York Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 9, 1945

61 N.L.R.B. 462 (N.L.R.B. 1945)

In the Matter of YORK CORPORATION and METAL TRADES DEPARTMENT,
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR
Case No. 4-R-1596.-Decided April 9, 1945
Mr. Marion F. Dick, of York, Pa., and Mr. William H. Howe, of
Washington, D. C., for the Company.
Mr. Walter M. Appleby, of Media, Pa., and Mr. R. Richard Ebersole,
of York, Pa., for the MTD.
Mr. Judson E. Ruch, of York, Pa., for the Independent.
Mr. George Q. Lynch, of Washington, D. C., for the PML.
Mr. Paul Bisgyer, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon a petition duly filed by Metal Trades Department, American
Federation of Labor, herein called the MTD, alleging that a question
affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of em-
ployees of York Corporation, York, Pennsylvania, herein called the
Company, the National Labor Relations Board provided for an ap-
propriate hearing upon due notice before Herman Lazarus, Trial Ex-
aminer. Said hearing was held at York, Pennsylvania, on January
30, 1945. Pursuant to an order issued by the Board on February 26,
1945, the record herein was reopened and a further hearing was held
before the said Trial Examiner at York, Pennsylvania, on March 2,
1945. The Company, the MTD, Ice Machinery Independent Em-
ployees Association, herein called the Independent, and Pattern Mak-
ers League of North America, herein called the PML, appeared and
participated at both hearings. All parties were afforded full oppor-
tunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to
introduce evidence bearing on the issues. The Trial Examiner's rul-
ings made at the hearings are free from prejudicial error and are
hereby affirmed. , All parties were afforded an opportunity to file briefs
with the Board.
61 N. L . R. B., No. 60.
462
YORK CORPORATION 463
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
York Corporation is a Delaware corporation normally engaged in
the development, design, and manufacture of refrigeration and air
conditioning accessories and supplies. At present, the Company is
also engaged in the manufacture of certain types of ordnance for the
use of the armed forces, and equipment for prime Government con-
tractors and the Maritime Commission. It operates two manufactur-
ing plants in York, Pennsylvania, known as the Grantley and West
York plants with which we are solely concerned, and branch organ-
izations in various cities both in and out of the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania.
During the fiscal year ending September 30, 1944, the Company used
at its Grantley and West York plants, raw materials valued at approx-
imately $7,700,000, 90 percent of which was obtained from sources
outside the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. During the same period,
it sold products finished at said plants valued at approximately $34,-
000,000,, about 73 percent of which was shipped to points outside the
State.
The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
H. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
Metal Trades Department, affiliated with the American Federation
of Labor, is a labor organization admitting to membership employees
of the Company.
Ice Machinery Independent Employees Association is an unaffili-
ated labor organization admitting to membership employees of the
Company.
Pattern Makers League of North America, affiliated with the Ameri-
can Federation of Labor, is a labor organization admitting to mem-
bership employees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
By letter dated October 27, 1944, the MTD notified the Company
that it represented a substantial number of the Company's employees,
and requested a conference for the purpose of negotiating a collective
bargaining agreement . The Company did not reply to this letter.
D
0
464 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
A statement of a Board agent, introduced into evidence at the hear-
ing, indicates that the MTD and the PML each represents a substan-
tial number of employees in the unit each alleges to be appropriate.'
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning
the representation of employees of the Company, within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The MTD seeks a unit of all hourly paid production and main-
tenance employees at the Company's Grantley and West York plants
and subdivisions thereof, excluding all journeymen pattern makers
and their apprentices, and supervisory employees. The PML re-
quests a unit of journeymen pattern makers and their apprentices
employed in the pattern shop.2 While the Independent and the
Company agree to the propriety of a production and maintenance unit
they, nevertheless, would include pattern makers therein contending
that, for 7 years, these employees have been effectively bargained for
by the Independent as part of such a comprehensive unit.
In or about the early part of 1938, the Company recognized the,
Independent as the exclusive bargaining representative of all its non-
supervisory, hourly rated employees, including pattern makers.
Thereupon, on the basis of this unit, the Independent and the Com-
pany entered into their first contract for a term of 1 year which was
followed by successive yearly agreements. The last contract was
executed on December 29, 1943.
The record discloses that during the course of collective bargaining
between the Independent and the Company the pattern makers were
apparently satisfied with the representation accorded them by the
Independent, participating in numerous benefits secured through the
latter's efforts. The Independent obtained, among other things, five
general wage increases in which the pattern makers shared, and one
solely granted to them, and as recently as December 1944, the pattern
' The Field Examiner reported that the MTD submitted 940 authorization cards, and
that the Company' s pay roll of December 6, 1944, contained the names of 2,337 employees
in the unit the MTD alleges to be appropriate.
The Field Examiner also reported that the PML submitted 10 membership applications
and dues books , and that the aforesaid pay roll contained the names of 13 employees in the
unit the PML alleges to be appropriate.
The Independent relies upon its contract of December 28, 1943, to establish its interest
in this proceeding. This agreement is not raised as a bar herein.
Prior to the commencement of this proceeding , two affiliates of the MTD , International
Union of Operating Engineers , Local No 831, and United Brotherhood of Carpenters and
Joiners of America, Local No. 1833, filed separate representation petitions with the Penn-
sylvania Labor Relations Board on June 15, 1944, and October 9, 1944, respectively, each
alleging as appropriate a unit of employees falling within its respective jurisdiction. While
the State proceedings are still pending, they are not urged as a bar herein.
2 The pattern shop is located at the Grantley plant and is under the same superintendent
as the foundry.
0
YORK CORPORATION 465
makers approved an application for a wage increase submitted by this
organization in their behalf to the National War Labor Board.3 More-
over, at their instance, the Independent has successfully handled their
complaints 4
Evidence adduced at the hearing further indicates that pattern
makers have manifested a continuous interest in the Independent and
its affairs. .4t the time of its organization, 5 out of 13 pattern makers
in the Company's employ voluntarily joined the Independent and,
through the years, others joined so that by 1944, 10 had become mem-
bers. The PML, however, had as members only 1 pattern maker from
March 1938 to 1940, and 3 from 1941 to 1944.5 It is undisputed that
pattern makers have solicited members for the Independent, attended
its meetings, successfully proposed at a 1938 meeting that they be
transferred for union representation purposes from the wood shop
group to the foundry group, and about 3 years ago selected a pattern
maker as an assistant delegate to represent them on the Board of
Delegates, which is charged with negotiating contracts and, under the
agreements between the Company and the Independent, with prose-
cuting grievances on appeal prior to arbitration.6
It is clear from the record that throughout the history of collective
bargaining with the Company pattern makers deliberately merged
their interests with those of other production and maintenance em-
ployees, and sanctioned their representation by the Independent.
Under the foregoing circumstances, and in view of the fact that pattern
3 The application also included requests for wage increases for other employees. It is
now pending before the National War Labor Board.
* These complaints concerned the position of patterns in core boxes , a question of policy
regarding older pattern makers, and the proper "set-up" of a crane in the pattern storage
room.
There is conflicting testimony as to whether or not the pattern makers , as a group, ever
dealt informally with the Company . Clarence Rau, a witness for the PML, testified that
on three or four occasions when wage increases were granted pattern makers employed
by other companies , he and three other employees sought increases from their foreman,
and that each time an increase was granted all pattern makers . This testimony was
disputed by two pattern makers who Rau alleged accompanied him. These individuals
testified that on only one occasion did they accompany Rau and ask their foreman for an
increase , and then they merely spoke for themselves According to the testimony of Joseph
Moody, the Company's Manager of Industrial Relations , an increase as granted on
December 11, 1938, to the four employees mentioned by Rau. In this state of the record
we are not persuaded that the pattern makers, as a group, informally dealt with the
Company.
Except for filing a petition for certification in 1937, which it withdrew , the PML, it
appears, did not seek until lately to represent the Company 's pattern makers. Apparently
as a result of its recent organizing efforts, the PML now claims 10 pattern makers as
members, and the Independent, 3.
Since 1938 , the Company has normally employed 13 pattern makers in its pattern shop.
9 The assistant delegate referred to is William Wellmann . He was selected by pattern
makers and a few other employees and, with their acquiescence , has continued to act in
such representative capacity . The record reveals that , except from August 1944 to
February 1945 , when he worked in another part of the plant , Wellmann was employed most
of his time as a pattern maker in the pattern shop.
466 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
making is integrated with the Company's other operations, we are
of the opinion that a separate pattern makers' unit is inappropriate.'
Accordingly, we shall include pattern makers in the production and
maintenance unit.
We find that all hourly paid production and maintenance employees
at the Company's Grantley and West York plants and subdivisions
thereof, including journeymen pattern makers and their apprentices,
but excluding general foremen, foremen, assistant foremen, and all
other supervisory employees with authority to hire, promote, discharge,
discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or
effectively recommended such action, constitute a unit appropriate for
the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section
9 (b) of the Act.
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
We shall direct that the question concerning representation which
has arisen be resolved by an election by secret ballot among the em-
ployees in the appropriate unit who were employed during the pay-roll
period immediately preceding the date of the Direction of Election
herein, subject to the limitations and additions set forth in the
Direction.'
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 9, of National Labor Relations
Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3, as amended, it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with York Corporation,
York, Pennsylvania, 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, under the direction and supervision of the Regional
Director for the Fourth Region, acting in this matter as agent for the
National'Labor Relations Board, and subject to Article III, Sections
10 and 11, of said Rules and Regulations, among the employees in
the unit found appropriate in Section IV, above, who were employed
during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of this
Direction, including employees who did not work during the said
pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation or temporarily
laid off, and including employees in the armed forces of the United
'Cf Matter of General Electric Company ( Lynn River Works and Everett Plant), 58
N. L. R. B, 57, and see Matter of Harnischfeger Corporation , 55 N L R B. 909
The MTD requests that its name appear on the ballot as set forth in the Direction
YORK CORPORATION 467
States who present themselves in person at the polls, 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 elec-
tion, to determine whether they desire to be represented by The Metal
Trades Department, A. F. of L., or by Ice Machinery Independent
Employees Association, for the purposes of collective bargaining, or
by neither.
MR. GERARD D. REILLY took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Direction of Election.
0