Sampsel Time Control, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 23, 1947

74 N.L.R.B. 611 (N.L.R.B. 1947)

In the Matter of SAMPSEL TIME CONTROL , INC., EMPLOYER and INTER-
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS, PETITIONER
Case No. 13-P-4219.-Decided July 23,1947
Mr. James T. Nielsen, of Chicago, Ill., for the Employer.
Mr. P. L. Siemiller, of Chicago, Ill., for the Petitioner.
Mr. Irving D. Rosenman, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
Upon a petition duly filed the National Labor Relations Board on
April 3, 1947, conducted a prehearing election among the employees
of the Employer in the alleged appropriate unit, to determine whether
or not they desire to be represented by the Petitioner for the purpose
,of collective bargaining.
At the close of the election a Tally of Ballots was furnished the
parties. The Tally shows that there were approximately 13 eligible
voters and that 13 ballots were cast, of which 8 were for, and 5 were
against, the Petitioner.
Thereafter, a hearing was held at La Salle, Illinois, on May 15, 1947,
before Max Rotenberg , hearing officer . At the hearing the Employer
moved to dismiss the petition on the ground that the prehearing elec-
tion and all subsequent proceedings in this case are invalid and con-
trary to the National Labor Relations Act, because ( 1) there have
been three other Board-conducted elections within the past 4 years
among its employees, two of which were held within the 12 months
preceding the hearing, and that none of these elections resulted in the
selection of a bargaining representative and (2) that the proposed
unit .is inappropriate. The hearing officer reserved ruling on the
motion for the Board. For reasons stated in Sections III and IV,
infra, the motion is denied. The hearing officer's rulings made at the
hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations
Board makes the following :
74 N. L . R. B., No. 119. 611
612 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
Sampsel Time Control, Inc., an Illinois corporation, is engaged'
in the manufacture of time controls and pump switches at its plant in
Spring Valley, Illinois. During a 12-month period, the Employer
purchases raw materials valued at over $100,000, of which approxi-
mately 60 percent represents shipments to its plant from points out-
side the State of Illinois. During a similar period the Employer sells,
finished products valued at over $1,000,000, of which approximately
80 percent represents shipments to points outside the State.
The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.,
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED 2
The Petitioner is a labor organization claiming to represent em-
ployees of the Employer.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Employer refuses to recognize the Petitioner as the exclusive
bargaining representative of its toolroom employees until the Peti-
tioner has been certified by the Board in an appropriate unit.
The Employer takes the position that no election should have been
conducted at this time for the reason that in a consent election con-
ducted June 24, 1943,3 and in a Board directed election held on June
25, 1946,' and in a prehearing election conducted February 11, 1947,5
a majority of its production and maintenance employees had in each
instance voted against representation by any labor organization."
However, inasmuch as the record discloses that the Petitioner did not
participate in any of these elections, and inasmuch as these elections
1Matter of Sampsel Time Control, Inc, 68 N. L R B 419
Y District 50, United Mine Workers of America, AFL , herein called District 50, and In-
ternational Union of Mine , Mill & Smelter Workers , C I 0, herein called the C I 0, and
the A F L Council of La Salle, herein called the Council, were each served with a
copy of the petition and notice of hearing No appearance was entered on behalf of any
of these labor organizations at the hearing.
9Matter of Sampsel Time Control, Inc, 13-R-1740 , District 50, was the only labor
organization on the ballot.
4 Matter of Sampsel Time Control, Inc , 68 N. L. R. B. 419. The participating organiza-
tions were District 50 and the C. I O.
e Matter of Sampsel Time Control, Inc ., 13-R-4143. The participating unions were the
C. I 0, District 50, and the Council
° The toolroom employees were specifically excluded from the unit in which the election
was held on February 11, 1947.
SAMPSEL TIME CONTROL, INC. 613
were conducted in different units from that involved herein, we find
no merit in ,the Employer's position.?
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
The Petitioner seeks a unit of all non-supervisory employees in the
toolroom. The Employer contends that only a plant-wide unit is,
appropriate and asserts that the Board's previous finding of the ap-
propriateness of a plant-wide unit 8 is controlling.
There is no history of collective bargaining in the Employer's plant..
At the time of the hearing, there were approximately 200 persons'
employed by the Employer, of whom approximately 13 were toolroom,
employees. The toolroom staff consists of skilled and apprentice tool
makers. The record discloses that they constitute a skilled and_
homogeneous craft group, are more highly skilled than employees in
the rest of the plant, receive higher rates of pay, and are under sep-
arate supervision. It further discloses that the toolrooin is physi-
cally segregated from the rest of the plant and that there is
no interchange of toolroom employees and production and mainte-
nance employees. Under all these circumstances, we find no merit to•
the Employer's contention, in effect, that the employees sought may
not function together for collective bargaining-purposes.9
Nor is there any merit to the Employer's contention that the Board's
previous finding as to the appropriateness of a plant-wide unit pre-,
eludes a holding that the requested unit is appropriate. That pro-
ceeding did not result in a certification or in any subsequent bargain-
ing history and, under well established Board principles, does not
preclude the establishment of the unit of toolroom employees.10
We find, therefore, that all employees of the toolroom at the Spring
Valley, Illinois, plant of the Employer, excluding office and clerical
employees, and all supervisory employees, constitute a unit appro-
priate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning
of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
7 Matter of Chicago Flexible Shaft Company , 62 N. L. R. B. 156 ; Matter of Dorlexa
Dyeing and Finishing Company, 60 N L. R. B. 903.
e See footnote 4, supra.
° Matter of The Beach Company, 72 N. L. R. B. 510, and Matter of The Bastian -Blessing
Company, 65 N. L. R. B. 1023.
10 Matter of Molina Company and Bendythe Company, 66 N L. R. B. 592 ; Matter of The
Hartford Courant Company, 72 N. L. R. B. 292; Matter of A. L. Mechling Barge Lines,
69 N. L . R. B. 838.
614 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
The results of the election held previous to the hearing show that
the Petitioner has secured a majority of the valid votes cast. We
shall certify the Petitioner as the collective bargaining representative
of the employees in the appropriate unit.
CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED that International Association of Machinists
has been designated and selected by a majority of all toolroom em-
ployees at the Spring Valley, Illinois, plant of the Employer, exclud-
ing office and clerical workers, and all supervisory employees, as their
representative for the purposes of collective bargaining, and that,
pursuant to Section 9 (a) of the Act, the said organization is the
exclusive representative of all such employees for the purposes of
collective bargaining with respect to rates of pay, wages, hours of
employment, and other conditions of employment.
CHAIRMAN HERZOG took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Certification of Representatives.