Ripley Manufacturing Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Feb 12, 1947

72 N.L.R.B. 559 (N.L.R.B. 1947)

In the Matter Of R IPLEY MANUFACTURING COMPANY , EMPLOYER and
INTERNATIONAL UNION, UNITED AUTOMOBILE , AIRCRAFT & AGRICUL-
TURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA (UAW-CIO), PETITIONER
Case No. 7-R-2425.-Decided February 12,1947
Mr. C. R. Meyers, of Croswell, Mich., and Miller, Can field, Paddock,
and Stone, by Mr. Emmett Fagan, of Detroit, Mich., for the Employer.
Maurice Sugar and N. L. S7nokler, by Mr. N. L. Smokier, of Detroit,
Mich., for the Petitioner.
Mr. Keith Dennison, of Croswell, Mich., for the Independent.
Mr. Philip Licari, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon an amended petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held
at Port Huron, Michigan, on September 17, 1946, before Meyer D.
Stein, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hear-
ing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations
Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
Ripley Manufacturing Company, a Michigan corporation, is en-
gaged at Croswell and Cass City, Michigan, in the manufacture and
sale of wire cloth products and perforated metal. The Employer's
plants in both cities are involved in this proceeding. During the year
1945, the Employer purchased raw materials valued in excess of
$200,000, of which 50 percent was obtained from sources outside the
State of Michigan. During the same period, the Employer sold
finished products valued in excess of $200,000, of which 50 percent was
shipped to points outside that State.
The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
72 N. L. It. B., No. 106. 559
731242-47-vol. 72-37
560 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress
of Industrial Organizations, admitting to membership employees of
the Employer.
Independent Screen and Strainer Workers, herein called the Inter-
venor, is a labor organization admitting to membership employees of
the Employer.'
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Employer refuses to recognize the Petitioner or Intervenor as
the exclusive bargaining representative of employees of the Employer
until either has been certified by the Board in an appropriate unit.
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning
the representation of employees of the Employer, within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Petitioner seeks a unit of all the Employer's employees at the
Croswell, Michigan, plant, including factory clerks, but excluding
office and clerical employees, foremen, and all other supervisory em-
ployees. Although in agreement as to the specific composition of the
foregoing unit, the Employer and the Intervenor contend that the
Employer's two plants located at Croswell and Cass City, Michigan,
respectively, together constitute an appropriate unit.
The Employer's plants at Croswell and Cass City are approximately
54 miles apart. There is no history of collective bargaining with re-
spect to either plant. The record discloses that although the two
plants are functionally related and are subject to certain over-all
managemelit policies, each of the plants is under separate supervision,
which includes independent authority to hire and discharge employ-
ees, the method of payment of wages for the two plants is different,2
the Employer maintains separate pay rolls at each plant, and there
is no interchange of employees. In view of the foregoing, and in the
absence of a history of collective bargaining on a broader basis, we are
I In the event the Board directs an election in this case , the Petitioner seeks to prevent
the Intervenor from appearing on the ballot , on the ground that it is not a bona fide labor
organization Although the Intervenor does not have a constitution or bylaws and does
not yet collect dues from its members, the record discloses that it has held a membership
meeting , at which officers were elected , that it has secured a petition from the Emplovei's
employees authorizing it to represent them , and that it has sought to engage in collective
bargaining with the Employer , with respect to wages, hours, and conditions of employment.
In view of the foregoing, we find that the Intervenor is a labor organization within the
meaning of the Act. See Matter of Gielow Inc., 60 N L R B 1477 , Matter of Air Reduc-
tion Sales Company, 58 N L R B 522 ; and Matter of Frigidatire Division , General Motors
Corporation , 39 N L R B 1108
2 The employees at the Croswell plant are paid on an hourly basis , whereas those at the
Cass City plant are paid on an incentive -pay plan.
RIPLEY MANUFACTURING COMPANY 561
of the opinion that the employees at the Croswell plant only constitute
a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining.3
We find that all the employees at the Employer's Croswell, Michi-
gail, plant, including factory clerks, but.excluding office and clerical
employees, foremen, and all other supervisory employees with an-
thority to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect
changes in the status of employees, or effectively recommend such ac-
tion, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bar-
gaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.4
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining with Ripley Manufacturing Company,
Croswell, Michigan, 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 Seventh Region, acting in this matter as agent for
the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Sections 203.55
and 203.56, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regula-
tions-Series 4, 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 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 per-
son 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 election, to determine whether they desire to,
be represented by International Union, United Automobile, Aircraft
Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW-CIO), or by
Independent Screen and Strainer Workers, for the purposes of collec-
tive bargaining, or by neither.
S See Matter of Mountain Ice and Fuel Corporation , 71 N. L. R. B. 180 , Matter of May,
McEwen Kaiser Company, May Full -Fashioned Division, 66 N. L R. B. 1341 ; Matter of
Salant & Salant Inc., 69 N. L. R. B. 84.
4 Although the Intervenor submitted evidence of some membership among the employees
at the Cass City plant , we shall not direct an election among them inasmuch as neither the
Petitioner nor the Intervenor has requested an election in a unit confined to the employees
at that plant.