The G. A. Gray Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 8, 1950

88 N.L.R.B. 962 (N.L.R.B. 1950)

In the Matter of THE G. A. GRAY COMPANY, EMPLOYER and UNITED
STEELWORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO, PETITIONER
Case No. 9-RC-684.-Decided March 8, 1950
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before Alan A. Bruck
ner, hearing officer . The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing
are free from prejudicial error and are Hereby affirmed.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor
Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with
this case to a three -member panel [ Chairman Herzog and Members
Reynolds and Murdock].
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the National Labor Relations Act.
2. The Petitioner and the United Electrical , Radio and Machine
Workers of America, herein called the Intervenor , are labor organiza-
tions claiming to represent employees of the Employer.
3. On December 31,1948, the Intervenor and the Employer executed
a collective bargaining contract covering the employees involved in
this proceeding . The contract was to continue in effect until January
2, 1950, and from year to year thereafter unless either party notified
the other in writing not less than 60 days prior to January 2 of any
year of its desire to make changes in or terminate the contract. The
record disclosed that the Intervenor gave notice for renegotiation of
the contract more than 60 days before January 2 , 1950. It is clear,
under well -established Board precedent , that this notice given in ad-
vance of the automatic renewal date opened the contract for all pur-
poses and that the contract is therefore not a bar to this proceeding.
Accordingly, we find that a question affecting commerce exists con-
cerning the representation of employees of the Employer within the
meaning of Section 9 ( c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and ( 7) of the Act.
4. The parties stipulated that the following unit is appropriate : All
production and maintenance employees and timekeepers, excluding
88 NLRB No. 201.
962
THE G. A. GRAY COMPANY 963
office and clerical employees, guards, professional employees, and
supervisors. The only issue is whether or not cooperative student
employees should be included in the unit, as contended by the Inter-
venor and opposed by the Petitioner and the Employer.
In 1946, the Employer initiated a student cooperative program em-
ploying yearly about 15 cooperatives from the University of Cincin-
nati and the Ohio Mechanics Institute. The University of Cincinnati
cooperatives work and attend classes in alternate 8-week stretches
over a period of 4 years. The Ohio Mechanics Institute cooperatives
work and attend classes in alternate 4-week periods for 2 years. In
the past, the cooperatives have not been part of the production and
maintenance unit established by the contract between the Employer
and the Intervenor. While the record does not disclose that the coop-
eratives have interests and duties which would of necessity prevent
their inclusion in the present bargaining unit, in the absence of any
compelling circumstances warranting a departure therefrom, we shall
adhere to our usual practice and not disturb the contract unit estab-
lished as a result of collective bargaining between the Employer and
the Intervenor. Accordingly, we shall exclude the cooperative student
employees from the unit.,
We find that all production and maintenance employees of the Em-
ployer at its Cincinnati, Ohio, plant, including timekeepers, but ex-
cluding office and clerical employees, cooperative student employees,
guards, professional employees, and supervisors as defined in the Act,
constitute a unit appropriate for the purpose of collective bargaining
within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION 2
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining with the Employer, an election by secret
ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than 30
days from the date of this Direction, under the direction and supervi-
sion of the Regional Director for the Region in which this case was
heard, and subject to Sections 203.61 and 203.62 of National Labor
Relations Board Rules and Regulations, among the employees in the
unit found appropriate above, who were employed during the payroll
period immediately preceding the date of this Direction of Election,
including employees who did not work during said payroll period
because they were ill or on vacation or temporarily laid off, but exclud-
I Petersen & Lytle, 60 NLRB 1070, 1073.
2 Either participant in the election herein may , upon prompt request to , and approval
thereof by, the Regional Director , have its name removed from the ballot.
882191-51-62
964 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ing 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, and also excluding employees on strike who are not entitled to
reinstatement, to determine whether they desire to be represented, for
purposes of collective bargaining, by United Steelworkers of Amer-
ica, CIO, or by United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of
America, or by neither.