The B. F. Goodrich Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jan 8, 1946

65 N.L.R.B. 294 (N.L.R.B. 1946)

In the Matter of TILE B. F. GOODRICH COMPANY a d FOREMAN'S
ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, CHAPTER #98
Case No. 8-R-1874.-Decided January 8, 1946
Messrs. L. M. Buckingham, James Olds, C. D. Russell, and George
Ohio, for the Company.K'ilmon, of Akron,
Messrs. William Valiance and Bernard E. Konopka, of Detroit,
Mich., for the Union.
Mr. Bernard Goldberg, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon a petition duly filed by Foreman's Association of America,
Chapter #98, herein called the Union, alleging that a question affect-
ing commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees
of The B. F. Goodrich Company, Akron, Ohio, herein called the
Company, the National Labor Relations Board provided for an ap-
propriate hearing upon dice notice before Thomas E. Shroyer, Trial
Examiner. The hearing was held at Akron, Ohio, on July 19, 20, 23,
and 24,1945. The Company and the Um on 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. The Conmpany's
request for oral argument is hereby denied.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. TILE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
The B. F. Goodrich Company, a New York corporation, operates
an office and plant in Akron, Ohio, where it is engaged in the manu-
facture and distribution of rubber and rubber-like products. During
65 N. L. R. B., No. 58.
294
THE B. F. GOODRICH COMPANY 295
1943, the Company manufactured finished products valued in excess
of $100,000,000, of which approximately 75 percent represented ship-
ments to points outside the State of Ohio. During the same year, the
Company purchased raw materials valued in excess of $50,000,000, of
which approximately 75 percent represented shipments from points
outside the State.
We find that the Company is engaged in commerce within the mean-
ing of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
Foreman's Association of America, Chapter #98, is an unaffiliated
labor organization admitting to membership supervisory employees
of the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On April 21, 1945, the Union requested the Company to meet with
it for the purpose of recognition and the negotiation of a collective
bargaining contract. On April 28, 1945, the Company declined the
request.
The Company contends that the foremen involved in this proceeding
are not "employees" within the meaning of Section 2 (3) of the Act,
but are rather "employers" under the definition contained in Section
2 (2). The question of the status of foremen under the Ace was dis-
cases and we therecussed in all its aspects in the So.ss 1 and Paaelcaii dl 2
held that foremen in relation to their employer are "employees." This
conclusion was reaffirmed in the recent Young case.3 In accord with
our previous determinations, we find that the foremen involved in
this proceeding are "employees" within the meaning of the Act.4
A statement of a Board agent, introduced into evidence at the hear-
ing, indicates that the Union represents a substantial number of em-
ployees in the unit hereinafter found appropriate.'
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.
IV. TIIE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Union has petitioned for a unit of floor foremen, shift foremen,
chief schedulers, senior schedulers, chief dispatchers, and senior dis-
Matter of Soss Manufacturing Company, 56 N. L. It B. 348.
Matter of Packard Motor Car Company , 61 N. L it. B 4, and 64 N . L. it. B 1212.
a Matter of L. A. Young Spring & Wire Corporation, 65 N. L. R. B. 298.
4 See N L R. B. v Armour and Co (C. C A 10, Nov 5, 1945 ), 17 L it. R 372 ;
Jones & Laughlin Steel Corporation v. N L. it. B, 146 F. (2d) 833 (C C. A. 5) , N. L.
R. B v. Skinner & Kennedy Stationery Company, 113 P. (2d) 667 (C. C. A. 8).
5 The Field Examiner reported that the Union submitted 802 application cards ; and
that the names on 685 of the cards also appeared on the Company's current pay roll
which contained the names of 908 employees in the appropriate unit.
296 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
patchers. In the alternative, the Union has suggested that two units,
one limited to floor and shift foremen and the other to chief schedulers,
senior schedulers, chief dispatchers, and senior dispatchers might be
appropriate. The Company has made no contention as to the com-
position of the unit or units. Rather does it assert that because the
foremen, dispatchers and schedulers here involved are part of manage-
ment, a unit of such employees is inappropriate. The Company at-
tempts to distinguish this case from the Packard case on the ground
that the supervisors in this proceeding have duties, powers and re-
sponsibilities greater than those of the supervisors in that case and
cannot be classified as mere "traffic cop-," of industry. The Company
has also set forth various evils which it alleges will flow from the
unionization of its foremen.
The issues raised in this proceeding were considered in extenso in
the Young case. ° We there held, as we do here, that foremen a,e
"employees" within the meaning of Section 2 (3) of the Act; that, as
"employees," they are entitled to be placed in some appropriate unit
under Section 9 (b) ; that the type of industry in which the foremen
are employed is immaterial; and that the nature of the duties and
responsibilities of the foremen is relevant only insofar as it bears on
the question of proper grouping of the foremen for collective bargain-
ing purposes.
The Company has made no contention that the Union, which admits
only supervisory employees into membership and is unaffiliated with
any other labor organization, is not independent of the United Rubber
Workers of America, CIO, which represents production and mainte-
nance workers, clerical employees, and guards in separate units. As in
previous cases, we find that the Union is an independent, unaffiliated
labor organization organized for the exclusive purpose of represent-
ing supervisory employees.'
As noted above, the Company has not objected to the composition
of either of the alternative units requested by the Union. We there-
fore find, in accord with the primary request of the Union, that all
floor foremen, shift foremen, chief schedulers, senior schedulers, chief
dispatchers, and senior dispatchers employed by the Company in its
Akron plant, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of col-
lective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
A'. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
We shall direct that the question concerning representation which
has arisen be resolved by an election by secret ballot among employees
6 Matter of L. A. Young Sprang & Wire Corporation, supra.
a Matter of L. A. Yonog Sprang & Wire Corporation, supra; Matter of Packard Motor
Car Company, supra.
THE B. F. GOODRICH COMPANY 297
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 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 The B. F. Good-
rich Company , Akron, 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 Eighth 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 em-
ployees 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 or not they desire to be represented by Fore-
man's Association of America , Chapter #98, for the purposes of
collective bargaining.
MR. GERARD D. REILLY took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Direction of Election.