Wells Manufacturing Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 6, 1949

85 N.L.R.B. 23 (N.L.R.B. 1949)

In the Matter Of WELLS MANUFACTURING CORPORATION,1 EMPLOYER
and INTERNATIONAL UNION, UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AIRCRAFT AND
AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO, PETITIONER
Case No. 13-RC-417.-Decided July 6,1949.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Under a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before Herman J.
DeKoven, hearing officer of the National Labor Relations Board. The
hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial
error and are hereby affirmed.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor
Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with
this case to a three-member panel [Members Reynolds, Murdock, and
Gray].
Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relation's
Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the National Labor Relations Act.
2. The organizations involved :
The Petitioner is a labor organization claiming to represent em-
ployees of the Employer.
The United Farm Equipment and Metal Workers of America, CIO,
and its Local 172, herein referred to individually as the F. E. and
Local 172, respectively, and collectively as the Intervenors, are labor
organizations claiming to represent employees of the Employer.
3. The question concerning representation :
The Employer refuses to recognize the.Petitioner as the exclusive
bargaining representative of employees of the Employer until the
Petitioner has been certified by the Board in an appropriate unit.
Among the grounds urged by the Intervenors as a basis for dismis-
sal of the petition was that the question of representation is a jurisdic-
tional dispute between two affiliates of a parent union. , Because it
1 The Employer' s name appears as amended at the hearing.
85 N. L. R. B., No. 8.
23
24 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
does not appear that there will be an immediate resolution of the dis,
pute without resort to the administrative processes of the Act, we
find no merit in such contention.'
The Intervenors further urge a contract bar with respect to the
present proceeding. The Employer takes no position concerning this.
issue. The Intervenors since 1943 have negotiated joint collective
bargaining agreements with the Employer covering a production and
maintenance unit which was established as the result of a Board elec-
tion. The most recent contract between the Employer and the Inter-
venors covering the employees involved was for a period of 1 year from
March 7, 1948. This contract provided for its automatic renewal
thereafter from year to year in the absence of notice by either party
at least 60 days prior to the termination date, of a desire to change or
terminate the contract. By letter dated September 20, 1948, the
Petitioner demanded recognition as bargaining representative of em-
ployees of the Employer, and on October 19, 1948, filed its petition.
Under well-established Board policy, we find the contract is not a bar
to the present proceedings.3
The Intervenors contend in their brief that the proceeding should
be dismissed upon the ground that the Petitioner is "fronting" for a
noncomplying local. It appears that on September 20, 1948, or
shortly thereafter, a group of employees of the Employer withdrew
their membership from the Intervenors and elected temporary officers
for the purpose of aiding the Petitioner in its organizational efforts
at the Employer's plant. Although this organization which sought
affiliation with the Petitioner, has not yet received its charter and is
not a fully perfected local, it has engaged in an organizational drive,.
has held regular monthly meetings and, as noted above, has elected
temporary officers who are actively in charge of its affairs. Under these
circumstances, we believe that it exists as a functioning local union
of the Petitioner. Although such local is not a formal party to this
proceeding, the record indicates that it will have an interest in any
contract obtained by the Petitioner pursuant to the election directed
herein. Because of the interest of such local, which is not in com-
pliance with the filing requirements of the Act, we shall not entertain
the instant petition unless the local achieves a status of compliance'
Accordingly, if within 2 weeks from the issuance of this Decision and
Direction of Election, the local is not in compliance with Section 9 (f),
(g), and (h) of the Act, the petition of International Union, United
2 See Matter of Gterity Michigan Corporation, 78 N. L. R. B. 94.
3 See Matter of Tin Processing Corporation, 80 N. L. It. B. 1369, and cases cited therein.
Since we have found that the contract does not constitute a bar to this proceeding, we find
it unnecessary to resolve an issue of disaffiliation raised by the Petitioner.
4 See Matter of United States Gypsum Company, 81 N. L. It. B. 292.
WELLS MANUFACTURING CORPORATION 25
Automobile, Aircraft and Agricultural Implement Workers of Amer-
ica, CIO, will be dismissed.
We find that a 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 Act.
4. The appropriate unit :
We find, in substantial accord with the agreement of the parties,
that the following employees constitute a unit appropriate for the
purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b)
of the Act : all production and maintenance employees at the Em-
ployer's Fond du Lac, Wisconsin, plant, excluding executive, office
and clerical employees, guards, professional employees, and super-
visors as defused in the Act.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION 5
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining with the Employer, an election by secret
ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than 30
days from the date of this Direction, under the direction and super-
vision of the Regional Director for the Region in which this case was
heard, and subject to Sections 203.61 and 203.62 of National Labor
Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 5, as amended, among
the employees in the unit found appropriate in paragraph numbered
4, above, who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately
preceding the date of this Direction of Election, including employees
who did not work during, said pay-roll period because they were ill or.
on vacation or temporarily laid off, but excluding those employees
who have since quit or been discharged for cause and have not been
rehired or reinstated prior to the date of the election, and also ex-
cluding employees on strike who are not entitled to reinstatement, to
determine whether they desire to be represented, for purposes of col-
lective bargaining by International Union, United Automobile, Air-
craft and Agricultural Implement Workers of America, CIO, or by
United Farm Equipment and Metal Workers of America, CIO,' or by
neither.
5 Any participant in the election directed herein may , upon its prompt request to, and
approval thereof by, the Regional Director, have its name removed from the ballot.
6 In accordance with the request of Local 172 of the United Farm Equipment and Metal
Workers of America , CIO, the name of such local is omitted from the ballot.