Richardson Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 23, 1938

7 N.L.R.B. 1113 (N.L.R.B. 1938)

In the Matter of RICHARDSON COMPANY and EMPLOYEES UNION
Case No. R-738.-Decided June 03, 1938
Battery Parts Manufacturing Industry-Investigation of Representatives:
controversy concerning representation of employees : employer's refusal to
recognize union as exclusive bargaining agent until question of representation
is determined by Board-Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : produc-
tion and maintenance employees , excluding foremen, other supervisory em-
ployees, clerical employees , and watchmen ; stipulation as to ; prior Decision of
Board-Representatives : proof of choice : comparison of pay roll and union
membership application cards-Certification of Representatives : upon proof of
majority representation.
Mr. Lester M. Levin, for the Board.
Mr. Carl Lehmann, of Cincinnati, Ohio, for the Company.
Mr. William C. Erbeeker, of Cincinnati, Ohio, for the Union.
Mr. Edwin L. Swope, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On January 10, 1938, Employees Union, herein called the Union,
filed with the Regional Director for the Eleventh Region (Indian-
apolis, Indiana) a petition alleging that a question affecting com-
merce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of
Richardson Company, Indianapolis, Indiana, herein called the Com-
pany, and requesting an investigation and certification of representa-
tives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act,
49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act. On January 31, 1938, the Union
filed an amended petition setting forth additional facts. On April
12, 1938, the National Labor Relations Board, herein called the
Board, acting pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the Act and Article III,
Section 3, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regula-
tions-Series 1, as amended, ordered an investigation and authorized
the Regional Director to conduct it and to provide for an appropriate
hearing upon due notice.
On April 30, 1938, the Regional Director issued a notice of hearing,
copies of which were duly served upon the Company, upon the Union_
1113
1114 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
upon United Automobile Workers of America, and upon Federal
Labor Union 21197, labor organizations claiming to represent em-
ployees directly affected by the investigation. Pursuant to the notice,
a hearing was held on May 9, 1938 , at Indianapolis , Indiana, before
James M. Brown, the Trial Examiner duly designated by the Board.
The Board , the Company , and the Union were represented by counsel
and participated in the hearing . Full opportunity to be heard, to
examine and cross-examine witnesses , and to introduce evidence bear-
ing on the issues was afforded all the parties . United Automobile
Workers of America and Federal Labor Union No. 21197 did not ap-
peir at the hearing. During the course of the^hearing the Trial Ex-
aminer made several rulings on motions and on objections to the
admission of evidence . The Board has reviewed these rulings and
finds that no prejudicial errors were committed. The rulings are
hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Counsel for the Board and counsel for the Company entered into
a stipulation concerning the business of the Company , which was in-
troduced into evidence during the hearing. Upon the basis of this
stipulation we hereby find as follows :
The Company is and has been since March 1, 1898 , a corporation
duly organized under and existing by virtue of the laws of the State
of Ohio, with its principal office located at Lockland , Ohio, and has
since that time qualified to do business in the State of Indiana, and
other States , as a foreign corporation and operates various plants in
Melrose Park, Illinois; Indianapolis , Indiana; New Brunswick, New
Jersey. During the month of May 1933, it started the operation of
a plant located at 20th and Olney Streets , Indianapolis , Indiana, and
has since said date employed from about 200 to 275 employee-, in
said plant.
The Company is engaged in the manufacture , sale, and distribu-
tion of molded products . At its Indianapolis plant the Company
manufactures chiefly battery cases , covers, and vents.
The raw materials used in the manufacturing operations at the
Indianapolis plant are as follows : Reclaimed rubber, crude rubber,
sulphur, asphalt , clay, fillers , softeners , lime,- and other materials.
During the year 1937 more than 50 per cent of said raw materials
in terms . of dollars and cents used at its Indianapolis plant -were
shipped to it from points and places outside the State of Indiana.
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1115
During the year 1937 more than 50 per cent of the annual output
of the Company from its Indianapolis plant, which amounts to
approximately $500,000 per annum in terms of dollars and cents was
shipped from said plant to customers located outside the State of
Indiana. The bulk of its said finished products is further processed
or assembled by its customers and shipped by them throughout the
States of the United States.
Most of the Company's finished products are shipped direct to
its customers by common carriers, either rail or independent truck
operators.
The Company employs salesmen who travel throughout the United
States receiving orders for goods produced by the Company at its
various plants, including its Indianapolis plant, and the Company
has advertised its products in various trade journals having a nation-
wide circulation.
This proceeding involves only the Company's Indianapolis plant.
If. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
Employees Union is an unaffiliated labor organization admitting
to its membership production and maintenance employees of the
Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On January 11, 1938, the Board directed that an election be held
among the production and maintenance employees of the Company at
its Indianapolis plant to determine whether they desired to be
represented by Local Union No. 442, United Automobile Workers of
America, affiliated with the Committee for Industrial Organization,
or Federal Labor Union No. 21197, affiliated with the American
Federation of Labor, for the purposes of collective bargaining, or
by neither.' The election was conducted on January 26, 1938. The
results showed that neither of the above Unions received a majority
and the Board ordered that the petition for investigation and cer-
tification of representatives which had been filed by Local Union No.,
442, United Automobile Workers of America be dismissed.'
The Union was organized after the hearing in the above-men-
tioned case and prior to election and now claims to represent a
majority of the employees in the Company's plant at Indianapolis,
Indiana. The Company has, indicated its unwillingness to recognize
the Union as the exclusive bargaining agent of its production and
1 See 4 N. L R B 835.
2 See 5 N L R B. 295.
1116 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
maintenance employees, unless the Board certifies that the Union
represents a majority of those employees.
We find that a question has arisen concerning representation of
employees of the Company.
IV. THE EFFECT OF THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION UPON
COMMERCE
We find that the question concerning representation which has
arisen, occurring in connection with the operations of the Company
described in Section I above, has a close, intimate, and substantial
relation to trade, traffic, and commerce among the several States, and
tends to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce
and the free flow of commerce.
V. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Union in its petition, as amended, claimed that all main-
tenance and production employees of the Company constituted a
unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining. 'It was
stipulated at the hearing by counsel for the Company and counsel
for the Union that the production and maintenance employees of
the Company, at its Indianapolis, Indiana, plant, exclusive of super-
visory and clerical employees and watchmen, constitute a unit
appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining.
Inasmuch as this is the same unit which was found to be appro-
priate by us in the previous case 3 involving the Company, we see
no reason for changing the unit and therefore find that the produc-
tion and maintenance employees of the Company at its Indianap-
olis, Indiana, plant, excluding foremen, other supervisory employees,
clerical employees, and watchmen, constitute a unit appropriate for
the purposes of collective bargaining and that said unit will insure
to employees of the Company the full benefit of their right to self-
organization and collective bargaining and otherwise effectuate the
policites of the Act.
VI. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
There was introduced in evidence at the hearing a list of em-
ployees of the Company at the Indianapolis plant as of the pay-roll
period ending February 5, 1938. It was agreed by all parties that
this list should be used as a basis for the determination of the repre-
sentative of the employees. The list included the foremen, watch-
men, and office workers who, we have found, should not be included
8 See 4 N. L. R. B. 835.
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1117
within the bargaining unit. After excluding their names from the
list it contains the names of 194 employees at the Indianapolis
plant within the appropriate unit as of the pay-roll period ending
February 5.
The Union submitted in evidence 120 membership application
cards. The Company did not question the authenticity of the cards
or make any other objection to them. A comparison of such cards
and the Company 's list of employees as of February 5, 1938, re-
vised as indicated above, shows that _ 111 employees whose names
appear on the application cards were employed within the appro-
priate unit at the Indianapolis plant on February 5, 1938. Four
of the signers could not be identified as employees of the Company.
Five cards were signed by persons who are designated on the list
of employees as foremen and watchmen . Eliminating these nine
cards, the evidence clearly establishes that 111 of the 194 within
the appropriate unit desire representation by the Union.
We find that the Union has been designated and selected by a
majority of the employees in the appropriate unit as their repre-
sentative for the purpose of collective bargaining . It is, therefore,
the exclusive representative of all the employees in such unit for the
purposes of collective bargaining, and we will so certify.
Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and upon the entire
record in the case, the Board makes the following :
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. A question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the repre-
sentation of employees of Richardson Company, Indianapolis, In-
diana, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and
(7) of the National Labor Relations Act.
2. The production and maintenance employees of the Company
at its Indianapolis, Indiana, plant, excluding foremen, other super-
visory employees, clerical employees, and watchmen, constitute a
unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining, within
the meaning of Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act.
3. Employees Union is the exclusive representative of all the em-
ployees in such unit for the purposes of collective bargaining, within
the meaning of Section 9 (a) of the National Labor Relations Act.
CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
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 8, of National
Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 1, as amended,
1118 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED that Employees Union has been designated
and selected by a majority of the production and maintenance 'em-
ployees of Richardson Company, Indianapolis, Indiana, excluding
foremen, other supervisory employees, clerical employees, and watch-
men, as their representative for the purpose of collective bargaining
and that, pursuant to the provisions of Section 9 (a) of the Act,
Employees Union is the exclusive. representative of all such employees
for the purposes of collective bargaining in respect to rates of pay,
wages, hours of employment, and other conditions of employment.