Parke, Davis and Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 9, 1943

51 N.L.R.B. 179 (N.L.R.B. 1943)

In the Matter of PARKE, DAVIS AND COMPANY and UNITED GAS, COKE
AND CHEMICAL WORKERS, C. I. O.
Case No. R-5506.-Decided July 9,1943
Mr. J. K. Worley, of Detroit, Mich., for the Company.
Mr. Nicholas J. Rothe, of Detroit, Mich., for the C. 1. 0.
Messrs. Lewis F. Brady and David J. Craig, of Detroit, Mich., for
the M. E. S. A.
Mr. Alfred Kamin, of Washington, D. C., and Mr. Henry Wilson,
of Detroit, Mich., for District 50.
Mr. Wallace E. Royster, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon a petition duly filed by United Gas, Coke and Chemical
Workers, C. I. 0., herein called the C. I. 0., alleging that a question
affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of em-
ployees of Parke, Davis and Company, Detroit, Michigan, herein
called the Company, the National Labor Relations Board provided
for an appropriate hearing upon due notice before Max Rotenberg,
Trial Examiner. Said hearing was held at Detroit, Michigan, on
June 7, 1943. The Company, th6 C. I. 0., Local No. 6, Mechanics
Educational Society of America, herein called the M. E. S. A., and
Local Union No. 12098, District 50, United Mine Workers of America,
herein called District 50, appeared, participated, and were afforded
full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses,
and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues. During the hearing
District 50 moved to dismiss the petition on the ground that the
C. I. O. had failed to make a substantial showing of membership
among the employees in the claimed unit. In accordance with our
finding in Section III, infra, the motion is denied' The Trial Ex-
aminer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error
1 District 50 also moved that the intervening petition of the M . E. S. A. be dismissed.
Since the M. E S A. filed no petition , the motion is inappropriate.
51 N. L . R. B., No. 41.
179
540612-44-vol. 51-13
180 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
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
Parke, Davis and Company is a Michigan corporation with its
principal plant and offices in Detroit, Michigan. In connection with
the Detroit plant, the Company operates a biological farm at Roch-
ester, Michigan, and maintains laboratories and warehouses in various
foreign countries and in the principal cities of the United States. A
substantial part of the Company's business is the manufacture of 'war
materials. This proceeding concerns only the Company's employees
working at the Detroit plant and the Rochester farm, where the Com-
pany is engaged in the manufacture, sale, and distribution of pharlna-
ceutical and biological products. The principal raw materials used by
the Company are drugs and chemicals. During 1942, the Company
used such raw materials of a value in excess of $9,000,000, of which
approximately 85 percent was shipped to the Company's plant and
farm from points outside Michigan. During the same period the
Company manufactured finished products at the plant and farm, of a
value in excess of $35,000,000, of which approximately 95 percent was
shipped to points outside Michigan.
The Company concedes for the purpose of this proceeding that it
is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor
Relations Act.
IT. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
United Gas, Coke and Chemical Workers, C. I. 0., is a labor organ-
ization affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, ad-
mitting to membership employees of the Company.
Local No. 6, Mechanics Educational Society of America, is a labor
organization affiliated with the Confederated Unions of America,
admitting to membership employees of the Company.
Local Union No. 12098, District 50, United Mine Workers of Amer-
ica, is a labor organization admitting to membership employees of the
Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On April 30, 1943, the C. I. O. notified the Company that a number
of the Company's employees had designated the C. I: O. as their'bar-
gaining agent and that a petition would be filed with the Board
seeking certification as such agent . At the hearing the Company
PARKE, DAVIS AND COMPANY 181
refused recognition to the C. I. O. as the exclusive bargaining repre-
sentative of its employees unless and until the C. I. O. is certified as
such representative by the Board.
In 1941 the Company and District 50 entered into a collective bar-
gaining contract covering the employees in an industrial unit. The
contract was' renewed in 1942 and was to remain in effect until July 1,
1943, and thereafter, subject to termination or modification by either
party upon 30 days' notice. Neither the Company nor District 50
directly asserts the contract to be a bar to this proceeding; since its
annual term has expired and it now may be terminated by a 30-day
notice, we find that it does not constitute a bar to a present investiga-
tion of representatives.
Statements of the Regional Director and the Trial Examiner, intro-
duced into evidence at the hearing, indicate that the C. I. O. and the
M. E. S. A. each represents a substantial number of employees in the
units claimed appropriate.2 At the hearing District 50 attempted to
introduce evidence to the effect that many of the employees from whom
the C. 1. 0. claimed authorizations, had repudiated such authorizations.
The Trial Examiner properly rejected this evidence as speculative and
of little probative value. If in fact the employees have designated
and then repudiated the C. I. 0., at most this may indicate that their
desires are in a state of flux and can best be expressed finally in an
election by secret ballot.
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.
IT. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
In its petition the C. I. O. requests a unit of "all production, mainte-
nance, stock and shipping employees, cafeteria and laundry employees,
laboratory technicians, working in the Detroit Plant and Rochester
Biological Farm of the Company, and all pressmen and press assistants,
typesetters, typesetter apprentices, proofreaders and bindery workers
employed in the printing department of the Detroit Plant, excluding
2 The Regional Director stated that the C. I. 0 submitted 565 application-for-membership
cards, all but one bearing apparently genuine, original signatures All cards were dated
subsequent to March 15, 1943, and 532 bore the names of persons whose names appear on
the Company's pay roll of May 16, 1943. The pay roll lists 1781 employees in the unit for
which the C I O. contends. The Trial Examiner stated that the C I 0 submitted 90
additional cards of which 79 bore apparently genuine, original signatures and were dated
subsequent to April 17, 1943 Eighty cards bore the names of persons whose names appear
on the Company's pay roll of May 16, 1943.
The Regional Director stated that the M. E S A submitted 105 membership application'
and authorization cards all dated in June 1943 All cards boie apparently genuine, original
signatures and were names appearing on the Company's pay roll of May 16, 1943. Ninety-
eight cards bore the names of persons among the 176 employees in the unit for which the
M. E. S. A. contends.
District 50 relies upon its contract to establish its interest.
182 DECISIONS OF' NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
executives , plant supervisors , foremen , foreladies, assistant foremen,
assistant foreladies, patrolmen , office employees, clerical employees,
plant-protection employees, control checkers, and technical men with
college degrees practicing their profession and paid on a monthly basis,
plant and laboratory office clerical workers and employees in the admin-
istrative building other than maintenance employees." This is the
same unit covered by the contract and District 50 concedes it to be
appropriate.
The M. E. S. A. would separate from the above group and represent
as a separate unit all hourly rated employees of the Company at the
Detroit plant and Rochester farm in the mechanical and powerhouse
divisions including blacksmiths, carpenters, capsule engineers, elec-
tricians, millwrights, machinists, painters, powerhouse employees,
plumbers, steamfitters, tinsmiths, tool makers, printers, garage me-
chani:;s and oilers, excluding sweepers and all categories excluded
from the unit requested by the C. 1. 0.
The operation of the Rochester farm, which consists of several build-
ings on 700 acres, is closely integrated with that of the Detroit plant
although they are situated 30 miles apart. Small animals are kept at
the farm for experimental purposes and for the production of biological
antigens. Complementary laboratory research is conducted both at
the plant and the farm. The employees at both locations were covered
by the contract and both plant and farm are under common manage-
ment.
Testimony offered by the M. E. S. A. at the hearing was to the
effect that the group it seeks to represent is dissatisfied with repre-
sentation as a portion of an industrial unit and that its interests would
best be served by representation in a separate unit. The employees
claimed by the M. E. S. A. are all manually skilled but are otherwise
a conglomerate and heterogeneous group. No one craft appears to
predominate among them, nor, in many cases, are the skills involved
similar or even comparable. Clearly the diversity of skills and func-
tions is no more pronounced in the industrial unit which the C. I. 0.
requests. The employees claimed by the M. E. S. A. have been repre-
sented under the contract and their hourly rates have been specifically
negotiated by collective bargaining. The history of collective bargain-
ing with the Company on an industrial basis extending over a period
of approximately 2 years; the absence of history of collective bargain-
ing with the Company on a craft or departmental basis; and the diver-
sity of skills and functions found in the group claimed by the M. E. S.
A. persuade us that the unit sought by the M. E. S. A. is inappropriate
for the purposes of collective bargaining and we so find.'
3 See Matter of Ampco Metal , Incorporated, 28 N. L . R B. 1227 . See also Matter of
Michigan Alkali Company, 40 N L. R B 480, and Matter of General Electric Company
(Lynn River Works and Everett Plant ), 50 N. L R. B 401
PARKE, DAVIS AND COMPANY 183
During the hearing the C. 1. 0. and District 50 agreed to minor modi-
fications of the unit. The Company has expressed no preference in this
respect. Accordingly, in consideration of the agreement of the C. 1. 0.
and District 50, we find that all production and maintenance employees
of the Company working in the Detroit plant and Rochester farm,
including stock and shipping employees, cafeteria and laundry em-
ployees; assistant laboratory technicians (A and B) ; and pressmen,
press assistants, typesetters, typesetter apprentices, proofreaders, and
bindery workers in the printing department of the Detroit plant; but
excluding superintendents, 'foremen, foreladies, assistant foremen,
assistant foreladies, or any other supervisory employees with authority
to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the
status of employees, or effectively recommend such action; plant-
protection employees; control checkers; and technical men with college
degrees who are employed in their profession and are paid on a monthly
basis; office employees in the plant and laboratory; clerical employees;
and employees in the administrative building other than maintenance
employees, 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 shall direct that the question concerning representation which
has arisen be resolved by an election by secret ballot among the em-
ployees in the appropriate unit who were employed during the pay-roll
period immediately 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 Relations
Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Parke, Davis and
Company, Detroit, Michigan, 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 Seventh Region, .acting in this matter as
agent for the National Labor Relations Board,- and subject to Article
III, Section 10, of said Rules and Regulations, among the employees
in the unit found appropriate in Section IV, above, who were em-
ployed during the pay-roll period immediately preceeding the date
184 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
of this Direction, including employees who did not work during such
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
those who have since quit or been discharged for cause, to determine
whether they desire to be represented- by United Gas, Coke and Chem-
ical Workers, C. I. 0., or by Local No. 6, Mechanics Educational
Society of America, or by Local Union No. 12098, District 50, United
Mine Workers of America, for the purposes of collective bargaining,
or by none.