Products Manufacturing & Engineering Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 8, 1947

73 N.L.R.B. 233 (N.L.R.B. 1947)

In the Matter of PRODUCTS MANUFACTURING & ENGINEERING CORPORA-
TION, EM â–º 'I.oYr:i; and UNITED ELECTRICAL, RADIO & MACHINE WORK-
ERS of AMERICA, CIO, PETITIONER
Case No. 1 R-4146.Decided April 8,19/7
Mr. Maurice E. Bur r, of Chicago, Ill., for the Employer.
Mr. Leo Turner, of Chicago, Ill., for the Petitioner.
Mr. Joseph M. Jacobs, by Mr. Jacob N. Gross, of Chicago, Ill., for
the Intervenor.
Mr. George H. Yayh jianz, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at Chicago,
Illinois, on February 3. 1947, before Max Rotenberg, hearing officer.
The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prej-
udicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations
Board makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
Products Manufacturing & Engineering Corporation, an Illinois
corporation having its principal place of business in Chicago, Illinois,
operates two manufacturing plants, known as the Armitage and
Wabansia plants, respectively. At the Armitage plant, it is engaged
in general machine work, and at its Wabansia plant, it is engaged in
stamping and assembling component parts for radios. Only the
Wabansia plant is involved in this proceeding. During 1946, the
Employer purchased for use at these plants raw materials valued at
approximately $40,000, about 15 percent of which originated outside
the State of Illinois. During the same period, it sold finished prod-
ucts valued at approximately $200,000, about 15 percent of which was
shipped out of the State.
The Employer admits, and we find, that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
73 N. L. R. B, No. 42. 233
234 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
II. THE `ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress
of Industrial Organizations, claiming to represent employees of the
Employer.
International Brotherhood of Electrical `Yorkers, Local B-1031,
herein called the Intervenor, is a labor organization affiliated with
the American Federation of Labor, claiming to represent employees
of the Employer.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Employer refuses to recognize the Petitioner as the exclusive
bargaining representative of employees of the Employer until the
Petitioner has been certified by the Board in an aplDropriate unit.
The Intervenor asserts that a cross-check conducted pursuant to a
cross-check agreement with the Employer is a bar to this proceeding.
On December 9, 1916, the Intervenor and the Employer orally
agreed that the latter would recognize the former as the bargaining
representative of the employees involved in this proceeding if a cross-
check, by a captain in the Chicago police department, of evidence of
representation submitted by the Intervenor showed that the latter
represented a majority of the employees. On December 12, 1946, the
captain conducted the cross-check and reported to the Employer that
the Intervenor did represent such a majority. On the following day,
the Employer and the Intervenor started negotiations fora collective
bargaining agreement. On December 14, 1946, the Petitioner notified
the Employer of its claim to represent the latter's employees and on
December 18, filed the present petition. Thereafter, on February 1,
1947, the Employer and the Intervenor entered into a collective bar-
gaining contract for a 1-year term. Neither the Intervenor nor the
Employer contends that this agreement is a bar.
The Intervenor argues that the same effect should be given to the
cross-check conducted by the police captain pursuant to oral agree-
ment as the Board gives to its own certification following an election.
In previous cases, the Board has refused to give this effect to cross-
checks conducted by a conciliator of the United States Conciliation
Service' and by one of its own Regional Directors 2 where the results
of the cross-check were not posted on the employer's premises for a
reasonable period of time so that either the employees or other in-
terested parties might have the opportunity of protesting these results
before they became final. In the present case, there is no evidence of
such posting. Under these circumstances, we refuse to accord this
1 Matter of Electro Metallurgical Company, 69 N L R. B. 772. See also Matter of Vic-
tory Chem ical Company, 60 N L R B 997
2 Matter of Joe Hearin, 68 N L R B. 150 and 66 N. I, R B 1276
PRODUCTS MANUFACTURING & ENGINEERING CORPORATION 235
card check the'same status as a dertification by the Board ' following an
election. Accordingly, Ave find that the oral cross-check agreement
and the card check conducted pursuant thereto do not bar a present
determination of representatives.
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning
the representation of employees of the Employer, within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
We find, in accordance with an agreement of the parties, that,all
production'and maintenance employees of the Employer at its Wa-
bansia plant, including watchmen and factory clerical employees, but
excluding office clerical and all supervisory employees with authority
to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in
the status of employees, or effectively recommend such action, con-
stitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining
within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION 3
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining with Products Manufacturing & Engi-
neering Corporation, Chicago, 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 Director for the Thirteenth Region, acting in this mat-
ter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to
Sections 203.55 and 203.56, of National Labor Relations Board Rules
and Regulations-Series 4, 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 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 those employees 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, CIO, or by International Brotherhood of Electrical Work-
ers, Local B-1031, AFL, for the purposes of collective bargaining, or
by neither.
CHAIRMAN HERZOG took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Direction'of Election.
Any participant in the election herein may, upon its prompt request to, and approval
thereof, by the Regional Director , have its name removed from the ballot