Palmer-Bee Co.Download PDFNational Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsFeb 28, 194560 N.L.R.B. 972 (N.L.R.B. 1945) Copy Citation In the Matter Of PALMER-BEE COMPANY, PLANT #5 and UNITED ELEC- TRICAL, RADIO & MACHINE WORKERS OF AMERICA, C. I. O. Case No. 11-R-722.-Decided February 28, 1945 Mr. Clifford L. Hardy, for the Board. Mr. Thomas Raeside, of Bloomington, Ind., for the Company. Messrs. &obert Kirkwood and John F. Naidman, of-Indianapolis, Ind., for the U. E. Mr. D. J. Omer, of Cincinnati, Ohio, and Mr. Will Hartman, of Bedford, Ind., for the I. A. M. Mr. Louis Cokin, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION STATEMENT OF THE CASE - Upon petition duly filed by United Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers of America, C. I. 0., herein called the U. E., alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of Palmer-Bee Company, Plant #5, Ellettsville, Indi- ana, herein called the Company, the National Labor Relations Board provided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice before William 0. Murdock, Trial Examiner. Said hearing was held at Bloomington, Indiana, on February 3, 1945. At the commencement of the hearing, the Trial Examiner granted a motion of International Association of Machinists, A. F. of L., herein called the I. A. M., to intervene. The Board, the Company, the U. E., and the I. A. Al. appeared at and participated in the hearing and all parties were afforded full op- portunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to 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 opportunity to file briefs with the Board. Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY Palmer-Bee Company is a Michigan corporation operating a plant at Ellettsville, Indiana, with which we are here concerned, where it 60 N L R B., No. 164. 972 PALMER-BEE COMPANY 973 is engaged in the manufacture of heavy machinery. The Company purchases raw materials viluQd in excess of $100,000, annually, for use at its Ellettsville; plant, over 50 percent of which is shipped to it from points outside the State of Indiana. Practically all products pro- duced by the Company at its Ellettsville plant are shipped to points outside the State of Indiana. The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce'within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED United Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers of America is a labor organization affiliated witht the Congress of Industrial Organizations, admitting to membership employees of the Company. International Association of.Machinists is a labor organization affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, admitting to mem- bership employees of the Company. - III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION The Company refuses to recognize the U. E. or the I. A. M. as the exclusive collective bargaining representative of the employees at the Ellettsville plant until such time as the U. E. or the I. A. M. is certified by the Board. A statenieiit of a Field Examiner of the Board, introduced into evidence at the hearing, indicates that the U. E. represents a substantial number of employees in the unit hereinafter found to be appropriate.1 We find that it 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 U. E. and the I.A. M. urge that all production and mainte- nance employees at the Ellettsville, Indiana, plant of the Company, including group leaders, firemen and watchmen, and the shipping clerk, but excluding office and clerical employees, foremen, assistant foremen, and any other supervisory employees, constitute * a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining. The only con- troversy with respect to the unit concerns the firemen and watchmen. The Company would exclude them from the unit. I The Field Examiner reported that the U E presented 71 membership application cards bearing names of persons that appear on the Company ' s pay roll of January 8, 1945. There are approximately 99 persons in the appropriate unit. The I A i1I presented 22 oat cis bearing the navies of persons on the January 8, 1945, pay roll 974 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD The Company employs two firemen and three watchmen. The former fire a furnace to maintain heat and operating steam for the entire plant. The watchmen are non-militarized and their duties are those which are normally performed by watchmen rather than plant protection employees. We shall include the firemen and watchmen in the unit. Although all parties agreed at the hearing that the shipping clerk should be included in the unit, the record indicates that he directs the work of 9 or 10 employees and is responsible for the operations of the shipping and receiving department. It appears that his duties are clearly supervisory in nature. We shall exclude him from the unit. We find that all maintenance and production employees at the Ellettsville, Indiana, plant of the Company, including group leaders, firemen and watchmen, but excluding office and clerical employees, foremen, assistant foremen, the shipping clerk, and any other super- visory employees with authority to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or effectively recommend such action, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining, within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act. V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES We find that the question concerning representation which has -arisen can best be resolved by means of an election by secret ballot. The Company contends that no election should be held in the im- mediate future because it expects its personnel to increase fourfold because of pending contract negotiations with the United States Army. The record indicates that at the time of the hearing there were approx- imately 99 employees in the appropriate unit. A representative of the Company testified that the Company was presently negoti^iting with the United States Army for a contract which would require its per- sonnel to increase to about 400. However, the Company has not re- ceived any new contracts and the record indicates that there is con- siderable uncertainty as to when any new contract requiring an appre- ciable expansion of personnel will be received. The record further discloses that, in the event the Company does receive the anticipated coitract,-the expansion of -personnel would not be put into effect for a period of at least 6 months. We shall, accordingly, proceed with an immediate determination of representatives. In one respect, however, we shall, in view of the circumstances herein presented, modify our usual practice. Generally, we consider, for administrative reasons, a certification as presumptive evidence of majority representation for a period of a year following issuance of the certification, and accordingly we have ordinarily refused to en- tertain a petition for an investigation and certification of represent PALMER-BEE COMPANY 975 atives where substantially less than a year has elapsed.. In expand- - ing industries, however, we have made an exception. Since there is .some possibility of an expansion of the Company's operations at its Ellettsville, Indiana, plant, which will almost quadruple the number of employees, we shall not, in the event a collective bargaining repre- sentative is certified as a result of this proceeding, adhere to our usual 1-year rule. We shall, instead, entertain a new petition for an in- vestigation and certification of representatives within less than 1 year, but not before the expiration of 6 months, from the date of any certifi- cation we may issue, upon proof (1) that the number of employees in the appropriate unit is more than double the number eligible to vote _ in the election hereinafter directed; and (2) that the petitioner repre- sents a substantial number of employees in the expanded unit.2 We shall direct that the employees eligible to vote in the election shall be those within the appropriate unit who were employed during the pay-roll period inunediately preceding the date of the Direction of Election herein, subject to the limitations and additions set forth in the Direction. 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 Rela-' tions Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3, as amended, it is hereby DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-. tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Palmer-Bee Comm pany, Ellettsville, Indiana, an election by secret ballot shall be con= ducted 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 Director for the Eleventh Region, acting in this matter as, agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Article III, Sections 10 and 11, of said Rules and Regulations, among the employees in the unit found appropriate 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 the said pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation or tem- porarily laid off, and including employees in the armed forces of the United States who present themselves in person at the polls, but ex- cluding any who have since quit or been discharged for cause and have not been rehired or reinstated prior to the date of the election, to determine whether they desire to be represented by United Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers of America, C. I. 0., or by International Association of Machinists, A. F. of L., for the purposes of collective, bargaining or by neither. 2 See Matter of Aluminum Company of America, 52 N. L. R. B. 1040. Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation