The Oliver Farm Equipment Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Feb 28, 1944

55 N.L.R.B. 118 (N.L.R.B. 1944)

In the Matter, of THE OLIVER FARM EQUIPMENT COMPANY and AMERI-
CAN FEDERATION OF LABOR
Case No. 14-R-847.-Decided February 28, 1944
Mr. E: J. Moyer, of Shelbyville, Ill., and Mr. J. C. Wittner,
Chicago, Ill., for the Company. ,
Mr. Fred Olds, of East St. Louis, Ill., for the Union.
Mr. David V. Easton, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
'Upon a petition duly filed by American Federation of Labor,
herein called the Union, alleging that a-question affecting commerce
had arisen concerning the representation of employees of The Oliver
Farm Equipment Company, Shelbyville, Illinois, the National Labor
Relations Board provided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice
before Charles E. Persons, Trial Examiner. Said hearing was held
at Shelbyville, Illinois, on January 27, 1944. The Company and the
Union appeared, participated, and were afforded full opportunity
to be heard, to examine 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.
All parties were afforded opportunity to file briefs with the Board.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
. The Oliver Farm,Equipment Company, a Delaware corporation
with its principal office located in Chicago, Illinois, operates plants
in the States of Iowa, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio,'and Illinois. We.
are concerned herein with the operation of the Company's plant
located it Shelbyville, Illinois, where the Company is engaged in
the manufacture of hay balers and some railroad track for railroads
55 N L R. B, No. 21. '
118
THE OLIVER FARM EQUIPMENT COMPANY 119
and mines . During the Company's fiscal -year between November 1,
1942, and November 1, 1943, it , purchased raw , materials valued at
approximately $600,000, of which about 50 percent was shipped to
its Shelbyville plant from points outside the State of Illinois. Dur-
ing the same period, said plant produced finished products valued
at- approximately $1,000,000, of which about 90 percent was sold to
buyers located at points outside the State of Illinois.
The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED ,
Federal Labor Union No. 23575 is a labor organization affiliated
with the American Federation of Labor , admitting to membership
employees of the Company.'
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
-The Company has refused to grant recognition to the Union as the
,exclusive bargaining representative of certain of its employees until
the Union hag been certified by the.Board in an appropriate unit.
A statement of, the Regional Director, introduced into evidence at
the hearing, indicates that the Union 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 Union seeks to represent a unit, composed, of all hourly paid
production and maintenance employees in the Company.'s production
plant,, foundry, and wood -shop,, including- =-boilerhouse., employees,
janitors, servicemen, foundry employees, shipping clerks, and working
foremen, but excluding superintendents, general foremen, office,work-
ers; timekeepers,- 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. „ The
,Company, although .agreeing generally with the proposed unit, con-
tends that its maintenance man, watchmen, shipping clerks, field,
servicemen,3 and working foremen should be excluded therefrom.
1 The record shows that although ,the petition was filed by the "American Federation of
Labor" all parties agreed that the subsidiary local organization more directly involved
herein is Federal - Labor Union No. 23575.
'The Regional Director reported that the Union submitted 113 designations and that
there are approximately 140 employees in the proposed unit. - '
3 These employees are designated by the Union as "servicemen." , , ,
120 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
The record shows that the maintenance man has general responsi-
bility for the installation and maintenance of machinery in the plant
and for its electrical wiring and equipment. He has assigned to him
one permanent assistant, and is permitted such further help as the
performance of his duties requires. Thus, under certain circum-
stances, he may have as many as 12 employees working under his
direction. Although he does not hire or discharge employees, he may
request that certain persons assigned to him be replaced because of
inefficiency or other reasons, and is able to make recommendations
respecting the status of these employees. Under these circumstances,
we are of the opinion that he falls within our customary supervisory
definition, and we shall therefore exclude him from the unit.
The Company employs four watchmen who are primarily concerned
with the prevention of fire and theft, and have no duties pertaining
to the discipline of employees. They are neither uniformed nor mili-
tarized. Under these circumstances, we shall include them within
the unit.
The Company employs three shipping clerks who are occupied
exclusively with the writing of bills and the recording of shipments.
They handle no freight, and perform purely clerical duties under the
direct and sole supervision of the office manager. We are of the
opinion, therefore, that they would be more properly included within
a unit of office clerical employees, and, accordingly, we shall exclude
them from the present unit.
The Union desires the inclusion of two field servicemen employed
by the Company. These employees are sent by the Company to the
field in order to make adjustments and minor repairs on its products.
When not so occupied, they perform production work in the plant.
For this reason, the Union desires their inclusion within the unit,
whereas the Company contends that their inclusion or exclusion should
be dependent upon the amount of production work performed by them.
In view of the fact that these employees act, in some respects, as rep-
resentatives of the Company, we shall permit their inclusion or exclu-
sion to be determined in accordance with the Company's contention,
and shall exclude those field servicemen who spend the major portion
of their time in other than production work.
The Company employs several working foremen who have charge
of groups averaging approximately 15 employees. Although they do
not hire, discharge, promote, or transfer any of these employees, they
are consulted with respect to promotions and wage increases affecting
them. They attend foremen's meetings, and, in addition, receive
higher wages than the employees under their supervision. We are of
the opinion that these employees are supervisory, and we shall there-
fore exclude them from the unit.
t
THE OLIVER FARM, EQUIPMENT COMPANY 121
We find that all hourly paid production and maintenance, employees
of the Company at its Shelbyville, Illinois, plant, including boiler-
house employees, janitors, foundry employees, watchmen, and service-
men who' spend more than half their time in the performance : of
production work, but excluding' the maintenance man, timekeepers,
shipping clerks, working foremen, servicemen spending a major portion
of their time in other than production work, as well as 'all super-
visory employees with authority to - hire, promote, discharge, disci-
pline, or otherwise effect changes, in the status of employees, or effec-
tively'recommend such action, constitute a unit appropriate for the
purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning,of Section'9 (b)
of the Act. ,
V. THE DETERMINATION' OF REPRESENTATIVES
We find • that the question concerning, representation which , has
arisen' can best be resolved by an election by secret ballot. In Decem-
ber 1943, the assembly plant was completely destroyed by fire, with
the result that the Company was required to lay off a number of em-
ployees.- Many' of these employees were given -outright 'releases and
are considered by the Company as permanently severed from the pay
roll; others were given conditional releases, the Company; expecting
to recall such employees when it again resumes assembly work. The
Union contends that both groups of employees should be eligible to
vote, and foi this -reason, urges that the pay roll of December_ 21, 1943;
be used to determine eligibility. The Company, while it,agrees that
those employees who have been granted conditional releases and over
whom it still exercises certain rights with respect 'to reemployment,
should be eligible to vote, opposes- the inclusion ' dvi'thin 'the' voting
group of those employees who were given outright releases and who
are considered' by it as permanently severed from its pay roll. We
agree with the contention of the Company, and accordingly shall ad-
here to our customary practice of permitting temporarily laid-off em-
ployees 4 to participate in the election, and of denying participation to
those whose lay-off is considered permanent. We shall direct that the
employees of the Company eligible to vote in the election shall be those
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.5
4 Employees granted conditional releases, and over whom the Company still exercises
reemployment rights are hereby considered as coming within the category of temporarily
laid off employees '
5 The Union requests that it be designated upon the ballot as "American Federation of
Labor, Federal Labor Union No. 23575." This request is hereby granted.
122 DECISONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
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 Relations
Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3, it is hereby
DIxECTEI that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with The Oliver Farm
Equipment Company, Shelbyville, Illinois, 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 super-
vision of the Regional Director for the Fourteenth Region, acting in
this matter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and sub-
ject 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
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 or not they desire to be represented by Amer-
ican Federation of Labor, Federal Labor Union No. 23575, for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining.
MR. JOHN M. HousTON took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Direction of Election.