The American Fork and Hoe Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 4, 1944

57 N.L.R.B. 1072 (N.L.R.B. 1944)

t
In the Matter of THE AMERICAN FORK AND HOE COMPANY and UNITED
STEELWORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO
Case No. 8-R-1556.-Decided August 4, 1944
Messrs. Herman A. Bayless, and Pearl H. Boerngen, of Cincinnati,
Ohio, for,the Company. '
Mr. James P. Griffin, of Youngstown, Ohio, for the CIO.
Mr. A. P. Nobozny, of Cleveland, Ohio, for the I. A. M.
Mr. Philip,Licari, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
t
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon a petition duly-filed by United Steelworkers of America, CIO,
herein called the CIO, alleging that a question affecting commerce
shad arisen concerning the representation of employees of The Ameri-
can Fork and Hoe Company, Conneaut, Ohio, herein called the Com-
pany, the National Labor Re]ations,Board provided for an appropriate
hearing upon due notice before Frank L. Danello, Trial Examiner.
Said hearing was held at Cleveland, Ohio, on June 29, 1944. The
Company and the CIO and International Association of Machinists,
A. F. L., herein called the I. A. M.,' appeared and participated. All
parties were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to examine and
cross-examine witnesses,' and to introduce evidence bearing on the
issues. At the hearing, the I. A. M. moved to dismiss the petition on
the ground that an existing contract constitutes a bar to the instant
proceeding. The motion was referred to the Board by the Trial
Examiner. For reasons stated in Section III, infra, the motion is
denied. The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hearings are free
from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. All parties were
afforded an opportunity to file briefs with the Board.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
l Apparently Lodge 1454 of the I. A M. Is the labor organization more particularly
concerned herein. The Lodge and its parent are collectively referred to as the I. A. M.
57 N. L R. B., No. 156.
1072
THE AMERICAN FORK AND HOE COMPANY 1073
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
The American Fork and Hoe Company, an Ohio corporation with
its principal office in Cleveland, Ohio, is engaged in the manufacture
of farm, garden, and industrial tools. The Company operates 18
plants located in various parts of the United States. This proceeding
'involves the Company's Conneaut Shovel Works located at Conneaut,
Ohio. During the calendar year 1943, the Company purchased for the
Conneaut Shovel Works raw materials valued at approximately $200,-
000, of which 40 percent was shipped from points outside the State
of Ohio. During the same period, the Conneaut Shovel Works pro-
duced finished goods valued at approximately $786,000, of which over
75 percent was shipped to points outside the State of Ohio.
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, affiliated with the Congress-of In-
dustrial Organizations, is a labor organization admitting to member-
ship employees of the Company.
International Association of Machinists, affiliated with the Ameri-
can Federation of Labor, is a labor organization admitting to mem-
bership employees of the Company.
III. TILE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
As a result of a consent election held under the auspices of the Board
in 1941, the I. A. M. was selected by the Company's productioif and
maintenance employees as their exclusive bargaining representative.
Subsequently, on August 1, 1941, the Company and the I. A. M. entered
into a collective bargaining agreement which was renewed from year
to year until August 1, 1943. Prior to the expiration of this agree-
ment, the I. A. M. notified the Company that it wished to commence
negotiations for a new contract. During the ensuing negotiations
certain issues concerning wages -and vacation rights were submitted
to the National War Labor Board for determination. On January
18, 1944, the National War Labor Board issued a directive order con-
cerning all disputed matters. Thereafter, on April 14, 1944, the Com-
pany and the I. A. M. entered into a collective bargaining agreement
retroactively effective as of August 1, 1943, to remain in force until
August 1, 1944, and subject to automatic renewal from-year to year in
the absence of notice given by either party 30 days prior to any -anni-
versary date, of a desire to change or abrogate the contract.
601248-45-vol 57=69
I
1074 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
On May 16, 1944, the 'CIO requested recognition as the exclusive
bargaining representative for the Company's production and mainte-
nance employees at the Conneaut plant. On June 21, 1944, the Com-
pany replied that, since it was operating under a current collective
bargaining agreement with the I. A. -M., it could not recognize the
CIO.
It is urged by the I. A. M. that its existing contract serves to bar the
instant proceeding. Since, however, the CIO apprised the Company
of its claim to representation prior to the operative date of the auto-
matic renewal clause contained in the contract, it is clear that the con-
tract does not preclude a determination of representatives.2
It is also asserted, in substance, by the I. A. M., that the doctrine
of the Allis-Chalmers case 3 is applicable to the instant proceeding
because resort was had to the processes of the National War Labor
--Board and, consequently, the petition should be dismissed. We do
not agree. The I. A. M. is not a newly recognized representative
which was deprived of a reasonable opportunity to secure for the
employees the benefits of representation, as evidenced by a collec-
tive bargaining contract, by delay caused by the submission of un-
settled matters to the National War Labor Board for determination.
Since 1941, the I. A. M. has acted on behalf of the Company's em-
ployees. In that year it secured a , collective bargaining agreement
with the Company,which was renewed until 1943. Therefore, we are
of the opinion that no bar exists to an immediate determination of
representatives.4
A statement of a Field Examiner for the Board, introduced into
evidence at the hearing, indicates that the CIO represents a substan-
tial 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
We And., in agreement with a-stipulation of the parties, that all pro-
duction and maintenance employees at the Company's Conneaut plant,
'Matter o f Erie City Iron - Works, 47 N . L R. B 381 . Despite the International's
assertion that Lodge 1454 had no power to terminate the agreement signed in 1944, we
note that Lodge 1454 , the signatory to the agreement, gave notice to the Company on
-June 23, 1944 , that it desired to terminate the agreement.
s See Matter of Alltis-Chalmers Manufacturing Company, 50 N. L. It. B. 306.
4 See Matter of MacClatchie Manufacturing Company , 53 N L R B 1268.
e The Field Examiner reported that the CIO submitted 116 authorization cards, all of
which bore apparently genuine original signatures ; and that the names of 111 persons
appearing on the cards were listed on the Company 's pay roll of June 15 , 1944, which
contained the names of 137 employees in the alleged appropriate unit. ' The I. A. M.
relies on its contract with the Company as evidence of interest in this proceeding.,
THE AMERICAN FORK AND, HOE COMPANY 1075
including watchmen ,6 but excluding clerical employees and supervisory
employees with authority to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or
otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or effectively recom-
mend such action, constitute a unit appropriate for the purpose of
collective bargaining ^vithin the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
We shall direct that the question concerning 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 period immediately preceding the date of the Direction of Election
herein, 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 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 im-estlgation to ascertain represent-
atives for the purposes of collective bargaining with The American
Fork and Hoe Company, Conneaut, Ohio, an election by secret ballot
shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than thirty (30)
days from the date of this Directiqn, under the direction and super-
vision of the Regional Director for the Eighth 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 employees in the unit found appropriate in Section IV,
above, who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately pre-
ceding 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 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
United Steelworkers of America, affiliated with the Congress of Indus-
trial • Organizations, or by International Association of Machinists,
affiliated with the American- Federation of Labor, for the purposes of
collective bargaining, or by neither. -
CHAIRMAN MILLIS took no part in the consideration of the above-
Decision and Direction of Election.
The Company employs three watchmen at its Conneaut plant . These employees are
neither armed nor uniformed , and have been bargained for by the Company and the
1. A M as part of the unit covered by the agreements made between them.