Tuthill Spring Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jan 8, 1941

28 N.L.R.B. 938 (N.L.R.B. 1941)

In the Matter of TUTHILL SPRING Co., A CORP . and UNITED AUTOMOBILE
WORKERS OF AMERICA , C. I. O.
Case No. R-2203.Decided January 8, 1941
Jurisdiction : steel products manufacturing industry.
Investigation and Certification of Representatives : existence of question: em-
ployer refuses to accord recognition to union; election necessary.
Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : production and maintenance em-
ployees excluding salesmen , office clerical employees, supervisory employees hav-
ing the right to hire and discharge employees or to recommend such hiring and
discharging , and outside truck drivers. ,
Fyffe cC Clarke, by Mr. Albert J. Smith, of Chicago, Ill., for the
Company.
Meyers & Meyers, by Mr. Ben Meyers, of Chicago, Ill., for the,
Union.
Mr. Eugene M. Purver, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On October 28, 1940, United Automobile Workers of America,
'C. I. 0., herein called the Union, filed with the Regional Director for
the Thirteenth Region (Chicago, Illinois) a petition alleging that a
question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation
of employees of Tuthill Spring Co., Chicago, Illinois, herein called the
Company, and requesting an investigation and certification of repre-
sentatives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations
Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act. On November 30, 1940, the
National Labor Relations Board, herein called the Board, acting pur-
suant 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 investigation and authorized the Regional Director to con-
duct it and to provide for an appropriate hearing upon due notice.
On December 3, 1940, the Regional Director issued a notice of hear-
ing, copies of which were duly served upon the Company and the
Union. Pursuant to notice, a hearing was held on December 12, 1940,
.at Chicago, Illinois, before Charles F. McErlean, the Trial Examiner
28 N. L . R. B., No. 144.
938
TUTHILL SPRING CO. 939
duly designated by the Board. - The Company and the Union 'were
represented by counsel and participated in the hearing. - Full oppor-
tunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to
introduce evidence bearing upon the issues was afforded all parties.
During the course of the hearing the Trial Examiner made a ruling
on an objection to the admission of evidence. The Board has reviewed
the ruling of the Trial Examiner and finds that no prejudicial error
was committed. The ruling is hereby affirmed. At the hearing the
Union moved to amend its petition by striking therefrom the word
"and" appearing between the word "office" and the word "clerical."
The Company made no objection to this motion. The Trial Examiner
reserved ruling thereon. The motion is hereby granted.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Tuthill Spring Co., is an Illinois corporation engaged, in Chicago,
Illinois, in the manufacture of automobile leaf springs and steel
products such as highway guard rails, bumper brackets, and agricul-
tural implement shapes. - The Company obtains approximately 20 per
cent'of the 3,600 tons of steel which it uses per year outside the State
of Illinois and ships from 85 to 90 per cent of its products to points4
outside the State of Illinois. The annual sales of the Company amount
to approximately $600,000.
III. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
United Automobile Workers of America, C. I. 0., is a labor orgaiii-
zatibn admitting to membership employees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On about October 24, 1940, the Union requested the Company to
recognize it as the sole collective bargaining agent of its production
and maintenance employees. Because of its doubts as to the Union's-
representation 'of a majority of the employees within an appropriate
unit, the Company refused such recognition. From a statement made
by the Trial Examiner at the hearing, following his examination of a
number of Union membership applications, it appears that the Union
represents -a substantial number of employees in the unit hereinbelow
found to be,appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining.'
1 The Trial Examiner stated that he had examined 53 membership application cards
presented to him by the Union ; that 5 of the cards were dated in October and November
1940 and 48 were undated ; that 49 of the cards appear to bear genuine signatures; and
that of the names appearing on the 53 cards , 47 appear on the Company 's pay roll for
December 4, 1940. There are approximately 104 employees in the unit found below to.
be appropriate. -
940 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
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 rela-
tion 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 Union claims that all production and maintenance employees
of the Company, excluding salesmen, office.clerical employees, super-
visory employees having the right to hire and discharge employees or
to recommend such hiring and discharging, and outside truck drivers,
constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining.
The Company does not object to such a unit.
We find that all production and maintenance employees of the Com-
pany, excluding salesmen, office clerical employees, supervisory em-
ployees having the right to hire and discharge employees or to
recommend such hiring and discharging, and outside truck drivers,
constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargain-
ing and that said unit will insure to employees of the Company the full
benefit of their right to self-organization and collective bargaining and
-otherwise effectuate the policies of the Act.
VI. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
We find that the question concerning representation which,has arisen
can best be resolved by an election by secret ballot. At the hearing the
Union requested that eligibility to vote in the election should be de-
termined as of the date of the filing of the petition. The Union did
mot assert, however, nor do we find, any reason for not following our
,usual practice. We shall accordingly direct that those eligible to vote
in the election shall be the employees in the appropriate unit who were
employed by the Company during the pay-roll period immediately
preceding the date of our Direction of Election, including employees
who did not work during said pay-roll period because they were ill or
.on vacation and those who were then or have since been temporarily
laid off, but excluding those who have since quit or been discharged
for cause.
Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and upon the entire
record in the case, the Board makes the following :
1
TUTHILL SPRING CO. 941 t
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. A question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the repre-
sentation of employees of Tuthill Spring Co., Chicago, Illinois, within
the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
2. All production and maintenance employees of the Company,.ex-
eluding salesmen , office clerical employees, supervisory employees hav-
ing the right to hire and discharge employees or to recommend such
hiring and discharging, and outside truck drivers, constitute a unit
appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the
meaning of Section 9 (b) of the 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 Relations Act,
and pursuant to Article III, Section 8, of 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 Tuthill Spring Co ., Chicago, Illinois, 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 of Election , under the direction
and supervision of the Regional Director for the Thirteenth 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 all production and maintenance employees of Tuthill Spring
Co. who were employed by it during the pay-roll period immediately
preceding the date of this Direction , including employees who did not
work during such pay-roll period because they were ill or on vaca-
tion and employees who were then . or have since been temporarily laid'
off, but excluding salesmen, office clerical employees , supervisory, em-
ployees having the right to hire and discharge employees or to recom-
mend such hiring and discharging , outside truck drivers, and those
who have since quit or been discharged for cause, to determine whether
or not they desire to be represented by United Automobile Workers of
America , C. I. 0., for the purposes of collective bargaining.
CHAIRMAN HARRY A. MILLIS took no part in the consideration of the
above Decision and Direction of Election.