Pioneer Tool and Engineering Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 25, 1945

62 N.L.R.B. 1435 (N.L.R.B. 1945)

In the Matter Of PIONEER TOOL AND ENGINEERING COMPANY and LOCAL
225, INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS, A. F. L.
Case No. 9-R=1760.Decided July 25, 1945
Mr. H. B. Rector, of Cincinnati, Ohio, and Mr. Earl R. Heavner, of
Dayton, Ohio, for the Company.
Mr. D. J. Omer, of Cincinnati, Ohio, and Mr. John. Louden, of Dayton.
Ohio, for the Union.
Mr. Isadore Engle, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon a petition duly filed by Local 225, International Association of
Machinists, A. F. L., herein called the Union, alleging that a question
affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees
of Pioneer Tool and Engineering Company, Dayton, Ohio, herein called
the Company, the National Labor Relations Board provided for an appro-
priate hearing upon due notice before James A. Shaw, Trial Examiner.
Said hearing was held at Dayton, Ohio, on May 14, 1945. The Company
and the Union appeared and participated. All parties were afforded full
opportunity 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 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
Pioneer Tool and Engineering Company is a proprietorship with its
offices and principal place of business in Dayton, Ohio. The Company is
engaged in the manufacture of tools and (lies, jigs, gauges, fixtures, and
(2 N L R, B., No. 197.
1435
1436 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
special machinery. During the past year it purchased raw materials valued
in excess of $25,000, approximately 50 percent of which came from points
outside the State of Ohio. During the same period, its sales of finished prod-
ucts exceeded $100,000 in value, approximately 50 percent of which repre-
sented shipments to points outside the State.
The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the meaning
of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
Local 225, International Association of Machinists, affiliated with the
American Federation'of Labor, is a labor organization admitting to mem-
bership employees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Company declined to recognize the Union as the exclusive bargain-
ing representative of its production and maintenance employees.
On February 24, 1945, the Union notified the Company that a majority
of employees of the Company had designated the Union as their exclusive
bargaining agent. Thereafter, a conference was held on April 18, 1945,
between the union and company representative,, wherein it was agreed
that a consent election would be held on May 8, 1945, under Board auspices.
Subsequent to the conference and prior to the scheduled consent election,
the Company received an increase in work orders. The change in circum-
stances made necessary a 100-percent increase in \-vorkmg personnel, and
approval therefor was given by the War Manpower Commission. The Com-
pany thereupon filed a motion with the Regional Director to postpone or
dismiss the petition in view of the contemplated upward revision in the
number of employees, contending that an election at that time would include
only a minority of the anticipated total complement of employees.' The
Regional Director denied the motion and thereafter issued a Notice of
Hearing herein.
At the hearing and in its brief, the Company contended that no question
concerning representation has arisen because (1) it is "unaware of the
type of designations" submitted, and (2) the showing of representation is
inadequate in view of the current expansion of the unit involved. There is
no merit to these contentions. As to the first reason urged, the Field Exam-
iner's report indicates that the Union has made a substantial showing.- We
have frequently stated that authorization or membership cards are required
1 No figures appear as to the exact size of the Company's staff on the date that the motion was
filed At the time of the hearing , May 14, 1945, the Company had approximately 29 employees in
the agreed unit and the Company anticipated a total complement of 50 employees within a period of
from 30 to 90 days
rz The Field Examiner reported that the Union submitted 17 authorization cards, that, of these
cards, 16 were dated February 1945, and 1 was dated March 1945 , and that on April 10 , 1945, there
were 20 employees in the emit petitioner) foi
PIONEER TOOL AND ENGINEERING COMPANY 1437
simply to provide a reasonable safeguard against the indiscriminate insti-
tution of representation proceedings by labor organizations which might
have little or no membership in the unit claimed to be appropriate." We
have also held that any question of such evidential showing by an opposing
party is not permitted, since the evidence submitted is for the sole purpose
of aiding the Board in making an administrative decision.'
As to the second contention, the Company stated that it anticipated at-
taining its full complement of 50 employees within a period of from 30 to
90 days of the date of the hearing. It added, however, that the rate of
expansion is necessarily_ dependent upon the availability of workers and
that it is not certain when all needed employees can be secured. The record
discloses that at the time of the hearing the unit had expanded sufficiently
to include on the pay roll Nore than 50 percent of the total number to be
employed. It is also clear that, by the time this Direction of Election issues.
the estimated 90 days, within which a full complement is to be attained, will
have virtually elapsed. Although the Company appears to have some doubts
as to its ability to complete its expansion within the 90 days, we regard its"
position as speculative, and, in any event, not controlling here. It is our
established policy in such circumstances to entertain a petition for a deter-
mination of representatives where, at the time of the hearing, the Company's
pay roll has expanded to more than half of the anticipated total complement
of employees.' Since the Company's pay roll had so expanded at the time
of the hearing, and since, in all likelihood, a much greater percentage of the
anticipated total complement of employees has already been attained, and
inasmuch as those now employed appear to be representative in skills and
duties, we are of the opinion that an election at this time will reflect the
wishes of the employees accurately and conclusively.'
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the
representation of employees. of the Company, within the meaning of Sec-
tion 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
We find, in agreement with the parties, that all employees of the Com-
pany, but excluding office and clerical employees, foremen, assistant fore-
men, and all supervisory employees with authority to hire, promote, dis-
charge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees,
3 See Matter of H. G. Hill Stores, Inc. Warehouse, 39 N. L. R. B. 874, 876.
4 See Matter of Sunset Motor Lines, 59 N. L. R. B. 1434.
c See Matter of Aluminum Company of America, 51 N. L. R. B. 1295, 1298. The Company con-
tends that the 50 - percent mark of the total anticipated complement of employees will not be reached
until it has hired 50 percent of the total number of new employees over and above those it employed
prior to the upward revision in the size of its staff. It argues further that the Union must then make
an adequate showing among such new employees before an election can be held . We find no merit in
the Company 's position which does not accord with the Board's policy in such cases, as stated above.
8 See Matter of Aluminum Company of America, Mead Aluminum Plant, 49 N. L. R. B. 1431,
1433.
1438 DEC ISIONS OIL NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
or effectively recommend such action, constitute a unit approprite 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 hay
arisen be resolved by an election by secret ballot among the employees in
the appropriate unit who were employed during the pay-roll period imme-
diately 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 3, as amended, it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representatives
for the purposes of collective bargaining with Pioneer Tool and Engineer-
ing Company, Dayton, Ohio, 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 Director
for the Ninth 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 im-
mediately preceding the date of this Direction, including employees who
did not work during said pay-roll period because they were ill or onvaca-
tion 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 have
not been rehired or reinstated prior to the date of the election, to determine
whether or not they desire to be represented by Local 225, International
Association of Machinists, A. F. L., for the purposes of collective bar-
gaining.