Reed Roller Bit Co.Download PDFNational Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsSep 22, 194458 N.L.R.B. 488 (N.L.R.B. 1944) Copy Citation In the Matter of REED ROLLER BIT COMPANY and UNITED STEEL- WORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO, LOCAL UNION 2083 / Case No. 16-R-89If.Decided September 02,1944 Messrs. Vinton, Elkins, Weer cC Francis, by Messrs. Wharton Weems and Leroy Jeffers, both of Houston, Tex., for the Company. Messrs. TV. A. Combs, A. F. Jackson, and Lawrence Rench, all of Houston, Tex., for the Steelworkers. Messrs. Lee Thomas Phillips and Claude E. Morris, both of Houston, Tex., for the Weldors. Messrs. Walter L. Grant, H. L. Wolf, and A. E. Houser, all of Hous- ton, Tex., for the Council. Mr. David V. Easton, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION STATEMENT OF THE CASE Upon a petition duly filed by United Steelworkers of America, CIO, Local Union 2083, herein called the Steelworkers, alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of Reed Roller Bit Company, Houston, Texas, herein called the Company, the National Labor Relations Board provided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice before Milton A. Nixon, Trial Examiner. Said hearing Was held at Houston, Texas, on June 15 and 16, 1914. The Company, the Steelworkers, Houston Metal Trades Council, A. F. of L., herein called the Council, and United Brother- hood of Weldors, Cutters and Helpers of America, Local #5, herein called the Weldors, appeared, participated, and were afforded full •opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine Witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues. During the hearing the Council moved to dismiss the petition. The Trial Examiner reserved ruling upon this motion for the Board. The motion is hereby denied. The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are free from preju- dicial error and are hereby affirmed. All parties were afforded an opportunity to We briefs with the Board. 58 N. L. R. B., No 94 488 REED ROLLER BIT COMPANY 489 On July 22, 1944, the Board issued an order reopening the proceed- ing,for the purpose of receiving into evidence a Supplemental Report on Investigation of Interest of Contending Labor Organizations. Thereafter an agent of the Board prepared such Supplemental Report. Subsequently, a, stipulation was executed by all parties to this proceed- ing, providing, inter atia, that it and the Supplemental Report be made part of the record without issuance of a further Notice of Hear- ing. The stipulation is approved, and both it and the Supplemental Report are hereby made part of the record. Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY Reed Roller Bit Company, a Texas corporation, is engaged in the manufacture of oil and drilling tools and various items of war equip- ment. For' these purposes it operates two manufacturing plants located at Houston, Texas, and numerous warehouses and branch offices located in the States of California, Oklahoma, Texas, and Wyoming, as well as in the Dominion of Canada. We are solely concerned herein with the Company's two manufacturing plants at Houston, Texas. The Company purchases a, substantial amount of raw materials for use in its Houston plants from points outside the State of Texas, and, dur- ing the past 6 months a substantial amount of all finished items manu- factured by the Company at these plants was shipped outside the State of Texas. The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED United Steelworkers of America, Local Union 2083, is a labor organi- zation affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, ad- mitting to membership employees of the Company. Houston Metal Trades Council composed of a number of member labor organizations, is a labor organization affiliated with the Ameri- can Federation of Labor, admitting to membership employees of the Company. United Brotherhood of Weldors, Cutters and Helpers of America, Local #5, is an unaffiliated labor organization, admitting to member- ship employees of the Company. III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION On or about March 22, 1944, the Steelworkers requested recognition from the Company as the collective bargaining representative of cer- tain of its employees. The Company takes the position, inter alia, that. 490 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD its current collective bargaining agreement with the Council precludes it from granting such recognition. The contract between the Company and the Council, covering all hourly paid employees of the Company's Houston plants, provides that it "shall remain in effect from January 4, 1943 to January 2, 1944, in- clusive, and thereafter until terminated by thirty (30) days' written notice by either party." In View of this provision, we find the agree- ment between the Company and the Council to be one of indefinite duration, and, consequently, no bar to a current determination of representatives'- Statements of a Field Examiner for the Board, made part of the record, indicate that the Steelworkers represent a substantial number of employees in the unit hereinafter found appropriate 2 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. IF. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT In its original petition , the Steelworkers sought a unit of produc- tion and maintenance employees , exclusive of clerical and supervisory personnel engaged at the Company 's Main Plant. At the hearing, however, and in its brief , the Steelworkers amended its petition by indicating that, should the Board find appropriate a unit comprised of the employees of both Houston plants , it desired a place upon the ballot in any election conducted among such employees . Both the Company and the Council contended that the employees of both Houston plants constitute the only appropriate unit. The Weldors seeks a unit consisting of various classifications of Weldors , welding inspectors , and welding leadmen .engaged in- the Company's Main Plant. As previously stated, the Company operates two manufacturing plants in Houston , Texas. One, known as the Main Plant, is en- gaged primarily in the manufacture of miscellaneous oil tool sup- 1 Matter of La-Plant-Choate Mfg Co., Inc , 29 N. L R H. 40 , Mattel of Allegheny Lud- lum Steel Corporation, 40 N L It Ii 1285. 2In his original statement, the Field Examiner reported that the Steelworkers submitted •638 designations hearing apparently genuine anginal signatures of persons whose names appeared on the Company's Alain Plant pay roll of April 7, 1944, and that this pay roll contained the names of 1,980 employees in the requested unit . He further reported that the Welders submitted 52 designations containing apparently genuine original signatures of persons appearing upon the afore -mentioned pay roll and that there were 353 employees In the unit sought by it (The record indicates that actually there are approximately 169 employees in the unit requested by the Weldors ) In his Supplemental Report, the Field Examiner stated that the Steelworkers submitted 802 designations containing the names of persons who appear upon the Company ' ,; pay rolls for the period ending July 23, 1944, and,that the. Company employed 2,424 employees at both its,IIouston plants on that date The Council relies"iipon its curreii1^c611ective bntlcgauiing, agarencut with . the Coni,hany for the establishment of its interest REED ROLLER BIT COMPANY 491 plies and, to a lesser extent, products used in furtherance of the war effort. The other, designated as the Transmission Divisions, is a comparatively new plant,' at which the Company has been engaged primarily, until very recently, in the manufacture of war material. At the present time, in addition to its production of war material, the Transmission Division is producing considerable quantities of oil tool equipment. It is evident from the record that both plants perform similar operations and are equipped to produce similar products. Each plant has separate storage facilities, and purchases and supplies are consigned to each separately. Both plants, however, are under the supervision of a common factory manager to whom factory superintendents at each plant are responsible. Both are governed by the same rules and regulations of the Company, and job classifications, wage rates, and conditions of employment are substantially the same at each. The Company employs a single chief engineer, master mechanic, purchasing agent, and personnel director, each having assistants at both plants. The Company's seniority is predicated upon a two-plant basis and em- ployees suffer no loss of seniority when transferred from one plant to the other. The record indicates that there have been substantial transfers of both personnel and machinery between the two plants. It further indicates that items pass through both plants for process- ing. The Company issues separate payrolls for each plant, but these pay rolls originate from a common accounting office, although it main- tains separate maintenance crews for each plant, both are under the supervision of the master mechanic. In addition, the Main Plant operates three shifts, whereas the Transmission Division, with the exception of its heat treating department, operates but two. The Company and the Council have had a continuous history of contractual'relations since 1937. In 1942, after the Transmission Divi- sion had been placed in operation, the contract between them, then covering only employees of the Main Plant, was extended to include employees engaged at the Transmission Division. The contract cur- rently in effect between these parties includes the employees at both plants within a single unit.4 In view of the foregoing facts, we are of the opinion that employees of both Houston plants of the Company properly comprise a single collective bargaining unit. The Weldors, as noted above, seeks a unit comprised of certain em- ployees engaged solely at the Main Plant. These employees are scat- tered throughout several departments, are not segregated from the 8 The Transmission Division was acquired by Lease from the-Defense Plant Corporation in the early part of 1942. The 1943 contract stated that this agreement shall apply to the present Houston plants of the Company W 492 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD other employees in their departments, and are under the supervision of the same production supervisors as such other employees. Throughout the entire collective bargaining history of the Company, the employees sought by the Weldors have formed part of a more comprehensive collective bargaining unit. In view ,of the absence of segregation and the bargaining history, we are of the'opinion that the proposed unit nought by the Weldors is inappropriate. We find that all production and maintenance employees of the Company at both its Houston plants, excluding clerical employees and all supervisory employees with authority to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or effectively recommend such action, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining, within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act. V.' TILE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES We find that the question concerning representation which has arisen can best be resolved by an election by secret ballot. The Steel- workers requested that eligibility to participate in the election be determined as of June 11, 1944. However, insufficient reason appear- ing in support of this request, we shall adhere to our customary policy, and shall direct that the employees of the Company eligible to vote -in the election shall be those in the appropriate unit who were em= ployed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of the Direction of Election herein, subject to the limitations and addi= tions 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 Rela- tions 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 Reed Roller Bit Company, Houston, Texas, an election by secret ballot shall be con- ducted 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 Sixteenth 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 em- In view of our finding in Section IV , supra, we further find that the Weldors does not have sufficient interest among the employees in the appropriate unit to warrant their paN ticipation in-the election hereinafter directed Accordingly , we shall not place them on the ballot. REED ROLLER BIT COMPANY 493 ployees 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 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 States who present themselves in person at the polls, but excluding any who have since quit or been discharged for cause and have not been rehired or reinstated prior to the date of the election, to determine whether they desire to be represented by United Steelworkers of America, Local Union 2083, affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, or by Houston Metal Trades Council, affiliated with the American Federation, of Labor, for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by neither. Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation