Thompson Products, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Feb 15, 1943

47 N.L.R.B. 619 (N.L.R.B. 1943)

n^
In the Matter of THOMPSON PRODUCTS , INC. and INTERNATIONAL UNION,
UNITED AUTOMOBILE , AIRCRAFT AND AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT
WORKERS OF AMERICA (UAW-CIO)
Case No. R-4745.-Decided February 15, 1943
Jurisdiction : automotive parts manufacturing industry.
Investigation and Certification of Representatives : existence of question: recog-
nition refused because of existing contract with -a union certified as the
statutory representative less than a year before; prior certification in effect
less than one year held no bar when under circumstances involved date
parties renewed a yearly contract following the election but prior to the
certification of the contracting union was considered the controlling factor
in Board's determination as to whether another election should be held ;
renewed yearly contract about to expire held no bar; usual pay roll rather
than pay roll preceding strike urged by one of the unions directed to de-
termine eligibility ; election necessary.
Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : all hourly rate and production em-
ployees at company's Detroit plant, with specified exclusions ; stipulation
as to.
Stanley & S'noyer, by Mr. Harry Sawyer, of Cleveland, Ohio, for'
the Company.
Mr. Maurice Sugar and Mr. Jack N. Tucker, of Detroit, Mich.,
for the C. I. O.
- Mr. Robert 0. Brown, of Detroit, Mich., for the Society.
-Mr: Arthur Leff, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon petition duly filed by International Union, United Auto-
.mobile, Aircraft and Agricultural Implement Workers of America
(UAW-CIO), herein called' the C. I. -O., alleging that a question
affecting Commerce had arisen concerning the representation of
employees of Thompson Products, Inc. Detroit, Michigan, herein
called the Company, the, National Labor Relations Board provided
for an appropriate hearing upon due notice before Robert J. Wiener,
Trial Examiner. Said hearing was held', in Detroit, Michigan, on
47 N. L. R. B., No. 83.
619
620
1 ,
DEIOI'SaONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
January 11, 1943. The Company, the C. I. 0., and Society of Tool
and' Die Craftsmen of America, herein called the Society, appeared,
participated, and were afforded full opportunity to be heard; to ex-
amine 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.' The Com-
pany has 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
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
'Thompson Products, Inc., is an Ohio corporation with its principal
office and place of business at Cleveland, Ohio. It maintains a plant
at Detroit, Michigan, where it manufactures, sells,,and distributes
divers parts used in the' automobile, truck, tractor, aircraft, and
marine engine industries. In the year- 1942 the Company purchased
materials valued at approximately $1,600,000, for use in its Detroit
plant, 20 percent of which was purchased from sources located outside
the State of Michigan. During the same period it manufactured at
its Detroit plant products of the approximate value of $3,690,000, 22
,percent of which was sold by it outside the State of Michigan.
The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
International Union, United Automobile, Aircraft and Agricultural
Implement Workers of America is a labor organization affiliated with
the Congress of Industrial Organizations, admitting to membership
employees of the Company.
Society of Tool and Die Craftsmen of America is an unaffiliated
labor organization admitting to membership employees of 'the
Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On October 1, 1942, and again on December 29, 1942, the C. I. O.
requested the Company to recognize it as the exclusive bargaining
1 At the hearing the Trial Examiner reserved for Board ruling a motion made by the
'C. I. 0. to incorporate in the record of, this case the Board's formal file in Case No . R-2834
(reported ' in 35 N. L. R. B. 323), in which the Company , the C. I . 0., and the Society were
parties ', The expressed purpose was to'show tl • e'length of time which elapsed 'between'the
Direction of Election and the Certification of Representatives in that case . In view of the
fact that the Board 's Supplemental ' Decision and Certification of Representatives in Case
R-2834 is in evidence in this case and shows on its face the sequence of events , the said
motion is hereby denied.
THOMPSON PRODUCTS, INC.. - - - , - T ' 621•
representati' e of the Company's employees in the Detroit plant. - The
Company denied this request upon,the ground that it had, a contract
With-the Society covering the employees in its Detroit plant, and upon
the further ground that the Society had been certified by the Board
as statutory representative on September 14, 1942.2
The Board's certification, issued on September 14, 1942, was based
upon, the, results of a. run-off election- which had been conducted on-
October 24,' 1941. ' Prior to the election, and on April29, 1941, the
Company and the Society had entered, into a collective bargaining
agreement for a term of 1 year. On April 29, 1942; following the run-
off election, but prior to the issuance of the certification, the Company
and the Society entered into an agreement, extending the term of
their previous agreement and making certain substantive changes
therein with respect to wage rates,. and vacation privileges. for• the
year 1942. After the Society was certified on September 14, 1942, the
Company and the Society, in the approximately 4-month period which
elapsed between that date and the date of the hearing, did- not nego-
tiate a new contract nor agree to any modification of their contract
already in effect.
While the language of the extension agreement is not'free from
ambiguity and fails to state explicitly the period of the extended term,
it appears to have been the intention of the parties to renew their col-
lectivebargaining agreement, subject to certification of the Society by
the Board, for an additional term of 1 year, i. e., until April 29, 1943.
This conclusion finds support in the omission of the parties to reopen
collective bargaining negotiations after the certification was issued.
We find, therefore, that the term of the' present contract between the
Company and the Society will not expire until April 29, 1943.
From their conduct in, modifying and extending their prior con-
tract, on April 29, 1942, and' their failure to take any steps toward,
altering their existing contract following the ;issuance- by 'the Board
on September 14, 1942, of its certification, it is, evident that, the
Company, aand' the Society did not consider themselves under, a dis-
ability, with, respect to collective bargaining by reason of the delay,
in, the issuance of certification, and that their bargaining relationship
was neither impeded nor impaired during the 11-month period which
elapsed between the run-off election and the issuance of the certifica-
tion. '
As a general rule, we do not entertain, a new petition within 1 year
from a prior certification. Where a contract for a reasonable term,
has been entered into with a certified representative, in the interest
of stability we refuse to disturb the, contractual relations. until' the
2 Matter of Thompson Products , - Inc. and International Union, United Automobile
_Workers of America, Afll-2ated with the C. I. 0., 35 N. L R. B 323; 43 N. L R. B. 1379.
622 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
-initial period of the contract is about to expire. Where, as here,
the parties renew a yearly contract after an election but prior to
certification, and where the contracting union is thereafter certified
as the exclusive representative, the term of the renewed contract
rather'than the date of certification becomes the controlling factor in
our determination as to whether another election should be held.,
We therefore find that the certification of September 14, 1942, is not a
bar to this proceeding. In view of the proximity of the expiration
date of the renewed contract, we find that it does not constitute a bar
to a present determination of representatives for the purpose of
negotiating a new agreement for the period following April 29, 1943.
A statement of the Field Examiner, introduced in evidence during
the hearing, indicates that the C. I. 0. represents a substantial
number of employees in the unit hereinafter found to be appropriate.3
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. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
We find , in accordance with a stipulation of the parties, that all
hourly rate and production employees at the Detroit plant of the
Company, excluding, supervisory employees , foremen , assistant fore-
men, watchmen, and office and confidential employees , constitute
a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining , within
the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.4
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
The C. I. 0. contends that only those employees within the appro-
priate unit whose names appear on the Company's pay roll of Decem-
ber 27,1942, should be,eligible to vote. The Company and the Society,
oppose this position.
In support of its contention, the C. I. 0. adduced evidence tending
to show that on December 29, 1942, a strike occurred at the Company's
Detroit plant, and that on January 2, 1943, following the termination
of the strike, 13 employees who were members of the C. -I. 0. com-
mittee'were discharged by the Company. The record does not clearly
disclose the cause of the strike. There is nothing in the record which
indicates that the 13 employees were discharged as a result of any
unfair labor practice proscribed by the Act. It does not appear that
8 The Field Examiner reported that the C. I. 0 submitted 276 authorization cards bear-
ing apparently genuine signatures of persons whose names appear on the Company's pay
roll of October 18, 1942. There are 689 names on that pay roll. The Society did not present
any evidence'of membership , but rests 'on its contract with the Company as determining
its interest in this proceeding.
4 This is the same unit previously found appropriate by the Board.
0
THOMPSON PRODUCTS, INC. 623
any charges have been filed with the, Board alleging that the em-
ployees have been discriminatorily discharged. It appears that since
December 27, 1942, `the Company has hired additional employees
who would be disenfranchised if the eligibility date proposed by the
C. I. O. were selected.
Under the circumstances, we are of the opinion, and therefore find,
that there is no reason for departing from our usual rule concerning
the date of employment as of which eligibility to vote should be
governed. Accordingly, we shall direct that the question concerning
representation which has arisen be resolved by an election by secret
ballot among the employees 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 2, as amended, it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Thompson Prod-
ucts, Inc., Detroit, Michigan, 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 Seventh Region, acting in this matter
as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Article
III, Section 10, of said'Rules and Regulations, among the employees-
of the Detroit,, Michigan, plant of Thompson Products, Inc., within
the unit found appropriate in Section IV, above, who were employed
during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of this.
Direction, including any such 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 any who
have? since,quit or'-been discharged for cause, to determine whether
they desire to be represented by International Union, United Automo-
bile, Aircraft, and Agricultural 'Implement Workers of America-
(UAW-CIO),'or by Society of Tool and Die Craftsmen-of America,
for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by. neither.
C
I