Vevier Loose Leaf Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 27, 1948

77 N.L.R.B. 351 (N.L.R.B. 1948)

In the Matter Of VEVIER LOOSE LEAF COMPANY, EMPLOYER and INTER-
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS, DISTRICT 9, PETITIONER
Case No. 14-R-1796.Decided April 27, 1944
Messrs. F. E. Williams and E. C. Vevier, of St. Louis, Mo., for the
Employer.
Messrs. Cody Quinn and Larry Connors, of St. Louis, Mo., for the
Petitioner.
DECISION
AND
ORDER
Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at St.
Louis, Missouri, on November 10, 1947, before Harry G. Carlson,
hearing officer. The hearing officer'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 1 makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. TIIE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
Vevier Loose Leaf Company, a Missouri corporation, is engaged in
the manufacture of loose-leaf binders at its St. Louis, Missouri, plant.
During 1946, the Employer purchased for use at its plant raw materials
valued in excess of $100,000, of which approximately 90 percent rep-
resented shipments from sources outside the State of Missouri. During
the same year, the Employer sold more than $100,000 worth of finished
products, of which approximately 90 percent represented shipments
from its plant 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.
i Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act , the Board has delegated its
powers in connection with this case to a three -man panel consisting of Chairman -Herzog
and Board Membeis Murdock and Gray.
77 N. L. R. B, No 52.
351
352 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
The Petitioner is a labor organization claiming to represent em-
ployees of the Employer.
III. THE ALLEGED QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION ; THE ALLEGED
APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Petitioner seeks a unit composed of all tool and die workers,
punch press operators, machinists,' die setters, and bench assembly
employees, excluding supervisors as defined in the Act. The Em-
ployer asserts that the proposed unit is inappropriate, contending that
the appropriate unit should embrace all its employees, except office
employees and supervisors.
The Employer manufactures loose-leaf binders in a single building
containing two floors and a basement. After the preparation of metal
parts on a shearing machine, the product moves through a series of
steps consisting of the fabrication of parts by punch press operators
and bench assembly employees; the application of a cardboard or
imitation leather covering by workers at a bindery table; punching
eyelets and rivet holes, and installation of metal flanges, by punch
press operators; application of lettering by a stamping machine; and
final assembly by workers at a bindery table, where any imperfections
are corrected by use of a drill press. The Employer also manu-
factures for a single customer a special type of binder known as the
"Hazel" binder, for whose manufacture it maintains, in a corner of
the main production floor, additional machines similar to all those
(except shearing machines) mentioned above.
There are approximately 46 production and maintenance employees
in the plant. Those whom the Petitioner seeks to represent include 2
tool and die makers, 1 die setter, 8 punch press operators, and 3 other
workers (bench assembly employees) who serve as helpers, substitute
for the regular operators on the punch presses, and perform either
metal shearing or bench assembly work. These 14 employees are
under the direct supervision of the plant superintendent, and consti-
tute what is characterized as the "metals department." The others are
known as bindery employees and are supervised by a bindery fore-
man, who is subordinate to the plant superintendent and is the only
other supervisor in the plant.
Among those in the proposed unit, only the two tool and die makers
are highly skilled employees and members of a recognized craft.3
2 The plant superintendent , a supervisor within the meaning of the Act as amended, is
the only machinist employed by the Employer
3 The record does not indicate the degree of skill of the die setter , but it is clearly shown
that the Employer does not consider him to be a highly skilled employee
VEVIER LOOSE LEAF COMPANY 353
The punch press operators and bench assembly employees require
about 2" months of training and usually attain maximum proficiency
in their work in about 1 year ¢ Approximately two or three times
each week the Employer temporarily assigns three or four bindery
employees to punch press work within the "metals department." Like-
wise, when the volume of work requires it, a regular punch press opera-
tor is detailed to temporary duty in connection with the manufacture
of the "Hazel" binder under the supervision of the bindery foremah.5
Occasionally, special manufacturing operations require that individ-
ual bindery employees perform all the work related to the making of
a finished product, including punch press work. The plant's main
production floor is not divided by partitions ; the plant is not organized
into separate departments for administrative purposes; and the Em-
ployer maintains a single plant-wide seniority list.
It is clear that the requested unit is not a craft group, and that it does
not comprise a distinct and functionally coherent department. In
view of the integration of the Employer's production process and the
substantial employee interchange and similarity of work performed
as between operations within and without the proposed unit, we find
that the unit sought by the Petitioner is not appropriate for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining.'
As we have held that the bargaining unit sought by the Petitioner
is inappropriate for collective bargaining purposes, we find that no
question affecting commerce exists concerning the representation of
employees of the Employer, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) (1)
and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act. We
shall, therefore, dismiss the petition.
ORDER
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact, and upon the en-
tire record in the case, the National Labor Relations Board hereby
orders that the petition for investigation and certification of repre-
sentatives of employees of Vevier Loose Leaf Company, St. Louis,
Missouri, filed herein by International Al ssociation of Machinists, Dis-
trict 9, be, and it hereby is, dismissed.
MEMBER GRAY took not part in the consideration of the Above Deci-
sion and Order.
' The pay scale of the employees in the requested unit ranges from 70 to 85 cents all
hour for punch press operators and bench assembly employees to $1 90 an hour for the
tool and die workers
s The bindery foreman supervises the entii e manufacture of the "Hazel" binder
"Matter of Raybestos Di&iston of the Raybestos-Manhattan Company, Inc. 74 N L R B.
1321 ; Matter of Freeport Eulphui Company, 65 N L R B 21 , and Matter of Voss Brothers
Mann fact nruig Company, 62 N L R B 915