The Bridgeport Safety Emery Wheel Co., Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Sep 10, 1946

70 N.L.R.B. 1252 (N.L.R.B. 1946)

In the Matter of THE BRIDGEPORT SAFETY EMERY WHEEL COMPANY,
INC., EMPLOYER and INTERNATIONAL UNION, UNITED AUT011IoBILE,
AIRCRAFT AND AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA,
UAW-CIO, LOCAL 577 , PETITIONER
Case No. O-R-6547.Decided September 10, 1946
Pullman c6 Comley, by Messrs. Aram H. Te'llalian, Jr., and John S.
Barton, of Bridgeport, Conn., for the Employer.
Mr. Benjamin Rubenstein, of New York City, for the Petitioner.
Mr. Elmer P. Freischlag, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon an amended petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held
at Bridgeport, Connecticut, on June 26; 1946, before Richard J. Hickey,
Trial Examiner. The Trial Examiner'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 :
FINDINGS Or FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
The Bridgeport Safety Emery Wheel Company, Inc., a Connecticut
corporation, with its principal office and plant located in Stratford,
Connecticut, is engaged in the manufacture, sale and distribution of
grinding machinery and abrasive wheels. During the period from
June 1, 1945, to May 31, 1946, the Employer purchased raw materials
valued in excess of $250,000, of which approximately 75 percent repre-
sented shipments to it from points outside the State of Connecticut.
During the same period, the Employer sold finished products amount-
ing in value to over $500,000, about 75 percent of which was shipped
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.
70 N. L 11. B., No 112 -
1252
0
THE BRIDGEPORT SAFETY EMERY WHEEL COMPANY, INC. 1253
II. TIIE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress
of Industrial Organizations, claiming to represent employees of the
Employer.
III. TIIE 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 appropriate unit.
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, substantially in accordance with the agreement of the
parties, that all production and maintenance employees, including
shippers A, storekeepers, toolkeepers, pattern makers, kiln setters,
mixers A and B, mixer helpers, electricians, shop maintenance men,
pressmen, sweepers, and wheel testers, but excluding office clerical
employees, production clerical employees, production control clerks,
shippers AA, inspectors, expeditors, salesmen, apprentices (con-
tracted), timekeepers, methods engineers, machine shop engineers
and draftsmen, ceramic engineer, production control supervisor, wheel
shop foremen, wheel shop superintendent, machine shop foremen,
machine shop assistant superintendent, machine shop superintendent,
working foremen, and all or any other supervisory employees with
authority to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect
changes in the status of employees, or effectively recommend such
action, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective
bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the
purposes of collective bargaining with The Bridgeport Safety Emery
Wheel Company, Inc., Stratford, Connecticut, 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 Second Region, acting
in this matter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and
subject to Article III, Sections 10 and 11, of National 'Labor Rela-
i The parties agreed, and we find, that Air. Fall, who is listed as a shop maintenance
man, is in fact a working foreman, and should be excluded from the unit
1254 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
tions Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3, as amended, 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 ilcluding 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 elec-
tion, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented by
International Union, United Automobile, Aircraft and Agricultural
Implement Workers of America, UAW-CIO, Local 877, for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining.
MR. JAMES J. REYNOLDS, JR., took no part in the consideration of
the above Decision and Direction of Election.