Brunswick Balke Collender Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Feb 21, 1949

81 N.L.R.B. 877 (N.L.R.B. 1949)

In the Matter of BRUNSWICK BALKE COLLENDER COMPANY, EMPLOYER
and AMALGAMATED PLANT GUARDS, LOCAL 23, UNITED PLANT GUARD
WORKERS OF AMERICA (UPGWA), PETITIONER
Case No. 7-RC--41.-Decided February 01, 1949
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed , a hearing was held before a 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 -man panel consisting of the undersigned Board
Members.*
Upon the entire record in this case , the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the National Labor Relations Act.
2. The labor organization named below in the Direction of Election
claims to represent employees of the Employer.,
3. The question concerning representation :
The Intervenor contends that its contract with the Employer
operates as a bar to this proceeding.
This contract which was entered into January 22 , 1947, covers the
Employer 's plant -protection employees . It was to remain in effect
from January 10, 1947, to January 9, 1948 , and to "become auto-
matically renewable from year to year unless either party shall serve
notice upon the other party in writing sixty ( 60) days prior to the
annual anniversary date of the agreement of its intention to amend
or change this agreement."
According to the record , the contract was automatically renewed
January 9, 1948 . On October 17, 1948, the Employer received a writ-
ten request for recognition from the Petitioner to which it replied,
* Chairman Herzog and Members Houston and Gray.
1 The Intervenor , Federal Labor Union #23409 , a labor organization affiliated with the
American Federation of Labor, also claims to represent employees of the Employer.
81 N. L. R. B., No. 135. 877
878 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
orally that it could not recognize the Petitioner because it was cur-
rently under contract with the Intervenor. On November 8, 1948,
the Intervenor served notice in writing on the Employer that it wished
"to open the contract for wages and further negotiations." On No-
vember 19, 1948, the petition in this proceeding was filed.
Inasmuch as the written notice given by the Intervenor, on Novem-
ber 8, 1948, of its desire to open the contract preceded the automatic
renewal date of the contract, we find that such notice effectively fore-
stalled its automatic renewal, and the petition was timely filed.' Ac-
cordingly, the contract is no bar to the present proceeding.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 (T) of the Act.
4. The appropriate unit :
We find, in accordance with the agreement of the parties, that all
plant-protection employees of the Employer at its Muskegon, Michi-
gan, plant, excluding the chief and all other supervisors, constitute a
unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining, within the
meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
5. The determination of representatives:
The Intervenor is a federal union affiliated with the American Fed-
eration of Labor. It is conceded by all parties in this proceeding
that the employees in the unit sought herein are "guards" ' within the
meaning of Section 9 (b) (3) of the amended Act. We have held
that a labor organization affiliated with the American Federation of
Labor, is "indirectly" affiliated with the other national and inter-
national labor organizations constituting the American Federation of
Labor which admit employees other than guards to membership.4 We
find, therefore, that by reason of such affiliation with the labor organi-
zation the Intervenor comes within the restriction imposed by Section
9 (b) (3), and cannot, in the language of that Section, be certified as
the representative of employees in a bargaining unit of guards. Ac-
cordingly, we shall not place the Intervenors name on the ballot.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
As part of the investigation to ascertain representativeq 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-
2 Matter of Seacoast Telephone Company , 74 N L R B 60
We find unnecessary , therefore , to consider the other reasons urged by the Petitioner
for holding the contract not to be a bar.
' Matter of Schenley Distillers , Inc, Old Quaker Dtvasion , 77 N L R B. 468.
BRUNSWICK BALKE COLLENDER COMPANY 879
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 excluding
employees on strike who are not entitled to reinstatement, to deter-
mine whether or not they desire to be represented, for purposes of
collective bargaining, by Amalgamated Plant Guards, Local No. 23,
United Plant Guard Workers of America (UPGWA).