Vinco Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 21, 1955

111 N.L.R.B. 1038 (N.L.R.B. 1955)

1038 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Charles Arnold-Continued
Quarter ending September 30, 1953:
Gross earnings--------------------------------------------------------------------- $820 50
Interim earnings (estimated at $40 per week for 13 weeks)--------------------------- 520.00
Net due---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- $30050
Quarter ending December 31, 1953•
Gross earnings--------------------------------------------------------------------- 895 50
Interim earnings (estimated at $40 per week for 13 weeks)--------------------------- 520 00
Net due----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 375 50
Quarter ending March 31, 1954:
Gross earnings---------------------------------------------------------------------- 835 75
Interim earnings (estimated at $40 per week for 13 weeks)--------------------------- 520 00
Net due----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 315.75
Quarter ending June 30, 1954
Gross earnings-------------------------------------------------------------------- 422 25
Interim earnings (estimated at $40 per week for 5 weeks)---------------------------- 200 00
Net due--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 222 25
Total due--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1,995 59
Appendix B
John Joseph Clancy
Quarter ending September 30, 1952
Gross earnings------------------- ----------------------------------------- $362 40
Interim earnings (Manolakos, Ocean Cafe)------------------------------------------ 50. CO
Net due---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- $312 40
Quarter ending December 31, 1952
Gross earnings---------------------------------------------------------------------- 603 00
Interim earnings (L F Pease Co )-------------------------------------------------- 587 39
Net due--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 15 61
Quarter ending March 31, 1953
Gross earnings---------------------------------------------------------------------- 624 00
Interim earnings (L F Pease Co ) -------------------------------------------------- 507 34
Net due----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 116 66
Total due--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 444 67
INDUSTRIAL STAMPING AND MANUFACTURING COMPANY, DIVISION OF
VINCO CORPORATION, PETITIONER and INTERNATIONAL UNION,
UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AIRCRAFT AND AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT
WORKERS OF AMERICA (UAW-CIO)
INDUSTRIAL STAMPING AND MANUFACTURING COMPANY, DIVISION OF
VINCO CORPORATION and INTERNATIONAL UNION, UNITED AUTOMO-
BILE, AIRCRAFT AND AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMER-
ICA (UAW-CIO), PETITIONER. Cases Nos. 7-RM-133 and 7-RC-
2601. March 21,1955
Decision and Direction of Election
Under separate petitions duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the Na-
tional Labor Relations Act, a consolidated hearing was held before
111 NLRB No. 177.
INDUSTRIAL STAMPING AND MANUFACTURING COMPANY 1039
Herbert C. Kane, 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 this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the Act.
2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent certain em-
ployees of the Employer.'
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section
9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
From May 1952 to September 24, 1954, the Employer operated two
separate plants, a plating plant on Beaufait Street, herein called the
Beaufait plant, and a stamping plant on Epworth Boulevard, herein
called the Epworth plant. Both of these plants are located in the city
of Detroit, Michigan, and are about 10 miles apart. On September
24, 1954, the Employer purchased a large plant on East Grand Boule-
vard in Detroit, herein called the Boulevard plant, from the Parker-
Wolverine division of Udylite Corporation, herein called Parker-
Wolverine. In acquiring this plant, the Employer purchased only the
land, buildings, equipment, and inventory, and did not assume any
obligations with respect to the employment of employees of Parker-
Wolverine. Parker-Wolverine discharged all of its Boulevard plant
employees when the sale was consummated. On or about September
27, 1954, the Employer, however, hired as new employees upon indi-
vidual application all of Parker-Wolverine's former Boulevard plant
employees who were employed on September 24.
Parker-Wolverine conducted the same type operations at the Boule-
vard plant as the Employer conducted at its Beaufait and Epworth
plants. The Employer has definite plans for consolidating the opera-
tions of all three plants into the Boulevard plant by transferring cer-
tain equipment and all employees from the Beaufait and Epworth
plants to the Boulevard plant. At the time of the hearing in this case,
October 20, 1954, a new top supervisory organization had already
been established for the consolidated operations; some retooling of
the Boulevard plant had begun; certain construction work and rear-
rangement of machinery had been initiated; and at least one type of
work had been transferred to the Boulevard plant. The Employer's
timetable for completing the transfer of the Epworth plant stamping
operations to the Boulevard plant was 60 percent by the end of Jan-
uary, 80 percent by the end of February, and 100 percent by the end
" The following labor organizations were permitted to intervene at the hearing on the
basis of certain unexpired contracts covering employees involved in this proceeding :
Mechanical Educational Society of America, CIO , herein called MESA ; Local No. 1, Metal
Polishers , Buffers , Platers & Helpers International Union, AFL, herein called Local 1 ;
Local 174 and Local 189, International Union, United Automobile, Aircraft and Implement
Workers of America, UAW-CIO, herein called Local 174 and Local 189, respectively, with
the International Union being called UAW-CIO.
1040 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
of March 1955. The timetable for completing the transfer of the
Beaufait plant operations was 30 percent by the end of January, 40
percent by the end of February, 50 percent by the end of March, 60
percent by the end of April, 70 percent by the end of May, and 100
percent by the end of June 1955. Furthermore, the machines and em-
ployees transferred from the Beaufait and Epworth plants will be
commingled with those already at the Boulevard plant, and the main-
tenance and service employees will function throughout the consoli-
dated operations, whereas one group of maintenance and service em-
ployees was employed by Parker-Wolverine for its stamping opera-
tions and a separate group of such employees for its polishing and
plating operations.
At the Boulevard plant, Parker-Wolverine was conducting stamp-
ing operations with about 120 employees in certain buildings and
polishing and plating operations with about 176 employees in separate
adjacent buildings. Parker-Wolverine's stamping operation em-
ployees had been represented on a production and maintenance basis
by MESA from 1937, the most recent contract having an expiration
date of January 1, 1956. The polishing and plating operations em-
ployees had been represented by Local 189 from 1942 on a production
and maintenance basis, the latest contract having an expiration date
of January 1, 1956.
The Beaufait plant employees, numbering approximately 97, have
been represented by Local 1 on a production and maintenance basis,
the present contract having an expiration date of June 30, 1955.
The Epworth plant employees, numbering approximately 137, have
been represented by Local 174 on a production and maintenance basis,
the current contract having an expiration date of May 30, 1955.
The Employer and UAW-CIO filed petitions seeking an election
in a unit of all production and maintenance employees at the Em-
ployer's Boulevard, Beaufait, and Epworth plants. MESA and
Local 1 contend that their contracts are a bar to those petitions. The
Employer and UAW-CIO contend that the consolidation of the 4
separate units of employees into 1 single integrated operation at the
Boulevard plant creates a new appropriate unit and that the contracts
are not a bar to a present determination of representatives. Local 174
and Local 189 do not contend that their contracts are a bar to the
petitions.
As a result of the acquisition of the Boulevard plant, employees
who were formerly in 4 separately represented units are now under
unified administrative control and supervision, and within approxi-
mately 90 days will be integrated into a single operating unit, approxi-
mately 5 times the size of the unit represented by either Local 1 or
MESA. We view the consolidated operations as being comparable to
an entirely new operation. Therefore, the contracts of Local 1 and
INDUSTRIAL STAMPING AND MANUFACTURING COMPANY 1041
MESA covering only a fraction of the enlarged employee complement
are not a bar to a present determination of representatives.'
4. The appropriate unit :
The Employer, UAW-CIO, Local 174, and Local 189 contend that
the only appropriate unit consists of all production and maintenance
employees of the Employer's plants located at 2501 East Grand
Boulevard, 6500 Epworth Boulevard, and 4019 Beaufait Street, De-
troit, Michigan, excluding office clerical employees, plant clerical em-
ployees, professional employees, guards, and supervisors as defined in
the Act. MESA and Local 1 do not contend that an overall produc-
tion and maintenance unit is inappropriate. But, in its brief, Local
1 seeks an election for a separate unit of polishers, platers, buffers, and
their helpers, contending that these employees should not be denied
the right to express their choice for continued separate representa-
tion. The record, however, reveals that the polishers, platers, buffers,
and their helpers have not been separately represented on either a craft
or departmental basis at the Beaufait, Epworth, or Boulevard plants,
but, instead, have been represented as parts of four separate produc-
tion and maintenance units. The fact that polishers, platers, and
buffers will not be separately located but will be commingled with the
stamping employees precludes an election on a departmental basis for
them, and as the record contains no evidence to prove that the work
of those employees requires them to exercise true craft skills, we shall
not direct an election for them on a craft basis.
In its brief, MESA also contends that the stamping employees
should be granted a self-determination election. These employees
have been represented at the Boulevard and Epworth plants as parts
of production and maintenance units; they will not be separately lo-
cated when the consolidation at the Boulevard plant has been com-
pleted ; and the record contains no evidence to show that the work of
these employees requires them to exercise true craft skills. We, there-
fore, perceive no reason for directing a self-determination election for
them on either a departmental or craft basis.
In view of the administrative integration of the Employer's Boule-
vard, Beaufait, and Epworth plants under a single unified direction,
supervision, and control and the resulting consolidation of all three
plants into a single operating unit at the Boulevard plant, we find
that the following employees of the Employer constitute a unit appro-
priate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning
of Section 9 (b) of the Act :
43 Greyhound Garage of Jacksonville, Inc., 95 NLRB 902 at 904 ; New Jersey Natural Gas
Company, 101 NLRB 251 at 252. As a further reason why the MESA contract is not a
bar, the facts in this case clearly reveal that the Employer is not a successor to Parker-
wolverine and, therefore , is not liable under any existing labor relations contract between
MESA and Parker -Wolverine Herman Lowenstein, Inc., 75 NLRB 377 at 379.
1042 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
All production and maintenance employees, including plant cleri-
cals,' but excluding office clericals, professional employees, guards, and
supervisors as defined in the Act.
5. Eligibility :
The UAW-CIO contends that all of the laid-off employees at the
Beaufait, Epworth, and Boulevard plants should be permitted to vote
in any election directed. The Employer stated at the hearing that it
intended to recall all laid-off employees at the Beaufait and Epworth
plants by the time that all of its operations were consolidated into a
single operation at the Boulevard plant. As these laid-off employees
have a reasonable expectancy of being recalled in the near future, we
shall, in accordance with Board practice, permit them to vote in the
election .4
The Employer also stated at the hearing that it intended to hire by
the time the consolidation was completed most or all Boulevard plant
employees whom Parker-Wolverine had laid off prior to the Employ-
er's acquisition of the Boulevard plant. As aforesaid, the Employer
in this case is not a successor to Parker-Wolverine and did not assume
any obligations concerning the employment of the latter's employees,
whether in laid-off status or not. Instead, it hired as new employees
upon individual application only those employees then working at
the Boulevard plant. Although the Employer intends to hire the em-
ployees laid off by Parker-Wolverine in the near future, they are not
employees of the Employer until it has actually hired them. We find
that the employees who were in laid-off status at the Boulevard plant
when it was acquired by the Employer are not eligible to participate
in the election unless they are hired and begin work prior to or during
the payroll period immediately preceding the date of the Direction
of Election herein .5
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
3 The Employer, UAW-CIO, Local 174, and Local 189 would exclude plant clericals from
the unit However, in accordance with usual Board practice, we shall include them.
Stauffer Chemical Company, 108 NLRB 1037.
* M & S Morenci Corporation , 100 NLRB 1114 at 1115.
5 J. Halpern Company, 108 NLRB 1142.
A. O. SMITH CORPORATION, KANKAKEE WORKS and OFFICE EMPLOYEES
INTERNATIONAL UNION, A. F. L., PETITIONER
A. O. SMITH CORPORATION, KANKAKEE WORKS and OFFICE EMPLOYEES
INTERNATIONAL UNION, A. F. L., PETITIONER. Cases Nos. 13-RC-
4153 and 13-RC-4201. March 21,1955
Decision, Direction of Election, and Order
Upon separate petitions duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the Na-
tional Labor Relations Act, a consolidated hearing was held before
111 NLRB No. 183.