The Osborn Manufacturing Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jan 8, 1941

28 N.L.R.B. 966 (N.L.R.B. 1941)

In the Matter of THE OSBORN MANUFAOrURING COMPANY and LOCAL
No. 217, UNITED AUTOMOBILE WORKERS OF AMERICA (CIO)
Case No. R-2006.-Decided January 8, 19.41
'Jurisdiction : industrial brush and foundry equipment manufacturing industry.
Investigation and Certification of Representatives : existence of question:
parties stipulated that Company refused to grant recognition to the union,
questioning the appropriateness of the unit ; election necessary.
Units Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : (1) all hourly paid production
and maintenance employees in the brush division, including the shipping room,
and in the property-maintenance department; (2) all hourly paid production
employees in the machine division ; elections to determine whether the above
,groups shall constitute,a single or separate units.
Mr. Fred J. Perkins, of Cleveland, Ohio, for the Company.
Mr. Arthur J. Petersen and ,Mr. A. E. Stevenson, of Cleveland,
Ohio, for the U. A. W. A.
Mr. Ralph W. Bell, of Cleveland, Ohio, for the Council.
Miss Grace McEldowney, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On July 17, 1940, Local No. 217, United Automobile Workers of
America (CIO), herein called the U. A. W. A., filed with the Re-
gional Director for the Eighth Region (Cleveland, Ohio) a petition
alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the
representation of employees of The Osborn Manufacturing Com-
pany," Cleveland, Ohio, herein called the Company, and requesting
an investigation and certification of representatives pursuant to Sec-
tion 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein
called the Act. On July 31, 1940, the National Labor Relations
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 2, as amended, ordered an in-
' Incorrectly designated in the formal papers as Osborn Mfg. Co. and Osborn Manufac-
turing Company
28 N. L. R. B., No. 148
966
E OSBORN MANUFACTURING COMPANY 967
vestigation and authorized 'the' Regional Director to conduct it and
to provide for an appropriate hearing upon due notice.
On August 2, 1940, the Regional Director issued a notice of hear-
ing, copies, of which were duly served upon the Company, the
U. A. W. A., and Osborn Employees Council, Inc., herein called the
Council, an organization claiming to represent employees directly
affected by the investigation. Pursuant to the notice, a hearing was
held on August 16, 1940, at Cleveland, Ohio, before Harry L.. Lodish,
the Trial Examiner duly designated by the Board. The Company
and the Council were represented by counsel, and the U. A. W. A.
by counsel and by its business representative, all of, whom partici-
pated 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 ob-
jections to the admission of evidence. The Board has reviewed the
rulings of the Trial Examiner, and finds that no prejudicial errors
were committed. The rulings are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF -THE COMPANY
The Osborn Manufacturing Company is an Ohio corporation en-
gaged in the manufacture of industrial brushes and foundry equip-
ment at its plant at Cleveland, Ohio. The raw materials used in its
manufacturing operations consist of lumber, fiber, bristle, wire, hair,
steel, cast iron, cast brass, rolled steel, and rolled brass.- Approxi-
mately 75 per cent of the materials used in the manufacture of
brushes and 10 per cent of the materials used in the manufacture
of foundry equipment are obtained outside the State, while approxi-'
mately 85 per cent of both types of finished products are shipped
out of the State.
The value of the raw materials- annually used by the Company
is about $750,000, and of its finished products, $1,500,000. The
plant normally employs some 300 employees, of whom 200 work in
the brush division and 100 in the machine division.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
J
Local No. 27, United Automobile Workers of America, is a labor
organization affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations.
It admits to membership employees of the Company.,
968 DECISIONS -OF NATIONAL--LABOR -RELATIONS :BOARD
Osborn Employees Council, Inc., is an unaffiliated -labor organiza-
tion, admitting to membership employees, of the- Company's machine
division.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The parties stipulated that the U. A. W. A. had requested the
Company to recognize it as the bargaining agency for a unit consist-
ing of all production and maintenance employees' in the plant, and
that the Company had refused such recognition, questioning the, ap-
propriateness of the unit.
There was introduced in evidence a report prepared by the Regional
Director which showed that the U. A. W. A. and the Council, respec-
tively, represented a substantial number of the employees in the units
that they claimed to be appropriate.2
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, occurring in
connection with the operations of the Company described in Section
I above, has a close, intimate, and substantial' relation to trade, trafficT
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 U. A. W. A. and the Council differ as to the scope of the
unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining, but agree
on the exclusion of supervisory, clerical, and drafting-room em-_
-ployees. The U. A. W. A. contends that the bargaining unit should
include hourly paid production, maintenance, and shipping employees
throughout the plant, while the Council believes that in addition to
a unit of brush-division employees there should be a separate unit
2 The U A. W. A. submitted to the Regional Director approximately 400 authorization
cards, of which 185 bore apparently genuine signatures of persons whose names were on
the Company 's pay roll of July 12, 1940, which listed 284 employees ; the Council sub-
mitted a petition bearing apparently genuine signatures of 62 persons , all of whose names
appeared on the same pay roll . Excluding employees in the drafting room, shipping room,
and 'property maintenance department , it appeared that there were 143 members of the
U A W. A and no members of the Council among the 159 employees in the brush divi-
sion , and 24 members of'the U. A. W A and 57 members of .the Council among the 78
employees in the machine division . The U A. W. A. and the Council apparently have,
respectively , 2 and 1 members among the 14 employees - in the drafting room, 3 and 1
members among the 13 employees in the shipping room, and 13 and 3 members among the
20 employees in the property maintenance department.
THE OSBORN MANUFACTURING COMPANY. - 969)
for hourly paid production employees in the machine division, in-
cluding shipping employees, but excluding property-maintenance
employees. The Company feels that on the basis ofits bargaining
history, the plant consists of two units, and that the employees of
the machine division should be- permitted to decide whether -to be
represented as a separate unit or to to be included in a single unit
with employees in the brush division.
Production activities of the brush and machine divisions are per-
formed on separate floors of the main building of the plant. The
plant also includes two small buildings, a wood shop used exclusively
by the brush division and a blacksmith shop used chiefly by the ma-
chine division. The services of the shipping room and the main-
tenance and electrical-repair department, as well as certain other
plant facilities such as the advertising office, accounting office, pur-
chasing office, personnel office, receiving room, tool crib, first-aid room,,
and cafeteria are shared by the two divisions. Each division has
separate engineering, drafting, and sales offices, and is managed by
its own vice president, manager, superintendent, and foremen.
The employees of the two divisions differ in skill and pay. The
machine division employs machinists, apprentices, and laborers, all
of whom are male and over 80 per cent of whom are skilled. They
receive an average rate of pay of 96.4 cents an hour. The products
on which they work are machines varying in size from 1,000 to 40,000,
pounds, and are for the most part made from blue prints on special
order. In the brush division over one-third of the employees are
female; only 15 per cent are skilled; and the average rate of pay is.
82 cents an hour for men and 50 cents for women. Approximately
60 per cent of the brushes which they manufacture are stock products,
made without blue prints. There appears"to be comparatively little
interchange of employees or work between the divisions at the pres-
ent time, although there has been some in the past. The entire brush-
tool section was transferred to the machine division in 1933, but was
transferred back to the brush division about a year later. Seniority
is based on the original date of employment with the Company, but
there has been no occasion to consider it as between members of
the two divisions.
Collective bargaining has been carried on in the plant since 1'933,
or 1934, when separate unaffiliated labor organizations were formed
in the two divisions. The original organization in the brush division
was followed after a lapse of some months by Mechanics Educational
Association of America, herein called the M. E. A. The M. E.-A.
later became the U. A. W. A. In the machine division -the first
organization was followed by Machine Division Employees Associa-
tion and then by the Council, both unaffiliated unions. The
970 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
U. A. W. A. and its predecessors have negotiated contracts with the
Company for their members in the brush division , and the Council
and its predecessors for their members in the machine division. The
M. E. A. and the U. A. W. A. have also represented members among
the machine -division employees in connection with grievances. The
M. E. A. and the U. A. W. A. have attempted on several occasions to
bargain with the Company in a plant -wide unit , but the company
has at all times refused to bargain on this basis . " In 1937 M. E. A.
members in the machine division went out on strike with the brush
division over the question ' of wages and "bargaining rights," but the
machine division continued to operate , although with a reduced
force. - The Council has not attempted to represent the brush
division.
Property maintenance employees work under the superintendent
of the machine division but are considered a separate department and
are not covered by the current contract between the Company and
the Council . The Company states that the shipping room is part
of the brush division , and nothing in the record points to a contrary
conclusion.
Upon the entire record, it appears that the hourly paid production
employees in the machine division might properly be considered
either as a separate unit or as part of the unit desired by the
U. A. W. A. Under such circumstances, we apply the principle
that the determining factor is the desires of the machine -division
employees .3 On this point the record is inconclusive . We shall
therefore direct separate elections in order that we may ascertain
the wishes of these employees . The Council does not wish to appear
on the ballot except in connection with the selection of representatives
for the machine division . We shall , therefore, direct separate elec-
tions among the following groups of employees , excluding super-
visory, clerical , and drafting-room employees :
(a) All hourly paid production and maintenance employees in
the brush division, including the shipping room, and in the prop-
erty-maintenance department , to determine whether or not they desire
to be represented by Local No. 217, United Automobile Workers of
America ( C. I. 0.), for the purposes of collective bargaining; and
(b) All hourly paid production employees in the machine division,
to determine whether they desire to be represented by Local No. 217,
United Automobile Workers of America (C. I. 0.), or by Osborn Em-
ployees Council , Inc., for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by
neither.
$ See-Matter of The G lobe Machine and Stamping Co., and Metal Polishers Union, Local
No. 3 et al , 3 N L R. B . 294, and subsequent cases.
THE OSBORN MANUFACTURING COMPANY 971
We shall certify the union, if any, designated by a majority of the
employees within each election unit as the exclusive representative-
thereof; or if the U. A. W. A. should win both elections , we shall
certify it as the exclusive representative of both election units
combined.
VI. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
The question concerning representation will be resolved by the
elections referred to in Section V above.
Pursuant to our usual practice , we shall direct that the employees-
eligible to vote shall be those employed by the Company. during the
pay-roll period immediately preceding the Direction of Elections,
subject to such limitations and additions as are set forth in the
Direction.
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and upon the-
entire record in the proceedings , the Board makes the following :
CONCLUSION OF LAW
A question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the representa-
lion of employees of The Osborn Manufacturing Company, Cleve-
land, Ohio, within - the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6),
and (7 ) of the National Labor Relations Act.
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
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, 49 Stat . 449, and pursuant to Article III, Section 8,
of the National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations--
Series 2, as amended, it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation authorized by the Board
to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining
with The Osborn Manufacturing Company, Cleveland, Ohio, elec-
tions by secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not
later than thirty (30) days from the date of this Direction of Elec-
tions, 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 those employees of The Osborn Manu-
facturing Company who fa11 within the groups described below and
who were employed by the Company during the pay-roll period im-
mediately preceding the date of this Direction, including employees
who did not work during such pay-roll period because they were ill
or on vacation or who were then or have since been temporarily laid
972 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
off, but excluding supervisory, clerical, and drafting-room employees
and those who have since quit or been discharged for cause :
(a) All hourly paid production and maintenance employees in the
brush division, including the shipping room, and in the property-
maintenance department, to determine whether or not they desire to
be represented by Local No. 217, United Automobile Workers of
America (CIO), for the purposes of collective bargaining; and
(b) All hourly paid production employees in the machine division,
to determine whether they desire to be represented by Local No. 217,
United Automobile Workers of America (CIO), or by Osborn Em-
ployees Council, Inc., for the purposes of collective bargaining, or
by neither.
MR. EDWIN S. SMITH, dissenting :
In view of the persistent efforts of employees, through the
U. A. W. A. and its predecessor, to' bargain on a plant-wide basis,
,tnd for the reasons stated in my dissenting opinion in Matter of Al-
Iis-Chalmers Manufacturing Company 4 and in subsequent cases,' I
would not permit the employees in the machine division to set them-
selves apart in a bargaining unit separate from the plant unit.
'Matter of Allis-Chalmers Manufacturing Company and International Union, United
Automobile Workers of America, etc ., 4 N. L. R B 159.
' See e g. Matter of Fried, Ostermann Co and Local 80, International Glove Workers of
America, A . F. L, 7 N. L R. B 1075; my dissent in Matter of Walgreen Co . and Wholesale
-and Chain Drug Warehouse Employees Union, etc., 15 N L. R. B. 980.