Outboard, Marine & Manufacturing Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Sep 7, 1945

63 N.L.R.B. 802 (N.L.R.B. 1945)

In the Matter of JOHNSON MOTORS. A DIVISION OF OUTBOARD, MARINE &
MANUFACTURING COMPANY and METAL POLISHERS, BUFFERS, PLATERS
AND HELPERS INTERNATIONAL UNION, LOCAL No. 140, A. F. L.
'
q
Case No. 13-R-2680.-Decided September 7,1945
Mr.`Irvin L. Moody, of Waukegan, Ill., for the Company.
Mr. John Grzenia, of Chicago, Ill., for the Polishers.
Messrs. Carl Ruesch and Daniel F. Knox, of Waukegan, Ill., for
the Independent.
Mr. Philip Licari, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon a petition duly filed by Metal Polishers, Buffers, Platers and
Helpers International Union, Local No. 140, A. F. L., herein called
the Polishers, alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen
concerning the representation of employees of Johnson Motors, ti
Division of Outboard, Marine & Manufacturing Company, Waukegan,
Illinois, herein called the Company, the National Labor Relations
Board provided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice before
Leon A. Rosell, Trial Examiner. Said hearing was held at Wau-
kegan, Illinois, on May 23, 1945. The Company, the Polishers, and
Independent Marine and Machinists Union, herein called the Inde-
pendent, appeared and participated. All parties were afforded full
opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and
A o introduce evidence bearing on the issues. The Trial Examiner's
rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are
hereby affirmed. All parties were afforded an opportunity to file
briefs with the Board.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Johnson Motors, a Division of Outboard, Marine & Manufacturing
Company, is a Delaware corporation engaged in the manufacture of
aircraft instruments, fire-fighting pumps, and outboard motors. The
63 N. L. R. B., No. 121.
802
JOHNSON MOTORS 803
Company's operations are carried on in several parts of the United
States. Only the Company's Waukegan, Illinois, plant is involved
in the instant proceeding.
During the period ending October 31, 1944, the Company purchased
raw materials for the Waukegan plant valued in excess of $4,500,000, of
which approximately 50 percent was shipped from points- outside the
State of Illinois. During the same period the Company's Waukegan
plant produced goods valued in excess of $13,000,000, of which approxi-
mately 50 percent was shipped to points outside the State of Illinois.
The Company admits, and we find, that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
Metal Polishers, Buffers, Platers and Helpers International Union,
Local No. 140, affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, is a
labor organization admitting to membership employees of the
Company.
Independent Marine and Machinists Union, unaffiliated, is a labor
organization admitting to membership employees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Company refused to grant recognition to the Polishers as the
exclusive bargaining representative of certain of its employees until
the Polishers has been certified by the Board in an appropriate unit.'
A statement of a Field Examiner for the Board, introduced into
evidence at the hearing, indicates that the Polishers represents a sub-
stantial number of employees in the unit it alleges to be appropriate.'
We find that a question affecting commerce has 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 UNIT; THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
The Polishers seeks to represent a unit comprising "all polishers
employed by the Company at the Waukegan, Illinois plant." 3 The
1 The petition herein was filed on September 28, 1944. The 1943 collective bargaining
agreement between the Company and the Independent expired September 30, 1944. In
November 1944, the Company and the Independent negotiated a new agreement which was
signed on November 27, 1944, and made retroactive to October 1, 1944. Neither the Com-
pany nor the Independent contends that either the 1943 or 1944 contract is a bar to the
present determination of representatives.
2 The Field Examiner reported that the Polishers submitted a certified copy of 30 names
of employees listed as members of the Polishers « ho have been employed by the Company.
The Field Examiner further reported that there are approximately 25 employees in the unit
alleged to be appropriate by the Polishers
The Independent relies on either its 1943 or 1944 contract with the Company as evi-
dence of its interest in this proceeding.
3 Although the Company employs several platers , neither of the parties contends that
these employees should be included in the unit sought by the Polishers , nor does the Polish-
ers claim to represent them.
662514-46-vol 63-52
804 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Company takes no position with respect to the appropriateness of any
unit. The Independent opposes the creation of a separate unit of
polishers on the ground that past collective bargaining has been suc-
cessfully conducted with the Company on the basis of a single plant-
wide unit. The parties are not in dispute with respect to the,#omposi-
tion of any unit finally found appropriate.
The Company's Waukegan operations are carried on in two plants
numbered 1 and 2. The polishing department, in which the Company
has approximately 25 polishers, is located in the center of plant No. 1.
This department is physically separated from the Company's other
departments by a wire fence. The polishers are under separate super-
vision, perform exclusively all the Company's polishing operations,
and are paid an hourly rate higher than the employees working in the
other departments-4 Since the record is clear that the polishers form
a cohesive and distinct craft group, appropriate for the purposes of
collective bargaining, the only other factor to be considered is the
history of collective bargaining.
Before 1927 the Company maintained a plant in South Bend, In-
diana, in which it employed, among others, a certain number of
polishers. At this plant the polishers, through their representative,
Local No. 130 of the Polishers, entered into an agreement with the
Company that all workers of their trade were to be hired through
their organization. In 1927, when the Company moved its South
Bend plant to Waukegan, many of the polishers employed there were
transferred to the present plant. At the Waukegan plant the polish-
ers formed Local No. 140 of the Polishers, and the Company con-
tinued its prior practice of hiring polishers through this organization.
In 1934, the Independent came into being and engaged in collective
bargaining-for the Company's production and maintenance employees
on a plant-wide basis. In 1937, the Independent, entered into its first
collective bargaining agreement with the Company.' Since then, it
appears that the Polishers have participated with the Independent
in the negotiation of all subsequent contracts and in the activities of
the Independent's grievance and bargaining committees. In 1939,
however, the Polishers sought to bargain with the Company for the
employees it represents in a separate group, but- the Company re-
fused to recognize it apart from the Independent for the purposes of
collective bargaining. Because of this refusal, the polishers became
members of the Independent.
Despite this, they still maintained their membership in the Pol-
ishers, the Company continued to hire polishers through their or-
4 Some of the machinery in the polishing department is sometimes used by employees
other than polishers , but this is done because of space limitation and the unavailability of
other machinery.
, The record shows that a representative of the Polishers participated in the negotiation
of this collective bargaining agreement.
JOHNSON MOTORS 805
ganization , and they did not become dues-paying members of the
Independent until 1941. In October of 1944, the Independent, dur-
ing the negotiation of a collective bargaining agreement with the
Company sought to have a maintenance -of-membership provision in-
corporated in the contract , whereupon the Polishers ordered its mem-
bers to withdraw their membership from the Independent. Since
1944, the Polishers has resumed its attempts to obtain recognition for
the employees it represents in a separate group. In view of-these
facts, we are of the opinion that the polishers employed by the Com-
pany have not, by their actions during the period in which the Inde-
pendent has been the exclusive representative of the Company's
employees , lost their identity as a separate craft group .6
We, therefore , conclude that the polishers could function as a sepa-
rate unit or, because of the bargaining history, could be included in
the existing comprehensive unit. Accordingly , before making a final
determination with respect to the unit proposed by the Polishers, we
shall ascertain the desires of the employees themselves . We shall
direct an election by secret ballot to be conducted among the em-
ployees of the Company in the following group who were employed
during the payroll period immediately preceding the date of the Di-
rection of Election, subject to the limitations and additions set forth
therein : all polishers employed by the Company at the Waukegan,
Illinois, plant , excluding supervisors , assistant supervisors , and all
other supervisory employees with authority to hire, promote, dis-
charge, discipline , or otherwise effect changes in the status of em-
ployees, or effectively recommend such action , to determine whether
they desire to be represented by the Polishers or by the Independent.
Upon the results of the election will depend , in part, our determina-
tion of the appropriate unit. If a majority of the employees in this
voting group select the Polishers as their bargaining representative,
they will be taken to have indicated their desire to constitute a sepa-
rate appropriate unit. If, however , a majority of these employees
choose the Independent , then they will be taken to have indicated
their desire to remain part of the established production and
maintenance unit.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
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 9, of National Labor Relations
Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3 , as amended , it is hereby
'See Matter of General Electric Company ( Lynn River Works & Everett Plant), 58
N. L. R. B. 57.
806 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Johnson Motors,
a Division of Outboard, Marine & Manufacturing Company, Wau-
kegan, Illinois, an election by secret ballot shall be conducted as early
as possible, but not later than thirty (30) days from the date of this
Direction, under the direction and supervision of the Regional Di-
rector for the Thirteenth Region, acting in this matter as agent for
the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Article III, Sec-
tions 10 and 11, of said Rules and Regulations, among the employees
in the voting group set forth in Section IV, above, who were employed
during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of this
Direction, including employees who did not work during said pay-roll
period because they were ill or on vacation or temporarily laid off,
and including employees in the armed forces of the United States,
who present themselves in person at the polls, but excluding any who
have since quit or been discharged for cause, and who have not been
rehired or reinstated prior to the date of the election, to determine
whether they desire to be represented by Metal Polishers, Buffers,
Platers and Helpers International Union, Local No. 140, A. F. L., or
by Independent Marine & Machinists Union for the purposes of col-
lective bargaining, or by neither.
MR. GERARD D. REILLY took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Direction of Election.