Western Machine & Tool Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 4, 1956

115 N.L.R.B. 978 (N.L.R.B. 1956)

978 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
We find that the following employees at the Employer's Milwaukee,
Wisconsin, plant constitute an appropriate unit for the employees
of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the
Act : All laboratory helpers and laboratory assistants in the technical
control and development departments, excluding office clerical and
plant clerical employees, chemists and other professional employees,
shop, or production, employees, guards, and all supervisors 8 as defined
in the Act. .
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
9 Excluded , as supervisors , are Joseph Miller, George Geiger, Otto Hansen , Harry Peksa,
Ed Olenzak and Malcolm . Schelong, who have hereinabove been found to be supervisors.
Charles and Henry Bertermann d/b/a Western Machine & Tool
Company 1 and Local 849 of the International Association of
Tool Craftsmen , Petitioner. Case No. 13-RC-4830. April 4,1956
DECISION AND O^JER
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a hearing was held before Allen P. Haas, hearing offi-
cer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from
prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed .2
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds:.,
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 Act, for the following reasons:
The Employer is a Racine, Wisconsin, partnership engaged in job
shopping tools, dies, fixtures, jigs, and similar products. During the
calendar year , 1955, the Employer's purchases, received from directly
outside the State, were approximately $3000, and its purchases re-
ceived indirectly from out-of-State were approximately $11,500. Dur-
ing that period, the Employer's gross sales were $99,357, and during
the 12-month period immediately preceding the hearing, its gross
sales were $99,870. All such sales were made to enterprises located
in the State of Wisconsin and, although the Employer testified that its
customers were themselves engaged in commerce, the record fails to
show on what basis, if any, the Board would assert jurisdiction over
the Employer's customers . However, even assuming that the necessary
facts were shown, and that the Employer's sales would be found to
constitute indirect outflow, these sales fall short of the minimum juris-
i The Employer's name appears as amended at the hearing.
9 Lodge No . 849, International Association of Machinists , AFL-CIO, was permitted to
intervene on the basis of a current contractual interest.
115 NLRB No. 156.
THE STICKLESS CORPORATION 979
dictional amount of $100,000 established by the Board for asserting
jurisdiction on the basis of indirect outflow'
The Petitioner contends that the Board should consider the Em-
ployer's sales for the years 1953 and 1954, as well as those for the most
recent year, in determining whether to assert jurisdiction herein.
However, the Board in applying its jurisdictional standards uniform-
ly relies on the experience of an employer during the most recent cal-
endar or fiscal year, or the 12-month period immediately preceding
the hearing before the Board, where such experience is available.'
Moreover, no evidence has been advanced to show that the decline in
the Employer's sales was temporary or caused by factors not likely to
recur. Accordingly, we find no reason to depart from our usual prac-
tice in this case. As the Employer's operations fail to meet either the
Board's indirect outflow standards, or any of the Board's other juris-
dictional standards, we find that it will not effectuate the policies of
the Act to assert jurisdiction in this case, and we shall therefore dis-
miss the petition.
[The Board dismissed the petition.]
3 Jonesboro Grain Drying Cdoperative, 110 NLRB 481; Whippany Motor Co. Inc., 115
NLRB 52.
4 Aroostook Federation of Farmers, Inc., 114 NLRB 538; Bischof Die and Engraving,
,114 NLRB 1346.
The Stickless Corporation and District 65, RWDSU, AFL-CIO
New York Printing Pressmen 's Union No. 51 , I. P. P. & AU, and
New York Press Assistants Union No. 23, I. P. P. & AU, AFL-
CIO, Joint-Petitioners. Case No. 2-RC-7933. April 5,1956
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a hearing was held before Leonard J. Lurie, 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.
3 Over the objection of the Employer and Amalgamated Workers Union , Local 139,
I. U. D. & TW, AFL-CIO, Intervenor herein, the hearing officer granted the motion of
New York Printing Pressmen 's Union No . 51, I. P. P. & AU, and New York Press Assistants
Union No. 23, I P. P. & AU, AFL-CIO, Joint Intervenors, and District 65, RWDSU,
AFL-CIO, the original Petitioner, to amend the petition by adding the names of the Joint
Intervenors as Joint Petitioners with District 65 Since the amendment of the petition
did not materially affect the composition of the unit as originally petitioned for, the
parties were not prevented from presenting all the evidence available to them on that
question Ahsszon Appliance Corporation , 108 NLRB 176 ; General Electric Company
(River Works), 107 NLRB 70. Accordingly we find no merit in the contentions , including
the Employer 's contention of surprise , of the objecting parties.
115 NLRB No. 154.