing Pressmen as the duly designated collective
bargaining representative of the printing pressmen and typographical employees and
certifying the Bopkbinders as the duly designated collective bargaining representative of
the bookbinders . 38 N. L. R B 652.
MIIVNE'APOLIS-HONEYWELL REGULATOR COMPANY 635
Objections to the Election Report were filed by the Company on
September 20, 1941, and by the United and the Federal on September
29, 1941. The United on September 29, 1941, also filed objections to
the conduct of the election. Thereafter, the Regional Director con-
ducted an investigation of the objections filed by the parties. As
part of the investigation, and pursuant to notice duly served on all the
parties, an informal hearing was held before the Regional Director on
October 8 and 9, 1941, at Minneapolis, Minnesota. The Company, the
United, and the Federal were represented. by counsel and participated
in the hearing. During the hearing, the United requested and the
Regional Director ruled that the United's objections to the conduct
of the election be referred to a Trial Examiner to be designated by
the Board. Following the investigation and hearing conducted by the
Regional Director, he issued his Report on Objections dated October
16, 1941, copies of which were duly served on the parties. The Report
on Objections contained no rulings or recommendations, but only find-
ings as to the nature of the work done by the 27 employees as to whose
challenged ballots the Regional Director's Election Report had made
recommendations with which one or more of the parties took issue in
their objections to the Election Report.
By order dated November 3, 1941, the Board directed the Regional
Director to investigate the objections to the conduct of the election and
to issue a Supplemental Report on Objections; ordered that a hearing
be held before a duly designated Trial Examiner for the purpose of
taking evidence as to the 96 challenged ballots referred by the Regional
Director to the Board; and authorized the Regional Director to issue
appropriate notice of such further hearing. In accordance with the
order, the Regional Director thereafter issued his Supplemental Re-
port on Objections dated December 27,1941; copies of which were duly
served on the -parties. He found that the United's objections raised
no substantial and material issues with respect to the conduct of the
election, except insofar as group leaders in the Company's employ had
engaged in certain activities which would constitute interference with
the election if engaged in by supervisory employees. Thereafter, by
order dated January 16, 1924, the Board directed that, at the hearing
before a duly designated Trial Examiner directed to be held by the
order of November 3, 1941, evidence be taken not only as to the 96
challenged ballots referred by the Regional Director to the Board,
but also as to the 27 challenged ballots cast by the employees named in
the Regional Director's Report on Objections dated October 16, 1941,
and as, to the activities of group leaders which the Regional Director
found in his Supplemental Report on Objections dated December 27,
1941, might raise a substantial and material issue with respect to the
conduct of the election. A motion further to enlarge the scope of
636 DECISIONS OF :NATIONAL LABOR • RELATIONS, BOARD
the hearing was filed by the United on January 29, 1942, and was
denied by the Board.
Pursuant to notice duly served on the Company, the United, and
the Federal, a hearing was held from February 3 to February 17,
1942, at Minneapolis, Minnesota, before Will Maslow, the Trial Exam-
iner duly designated by the Chief Trial Examiner. The Board, the
Company, the United, and the Federal were represented by counsel and
participated in the hearing. Full opportunity to be heard, to examine
and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence on all but one
of the issues referred to the Trial Examiner was afforded all parties.
As to the issue of the activities of group leaders, the Trial Examiner
took no evidence at the hearing but directed,-without objection, that
any of the parties might, within 10 days after the close of the hearing,
submit offers of proof on the question of interference with the election.
An offer of proof was accordingly filed with the Board by the United
on March 2,1942. Thereafter, briefs were filed with the Board by the
Company and the Federal on March 9, 1942, and by the United on
March 12, 1942. The offer of proof and the briefs have been fully
considered by the Board.
It is now more than 9 months since the Company filed its petition
herein, almost 8 months since the STIPULATION FOR CERTIFICATION
UPON, CONSENT ELECTION was signed by the parties, and more than
7 months since the election was held on September 11, 1941. The
Regional Director's report shows that some 2100 ballots were cast in
that election and that, excluding the challenged ballots, there was a
difference of only 15 between the number.of votes cast for the Federal
and the number of votes cast for the United. The protracted proceed-
ings since the election have covered a period in which the country
has been plunged into walr and has begun a staggering program of
production of goods for the war effort, a program in which the Com-
pany's plant is taking, part. It is claimed, and we have little doubt,
that this change by the Company from peace-time production to war
production has substantially altered the nature of its operations and
the composition of its working force.
Because the STIPULATION FOR CERTIFICATION UPON CONSENT ELEC-
TION did not resolve all the issues among the parties, but reserved some
issues for decision by the Regional Director and some for decision
by the Board, it has led to disagreement among the parties and to
delay in disposition of the proceeding. The lapse of time has resulted
in substantial alteration of the situation in which our decision must
operate. Certification of either union as a collective bargaining
representative on the present inconclusive record would in any event
be based of necessity on ambiguous circumstances, in view of the
extremely narrow margin between the unions in the election and in
MINNEAPOLIS-HONEYWELL REGULATOR COMPANY 637
view-, further, of the speculative nature of any attempt 'to estimate
the effect on the Company's employees of the support given by group
leaders to both unions.
In any case, before a collective bargaining representative could
be certified in this proceeding, it would first be necessary to take further
evidence as to the status and duties of the group leaders who were per-
mitted to vote in the election without challenge and as to the inter-
ference with the election which the United's offer of proof tends to
show. To take such'further evidence would require another hearing
and would entail additional delay in disposition of the proceeding.
It will not, in our opinion, promote stability of industrial relations
in the Company's plant or effectuate the purposes of the Act to hold
any further hearings under the present STIPULATION FOR CERTIFICA-
TION UPON CONSENT ELECTION or to pass on the merits of the issues
which have arisen thereunder.
We shall, therefore, set aside the election of September 11, 1941, and
dismiss the petitions filed herein by the Company and the United, but
without prejudice to the filing of new petitions.
ORDER
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 National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regula-
tions-Series 2, as amended,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the election among the production and
maintenance employees of Minneapolis-Honeywell Regulator Com-
pany, Minneapolis, Minnesota, held on September 11, 1941, be, and
it hereby is, vacated and set aside;
AND IT Ise FURTHER ORDERED that the petitions for investigation and
certification of representatives filed herein by Minneapolis-Honeywell
Regulator Company and by United Electrical, Radio & Machine
Workers of America, Local 1145, be, and they hereby are, dismissed
without prejudice.