Minneapolis-Moline Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 13, 1950

89 N.L.R.B. 395 (N.L.R.B. 1950)

In the Matter Of MINNEAPOLIS-MOLINE COMPANY, EMPLOYER AND
PETITIONER and LOCAL 814, INTERNATIONAL UNION OF ELECTRICAL,
RADIO & MACHINE WORKERS, C. I. 0., PETITIONER and LOCAL 814,
UNITED ELECTRICAL, RADIO AND MACHINE WORKERS OF AMERICA
Case9 Nos. 13-RM-71 and 13-RC-993.-Decided April 13, 1950
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon petitions duly filed and consolidated, a hearing was held-before
Robert Ackerberg, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made
at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor
Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with
this case to a three-member panel [Members Houston, Reynolds, and
Murdock].
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 organizations involved claim to represent certain em-
ployees of the Employer.'
3. The question concerning representation :
On May 25, 1948, Local 814, UE, as an affiliate of the CIO, executed
an agreement with the Employer, covering employees involved in this
case to be in effect until May 31, 1949, and thereafter for yearly periods
unless terminated by notice at least 60 days before May 31 of any year.
This contract was subsequently modified in several respects by amend-
ments. The last amendment entered into on July 15, 1949, provided,
inter alia, that the terminal date of the contract be changed to Septem-
ber 1, 1950. Local 814 UE contends that this contract operates as a bar
to a present determination of representatives. Local 814, IUE-CIO
contends that the contract is not a bar because as the result of a schism
'These labor organizations are Local 814, International Union of Electrical, Radio &
Machine Workers, C. I. 0., hereinafter called Local 814 IUE-CIO, and Local 814, United
Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America, hereinafter called Local 814 UE.
89 NLRB No. 62.
395
396 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
in Local 814, UE, a substantial number of its former members have
affiliated with the IUE-CIO. The Employer takes the position that
it does not know which union represents its employees and it therefore
is unwilling to bargain with either until one or the other has been
certified by the Board as the exclusive representative of its employees.
The record shows that on November 2, 1949, the CIO at its national
convention expelled the UE. On November 10, at a regular member-
ship meeting of Local 814, then affiliated with the UE, a motion to
disaffiliate from the UE and affiliate with the IUE-CIO was passed by
unanimous vote. The meeting which was attended by a substantial
number of members had been publicized 2 days in advance by nu-
merous notices on the plant bulletin boards and by oral notification
through shop stewards to individual members. Shortly after the
meeting, Local 814 applied for.and received a charter from the IUE-
CIO. All the officers of the former UE Local 814 were elected by the
membership of the new Local and have continued to serve in their
respective capacities as officers of Local 814, IUE-CIO. Uncontro-
verted evidence indicates that since November 10, Local 814, IUE-
CIO has obtained signed membership cards from a large majority of
the Employer's employees, who had been members of Local 814, UE.
It has also held monthly meetings since that date as had Local 814, UE.
These circumstances reveal that there has been a schism in the con-
tracting union's organization which we find, for reasons stated in the
Boston Machine Works case,2 removes.the current contract as a bar to
an immediate determination of representatives.s
Accordingly, we find that a question affecting commerce exists con-
cerning the representation of employees of the Employer, within the
meaning of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The following employees of the Employer constitute a unit ap-
propriate for purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of
Section 9 (b) of the Act:
All production and maintenance employees employed at the Em-.
ployer's Moline, Illinois, plant, including inspectors, outside truck
drivers, garage mechanics, garage repairmen, shop janitors,' but ex-
2 Boston Machine Works Company, 89. NLRB No. 59.
3 Also for the reasons stated in the Boston Machine Works case. we do not here pass upon
the property rights or the collective bargaining duties of the parties with reference to the
current contract.
° Contrary to the positions taken by the Petitioner and the Intervenor, the Employer
contends that the outside truck drivers, garage mechanics, garage repairmen, and shop
janitors should be excluded on the alleged ground that these'employees have not been in-
cluded in. the contract unit. The mere fact that these employees, whose interests clearly
lie with the other production and maintenance employees, have not been included in the
contract unit, does not render their inclusion in a production and maintenance unit inap-
propriate. Benner Tea Company, 88 NLRB 1409.
MINNEAPOLIS-MOLINE COMPANY 397
eluding time-study men, checkers, guards, watchmen,5 plant engineers,
experimental and engineering employees, office, clerical, and technical
employees, patternmakers, shop clerical employees, foremen, assistant
foremen, and all supervisors as defined in the Act.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining with the Employer, 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 super-
vision 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 em-
ployed during the payroll period immediately preceding the date of
this Direction of Election, including employees who did not work
during said payroll 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 rein-
stated prior to the date of the election, and also excluding employees
on strike who are not entitled to reinstatement, to determine whether
they desire to be represented, for purposes of collective bargaining,
by Local 814, International Union of Electrical, Radio &Machine
Workers, C. I. 0.,8 or by Local 814, United Electrical, Radio and Ma-
chine Workers of America, or by neither.
5 By Order dated July 19, 1950, the Board found, upon the basis of facts submitted,
that the watchmen herein are in fact guards.
6 We find no merit to the contention of the Intervenor that insofar as the two labor
organizations are designated on the ballot, the Petitioner should not be permitted to use the
same local number as the Intervenor, for the reasons stated in General Motors Corporation,
et al., 88 NLRB 450.