Ken-Rad Tube and Lamp Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 3, 1942

42 N.L.R.B. 1235 (N.L.R.B. 1942)

In the Matter Of KEN-RAD TUBE AND LAMP CORPORATION and INTERNA-
TIONAL UNION, UNITED AUTOMOBILE WORKERS OF AMERICA, AFFILIATED
WITH THE AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR
In the Matter of KEN-RAD TRANSMITTING TUBE CORPORATION and IN-
TERNATIONAL UNION, UNITED AUTOMOBILE WORKERS OF AMERICA,
AFFILIATED WITH THE AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR
Cases Nos R-41033 and R-4034, respectvvely -Decided August 3,1943
Jurisdiction : incandescent elects is lamp and radio transmitting tube manu-
factuiing industiy
Investigation and Certification of Representatives : existence of question re-
fusal to accoid petitioner recognition until certified by the Board, labor organ-
ization which presented no evidence of membership excluded from ballot, elec-
tion necessary
Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : all production and maintenance em-
ployees of the Companies, including factory clerks, but excluding foremen,
assistant foremen, mstiuctois, department maintenance men, watchmen, plant'
piotection employees, office employees, ,timekeepers,',engineering-department
employees, and nurses
Mr Thomas E Sandige and Mr William K Miller, of Owensboro,
Ky, and Mr Fae IV Patrick, of Indianapolis, Ind, for the Company
Mr Peter G Noll, Mr McKinley Ralston and Mr William V. Mon-
tague, of Norw ood, Ohio, for the A F of L.
Mr Will?am SenStner, of Si Louis, Mo , for the C I 0
Mr Mozart C Ratner, of counsel to the Board
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF TIIE CASE
Upon two petitions duly filed by the International Union, United
Automobile Workers of America, affiliated with the American Federa-
tion of Labor, lieiein called the A F of L, alleging that questions
affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of em-
ployees of Ken-Rad Tube and Lamp Coiporation, Owensboro, Ken-
tucky, herein called the Tube Corpoiation, and Ken-Rad Transmitting
Tube Corporation, Owensboro, Kentucky, herein called the Transmit-
42 N L R B, No 226
1235
J
1236 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
tang Corporation, (the corporations will be referred to herein collet'
tively as the Company), the National Labor Relations Board issued
its order consolidating the cases and provided for an appropriate
hearing upon due notice before Arthur R. Donovan, Trial Examiner.
Said hearing was held at Owensboro, Kentucky, on July 9 and 10, 1942.
The Company, the A. F of L, and United Electrical, Radio and Ma-
chine Workers of America,-C I 0., herein called the C. 1. 0, appeared
and participated and were afforded full oppoitunity to be heard, to ex-
amine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing
on the issues. The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are
free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. The Company
filed a brief which the Board has considered.
Upon the entire record in the case; the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY,
Ken-Rad Tube and Lamp Corporation, a Kentucky corporation,
maintaining its piincipal office and place of business at Owensboro,
Kentucky, is engaged in the manufacture and sale of incandescent
electric lamps. The Tube Corporation annual purchases raw materials
of a value in excess of $2,000,000, of which approximately 95 percent
in value is shipped to the Tube Corporation from points outside the
State of Kentucky. The Tube Corporation annually has sales of
products of a value in excess of $6,000,000, of which approximately
97 percent in value is shipped to points outside the State of Kentucky.
Ken-Rad Transmitting Tube Corporation, a Kentucky corpora-
tion, maintaining its principal office and place of business at Owens-
boro, Kentucky, is engaged in the manufacture of radio transmitting
tubes The Transmitting Corporation has been engaged in business
approximately 2 or 3 month. All of its products are sold directly
to the United States Government or its agencies Officers of the cor-
poration estimated that approximately 95 percent of the raw materials
which will be used by the coi poration 'will be purchased outside the
State of Kentucky, and that approximately 97 percent of its finished
products will be sold and shipped to points outside the. State of Ken-
tucky The Company admits that both corporations are engaged in
commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
H IHE OBC &NIZATIONS INVOLVED
International Union,, United Automobile Workers of America, is a
labor organization affiliated with the American Federation of Labor,
admitting to membership employees of the Company.
United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America is a
labor organization affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organ-
KEN-RAD TUBE AND LAMP CORPORATION ' 1237
izations , admitting to membership employees in the production and
maintenance divisions of the Company.
III THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On June 18, 1942, the A F of L requested recognition as exclusive
bargaining agent for the employees of the Tube Corporation. The
Tube Corporation declined to recognize the petitioner unless and
until it had been certified by the Board. Thereafter, the A. F. of L.
requested recognition as exclusive baigaining agent for the employees
of the Transmitting Corporation. The Transmitting Corporation
declined to recognize the petitioner unless and until it had been certi-
fied by the Board. '
A statement of the Regional Director introduced in evidence at the
hearing indicates that the A F of L represents a substantial number of
employees in the unit hereinafter found 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 A F of L requests that separate elections be held among the
employees of the Transmitting Corporation and among the employees "
of the Tube CoI poration. It contends that the Transmitting Cor-
poration is an independent enterprise, still largely in the experimental
stage, and largely dependent for its continued existence upon the
progress of the war effort. In the few weeks preceding the hearing it
has employed a great many people, and there is no indication as to
how large its employment rolls will become or when employment will
reach its peak The A F of L further requests, however, that inn the
event that it is chosen exclusive bargaining repiesentative by the em-
ployees of both the Tube Corporation and the Transmitting Corpora-
tion, the two plants should then be treated as a single unit for the
purposes of collective bargaining The Company contends that both
plants constitute a single unit and that only one election should be
held among all its employees
The Transmitting Corporation is a wholly owned subsidiary of the
Tube Corporation and is regarded by the officials of the Company as
1 The A F of L presented 1,192 application cards, of which 1,113 were found to bear
the apparently genuine original signatures of persons appearing on the Company 's pay rolls
of Tuly 1, 1942 At the hearing the A F of L submitted 480 additional application
cards of which 460 were found to bear apparently genuine original signatures of
persons on the Company' s pay rolls of July 1, 1942 These pay rolls contained the names
of 3,103 emplo3ees, of which 2 , 838 were employees of the Tube Corporation and 263 were
employees of the Transmitting Corporation Of the 1 , 573 application cards presented
by the A F of L, which were found to bear appal ently genuine original signatures of
persons on the Company 's pay rolls of that date , 1,507 were found to bear the names of
persons employed by the Tube Corporation and 66 sere found to bear the names of
persons employed by the Transmitting Corporation
1238 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
a mere division or department of the Tube Corporation Both cor-
porations have the same officers and directors and the same general
manager The two plants are connected by a bridge which spans the
10-foot alleyway which separates them Both plants are engaged in
the same type of work and many of the parts which are used in the
transmitting plant are made in the tube plant Similarly, items manu-
factured in the tube plant are often finished in the transmitting plant.
Both plants are maintained by the same machine shop and a single grid
department and parts department supply both plants The clerical
work for both plants is done in the office of the Tube Corporation and
the personnel department of the Tube Corporation handles all per-
sonnel problems of the Transmitting Corporation as well In addition,
the work of the employees of the two corporations is similar, the key
employees of the Transmitting Corporation are being drawn primarily
from the employees of the Tube Corporation, and there will be, accord-
ing to the Company, a constant interchange of employees between the
two plants.
We are of the opinion and find that the unit appropriate for the
purposes of collective bargaining consists of employees of both the
Tube Corporation and the Transmitting Corporation
The parties agreed that all production and maintenance employees
should be included in the appropriate unit, and that foremen, assist-
ant foremen, watchmen, plant protection employees, office employees,
and nurses should be excluded from the unit The A F of L. would,
in addition, exclude instructors, factory clerks, timekeepers, and all
employees in the engineering department The Company considers
that these groups of employees are non-supervisory production and
maintenance employees and would- include them in the unit The
Company contends, however, that if instructors are excluded, then
department maintenance nien, whom the A F of L would include,
should likewise be excluded because they allegedly exercise more
supervisory control over employees than do the instructors. We shall
discuss instructors, department maintenance men, timekeepers, factory
clerks, and employees of the engineering department in that order.
Instructors , The A. F of L contends that instructors, of whom
there are 65 in the plants of the Company, are supervisory employees
and should therefore be excluded from the unit The evidence dis-
closes that there are 2 or 3 instructors on each floor of the Company's
plants and that instructors are not connected 'with any particular
machine or unit but operate throughout their floor It is the duty of,
the instructors to teach the operators how to perform the various-
operations, to answer the operators' questions on problems concerning
their work, to suggest to the foremen which operations each employee
is best able to do, and occasionally to assign work to the operators.
The instructors have no power to hire or discharge employees, but
4
KEN-RAD TUBE AND LAMP CORPORATION 1239
they may repimand operators for inferior workmanship and recom-
mend to the foreman the dischaige`of incompetent operators They
apparently act as intermediaries between the employees and the fore-
men in the issuance of orders and with respect to applications for
leaves of absence Occasionally the instructors relieve the operators
and work on the machines for a few minutes themselves Instructors
are paid at a higher hourly wage rate than are operators Although
the evidence is conflicting, it appears that the employees regard in-
structors as "bosses "
Department maintenance men The testimony of a foreman and
of a department maintenance man indicates that each department
maintenance man has charge of 2 machines or units and of between
9 and 14 operators employed on each unit. It is the duty of the
maintenance man to.keep the machines in proper working order, to
keep the correct number of operators on each tent, and to ascertain
whether the operators are performing their fobs, properly so that
the items produced may be of standard quality and sufficient quantity
He may explain to the operators the proper performance of their
tasks and has authority to recommend to the foreman that in-
efficient operators be placed on other jobs Maintenance men are more
highly paid than operators It is the contention of the Company
that the department maintenance man is really a type of assistant
foreman The A F of L , however, contends that the department
maintenance men are primarily production employees with only inci-
dental supervisory functions and not like the instructors, essentially
supervisory employees ,
We find, however, that both instructors and department mainte-
nance men exercise substantial supervisory powers and for this reason
we shall exclude both groups from the unit
Timekeepers The A F of L contends that timekeepers are office
employees and, as such, should be excluded The evidence discloses
that there are from one to two timekeepers in each department. All
but one are salaried employees They are under control of the office
manager and enter the plant through the office entrance. They are
regarded by the factory employees as office employees Chester Gleim,
designated on the Company's pay roll as a "stock room clerk," is the
only timekeeper on an hourly basis, it appeal s, however, that his
duties are the same as those of the other timekeepers We find that all
of the timekeepers, including Chester Gleim, are office employees and
we consequently exclude them from the unit.
Factory clerics These employees are engaged in collecting, check-
ing, and tabulating production data They work in the factory and
are under the'supervision of the foremen of the various departments
in which they work They are paid on an hourly basis and are not
subject to the supervision of the office manager We find that factory
1240 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
clerks are • production employees, and shall include them in the unit
The engineering department. The A F of L contends that all
employees in the engineering department of the plant should be ex-
eluded from the unit herein found appropriate because the nature
of the work performed in that depaitment is experimental and of a
confidential nature 2 The evidence discloses that some of the em-
ployees in the engineering depaitment are college graduates with
engineering degrees These men supervise the construction of the
tubes and conduct experiments leading to improvement of the prod-
ucts They are in charge of all employees in the engineering de-
partment The Company concedes that these employees should be
excluded from the unit. The Company contends, however, that em-
ployees of the engineering department who perform manual labor,
such as radio tube opei ations,3 check inspectors and laboratory assist-
ants,' production engineers, and engineering clerks,6 should be in-
cluded in the unit.
We are of the opinion and find, however, that the engineering de-
partment is primarily an experimental department of the Company
and that the employees in the engineering department are not essen-
tially production employees We shall therefore exclude all em-
ployees in the engineering department, from the unit.
We accordingly find that all production and maintenance employ-
ees employed by the Ken-Rad Tube and Lamp Corporation and the
Ken-Rad Transmitting Tube Corporation, including factory clerks,
but excluding foremen, assistant foremen, instructors, department
maintenance men, watchmen, plant protection employees, office em-
ployees, timekeepers, all employees in the engineering department,
and nurses, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of col-
lective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
On July 10, 1942, the C I. 0 asked leave to intervene in the pro-
ceedings on the ground that it represented a majority of the em-
ployees in the radio, tube, and lamp industries throughout the United
States The C I 0 submitted no evidence that it represented any
of the employees of the Company either to the Regional Director
or to the Trial Examiner However, it requested that, in the event
2 This position is taken despite the fact that 5 employees out of 40 employed in the engi-
neering department signed application cards for membership in the A F of L
3These employees mix and process the chemicals that go into the tubes They are paid,
on an hourly basis and no special trainirg is required for the work
4 These employees test and inspect the finished tubes to ascertain whether they conform
to specifications They are paid on an hourly basis
These employees conduct simple experiments tinder the direction of the engineers
They are paid on an hourly basis and no special training is required for their work
"These employees collect supplies and arrange materials for the engineers Some
operate photostat machines They aie paid on an hourly basis
4
KEN-RAD TUBE AND LAMP CORPORATION 1241,
the Board directs an election, it be granted permission to submit such
evidence within 10 days of the election and further requested that
its name appear on the ballot. Both the Company and the A. F of
L contend that since the C I. 0 did not present any evidence of mem-
bership either before or at the hearing, the C. I. 0 should not ap-
pear on the ballot In view of the failure of the C I 0 to pre-
sent any evidence of membership we shall not accord it a place on the
ballot
We shall direct that the question conceiving 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 peiiod immediately preceding the date of our Direction of
Election, 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 Re-
lations Act, 49 Stat. 449, and pursuant to Article III, Section 8, of
National Labor Relations Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as
amended, it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Ken-Rad Tube
and Lamp Corporation, Owensboro, Kentucky, and Ken-Rad Trans-
mitting Tube Corporation, Owensboro, Kentucky, 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 of Election, under the
direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Eleventh
Region (Indianapolis, Indiana), acting in this matter as agent for
the National Labor Relations Board and subject to Article III, Sec-
tion 9, of said Rules and Regulations, among all employees of the
Company 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
durinj such pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation or
in the active military service or training of the United States, or
temporarily laid off, but excluding those employees who have since
quit or been discharged for cause, to determine whether or not they
desire to be represented by the International Union, United Auto-
mobile Workers of America, affiliated with the American Federation
of Labor, for the purposes of collective bargaining.
MR. GniARD D. REILLY took no part in the consideration of the
above Decision and Direction of Election.