The B. F. Goodrich Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Oct 19, 1939

16 N.L.R.B. 165 (N.L.R.B. 1939)

In the Matter of THE B. F. GOODRICH COMPANY and PATTERN MAKERS
LEAGUE OF NORTH AMERICA (A. F. O F L.)
Case No. R-14-08.-Decided October 19, 1939
. Rubber Products 31avu-featuring Inr.ducstr,y-Investigeati.on of Representatives:
controversy concerning representation of employees : controversy concerning
appropriate unit ; rival unions ; recognition of rival union as exclusive bargain-
ing agent-Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : election to determine
whether pattern makers desire industrial or craft union ; ( Leiserson , concurr:
ing) unit fixed in exclusive bargaining contract not determinative of, where
modified in a collateral understanding between the competing unions ; separate
vote should be taken among pattern makers ; ( Smith, dissenting ) no justifi-
cation for permitting craft unit to split off from industrial unit, existence of
a collateral understanding not sufficiently shown-Election ordered
Mr. Max W. Johnstone, for the Board.
Mr.. J. L. McKnight, of Akron, Ohio, for the Company.
Mr. Charles D. Madigan, of Cleveland, Ohio, for the League.
Mr. Stanley Denlinger, of Akron, Ohio, for the United.
Mr. William T. Little, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On January 12, 1939, Pattern Makers League of North America,
affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, herein called
the League, filed with the Regional Director for the Eighth Region
(Cleveland, Ohio) a petition alleging that a question affecting com-
merce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of The
B. F. Goodrich Company, herein called the Company, and requesting
an investigation and certification of representatives pursuant to
Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449,
herein called the Act. On April 26, 1939, the National Labor Rela-
tions Board, herein called the Board, acting pursuant to Section
9 (c) of the Act and Article III, Section 3, of National Labor
Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 1, as amended, or-
dered an investigation and authorized the Regional Director to
conduct it and to provide for an appropriate hearing on due notice.
16 N. L. R. B., No. 19.
165
166 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
On May 9, 1939, the Regional Director issued a notice of hearing,
copies of which were duly served upon the Company , the League,
and Goodrich Local No. 5, United Rubber Workers of America,
herein called the United , a labor organization claiming to represent
employees directly affected by the investigation . Notices of post-
ponement and amended notices of hearing were served on all parties.
Pursuant to notice , a hearing was held on June 30 and July 6,
1939, before E. G. Smith, the Trial Examiner duly designated by
the Board . At the hearing the Trial Examiner granted the United's
motion to intervene . The Board , the Company , and the United were
represented by counsel and the League by its official representative,
and all participated in the hearing . Full opportunity to be heard,
to examine and cross -examine witnesses , and to introduce evidence
bearing on the issues was afforded all parties . During the course
of the hearing , the Trial Examiner made several rulings on motions
and on objections . to the admission of evidence . The Board has
reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner and finds that no prej-
udicial errors . were committed . The rulings are hereby affirmed.
On July 13, 1939, the United filed a brief which has been considered
by the Board.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
The Company is a New York corporation engaged in the manu-
facture of rubber products . Its principal office is in Akron, Ohio,
where it has six plants . In addition to the Akron units, it operates
plants in Pennsylvania , Georgia, California , and Michigan and is
the sole owner of the Hood Rubber Co ., located in Watertown, Mas-
sachusetts . This proceeding is concerned only with the six, plants
in Akron, Ohio.
The principal raw materials used in the above manufacturing
process are rubber, cotton , and chemicals . Over 90 per cent of these
raw materials , the total value of which is in excess of $50,000,000
per year, are obtained outside the State of Ohio. The annual sales
of the Company exceed $115 ,000,000 of which more than 75 per cent
are shipped outside the State.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
The League is a labor organization , affiliated with the American
Federation of - Labor, admitting to membership practical pattern
makers.
THE B. F. GOODRICH COMPANY 167
The, United is a labor organization , affiliated with the Congress of
Industrial Organizations , admitting to membership all employees of
the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
In August 1937, in a consent election conducted under the super-
vision of the Regional Director, the United was selected as the
representative of the piece- and clock-work factory employees engaged
in manufacture or maintenance at the Company's six Akron plants.
Since that time the League has been unable to bargain with the
Company on behalf of the pattern makers in the Company's employ.
The League alleged in its petition that all wood and metal pattern
makers and pattern makers' apprentices constituted an appropriate
unit for the purposes of collective bargaining. This allegation is
contested by the United which contends that the petition should be
dismissed.
We find that a question has arisen concerning the representation of
employees of the Company.
IV. THE EFFECT OF THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION UPON
COMMERCE
We find that the question concerning representation which has
arisen, occurring in connection with the operations of the Company
described in Section I above, has a close, intimate, and substantial
relation to trade, traffic; and commerce among the several States and
tends to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce
and the free flow of commerce.
V. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The League alleges in its petition that all wood and metal pattern
makers and pattern makers' apprentices employed by the Company
constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargain-
ing. The United contends that such employees should be included
within a unit consisting of all the piece- and clock-work factory em-
ployees engaged in manufacture or maintenance at the Company's
six Akron plants. The Company employs at least 9,000 piece- and
clock-work factory employees in its six Akron plants, about 900 of
whom are craftsmen representing about thirty different crafts.
There are approximately five employees in the unit claimed by the
League.
In August 1937, in a consent election held among the piece- and
clock-work factory employees engaged in manufacture or mainte-
247383-40-vol. 16-12
168 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
nance at the Company's six Akron plants, the United was designated
as their collective bargaining representative by 8,212 of the 9,058
employees voting. The pattern makers were eligible to and at least
one of them did participate in this election. Thereafter on May 27,
1938, the United and the Company entered into a contract covering
"the hourly and piece work factory employees employed by the Com-
pany in its Akron plants" for the year 1938.1 It is apparent from
the record that this contract recognized the United as the exclusive
bargaining representative of all the piece- and clock-work factory
employees. Under this contract the pattern makers have been per-
mitted to work overtime only with the consent of the United. Fur-
thermore the League maintained that it could not bargain with the
Company after the United' obtained the "bargaining rights."
The pattern makers employed by the Company are employed in
one department and produce patterns used in all the Company's
plants. They are a well-established and highly skilled craft, requir-
ing a lengthy apprenticeship. The League has had members in the
plant since 1933 and evidence was introduced tending to show that
all the pattern makers employed in the Company's Akron plants are
members of the League. The League has engaged in numerous con-
ferences with the Company, has addressed petitions to the Company,
and has arrived at "understandings" with it although the League
has not had formal bargaining relations after the 1937. election, nor
has it ever concluded a contract with the Company. There is no
evidence that the League received notice of the consent election of
1937 or was a party thereto.
In view of. all the circumstances, we are of the opinion that the
question of the proper unit in which the pattern makers belong
should be determined by the desires of the pattern makers them-
selves.2 We will therefore direct that an election be held among the
wood and metal pattern makers and pattern makers' apprentices em-
ployed by the Company at its Akron plants to determine whether
they desire to be represented by the League or by the United for the
purposes of collective bargaining, or by neither. If it majority of
the wood and metal pattern makers and. pattern makers' apprentices
cast their votes for the League; we shall hold that they 'constitute a
separate appropriate unit and we shall certify the League as the
exclusive representative thereof. If a majority of such employees
cast their votes for the United or for neither or if the votes for the
United and for neither together constitute a majority, we shall con-
clude therefrom that they do not desire to constitute a separate unit.
In that event we will dismiss the petition,
1 On March 1 , 1939 , a similar contract was entered into for the year 1939.
2 Matter of The Globe Machine and Stamping Co. and Metal Polishers Union, Local
No. 3, et al., 3 . N. L. R. B. 294.
THE B. F. GOODRICH COMPANY
VI. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
169
Although the League introduced some evidence that it represented
all the wood and metal pattern makers and pattern makers' appren-
tices, we shall nevertheless order an election.8
We find that those eligible to vote in the election shall be the wood
and metal pattern makers and pattern makers' apprentices employed
by the Company in its Akron plants during the last pay-roll period
next preceding the date of this Direction, including employees who
did not work during such pay-roll period because they were ill or on
vacation. and employees who, were. then or have since been. temporarily
laid off, but excluding those who have since quit or been discharged
for cause.
On the basis of the above findings of fact and upon the entire
record,in the case, the Board makes the following :
CONCLUSION OF LAW
1. A question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the repre-
sentation of employees of The B. F. Goodrich Company, Akron, Ohio,
within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the
Natioual Labor Relations Act.
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 Rela-
tions Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 8, of National Labor
Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation authorized by the Board
to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargain-
ing with The B. F. Goodrich Company, Akron, Ohio, an election by
secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later
thami thirty (30) days from the date of this Direction of Election,
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, Section 9, of said Rules
and Regulations, among the wood and metal pattern makers and
pattern makers' apprentices employed by said Company during the
pa.y-roll period next preceding the date of this Direction of Election,
including such employees as did not work during such pay-roll period
3 Matter o f The Cudahy Packing Company and United Packinghouse Workers of Amer-
ica, Local No. 21, of the Packinghouse Workers Organizing Committee, 13 N. L. R. B.
526; Matter of Armour A Company and United Packinghouse Workers, Local Industrial
Union No . 13 of Packinghouse Workers Organi. in# Committee , 13 N. L. R. B. 367.
170 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
because they were ill or on vacation and employees who were then
or have since been temporarily laid off, but excluding those who
have since quit or been discharged for cause, to determine whether
they desire to be represented by Pattern Makers League of North
America, affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, or by
Goodrich Local No. 5, United Rubber Workers of America, affiliated
with the Congress of Industrial Organizations for the purpose of
collective bargaining, or by neither.
MR. WILLIAM M. LEISERSON, concurring.
At the hearing, the League claimed that it had proceeded on the
assumption that an agreement . made between the League and the
United Rubber Workers of America to the effect that the League
should represent the pattern makers at the Firestone Tire and Rubber
Company applied to The B. F. Goodrich Company as well. The
League further claimed that as soon as the United insisted that
the pattern makers become members of the United, it filed its peti-
tion in this case. The lack of conflict in the past between the United
and the League concerning the pattern makers employed by the
Company would tend to support this claim and show a tacit under-
standing between the parties. Under such circumstances the unit
fixed in the contracts between the United and the Company is not
determinative and a separate vote should be taken among the pattern
makers.
MR. EDWIN S. SMITH, dissenting :
The United has represented the pattern makers since 1937, and
in 1938 entered into a plant-wide contract which included the pattern
makers in its scope. The employees of the, Company selected the.
United to represent this unit by an overwhelming majority in 1937.
In the absence of more tangible evidence of a definite agreement
than the claim of the League, I am of the opinion that the case falls
within the doctrine of the American Can case.4 For the reasons
stated in my concurring opinion in that case as well as the reasons
given in my dissenting opinion in Matter of Allis-Chalimers Manu-
f actuoiing Company,5 I would not permit the pattern makers to set
themselves apart in a bargaining unit separate from the industrial
unit in which the employees have been represented since 1937.
4 Matter of American Can Company and Engineers Local No . 30, Firemen and Oilers
Local No. 56, et al ., 13 N. L. R. B. 1252.
5 Matter of Allis - Chalmers Manufacturing Company and International Union United
Automobile Workers of America, Local 24S, 4 N. L. R. B. 159.