Westinghouse Electric & Manufacturing Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jan 17, 1942

38 N.L.R.B. 412 (N.L.R.B. 1942)

In the Matter Of WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC & MANUFACTURING COM-
PANY, LOUISVILLE ORDNANCE DIVISION and INTERNATIONAL ASSO-
CIATION OF MACHINISTS, LOCAL LODGE 681,
Case No. R-3394.-Decided January 17,194,0
Jurisdiction : armament apparatus manufacturing industry; plant owned by the
United States Navy Department and operated on its behalf by the Company
under a lease agreement.
Investigation and Certification of Representatives : existence of question : re-
fusal to accord union recognition until certified by the Board ; conflicting
claims of rival representatives ; organization which made no showing of rep-
resentation, but which based its claim of interest on contracts with the Com-
pany covering employees at its other plants, not accorded place on ballot ;
immediate election ordered notwithstanding stipulation that Board might
certify petitioner on the basis of evidence in the record and despite one of
the union's objections that no election should be held and petition should be
dismissed because plant is operating with less than one-fourth of its antici-
pated staff ; since expansion of plant is anticipated in a comparatively short
time Board will entertain a new petition if filed less than one year from any
certification in this proceeding, should it be satisfied under circumstances then
showing, that a question concerning representation exists.
Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : all production and maintenance
employees at the Louisville, Kentucky, plant of the Company, including group
leaders, but excluding executives, supervisory, and clerical employees, and
watchmen ; agreement as to
Mr. Harold M. Weston, for the Board.
Mr. William E. Miller, of Pittsburgh, Pa., for the Company.
Mr. Paul R. Hutchings, of Washington, D. C., for the I. A. M.
Mr. Fred Haug, of Sharon, Pa., and Mr. William Sentner, of St.
Louis, Mo., for the U. E. R. M.
Mr. Robert R. Hendricks, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On September 9, 1941, International Association of Machinists,
Local Lodge 681, herein called the I. A. M., filed with the Regional
Director for the Ninth Region (Cincinnati; Ohio) a petition alleging
38 N. L. R. B, No. 82.
412
WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC & MANUFACTURING COMPANY 413
that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the repre-
sentation of employees of the Louisville Ordnance Division, Louis-
ville, Kentucky, operated by Westinghouse Electric & Manufacturing
Company, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, herein called the Company,' and
requesting an investigation and certification of representatives pur-
suant to Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat.
449, herein called the Act. On November 5, 1941, the National Labor
Relations Board, herein called the Board, acting pursuant to Section
9 (c) of the Act, and Article III, Section 3, of National Labor Rela-
tions Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, ordered
an investigation and authorized the Regional Director to conduct it
and to provide for an appropriate hearing upon due notice.
On November 5; 1941, the Regional Director issued a notice of
hearing, copies of which were duly served upon,the Company and
the I. A. M. Pursuant to notice, a hearing was held on November 14,
1941, at Louisville,. Kentucky, before 'Josef L. Hektoen, the Trial
Examiner duly designated by the Chief Trial Examiner. During
the course of the hearing, United Electrical, Radio & Machine Work-
ers of America, affiliated with the C. I. 0., herein called the U. E.
R. M., filed a written motion to intervene in the proceeding. The
motion to intervene was granted by the Trial Examiner over, the
objection of the.I. A. M. Full opportunity to be heard, to examine
and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing on the
issues was afforded all parties. During the course of the hearing, the
Trial Examiner made various rulings on, other motions and on ob-
jections-to the admission of evidence. The Board has reviewed the
rulings of the Trial Examiner and finds that no prejudicial errors
were committed. The rulings are hereby affirmed. A brief filed by
the I. A. M. has been considered by the Board. With the leave of
the Board, and pursuant to notice, a hearing for the purpose of oral
argument was held before the Board, in Washington, D. C., On De-
cember 2, 1941. The I. A. M. and the U. E. R. M. appeared and
participated in the hearing; the Company appeared but did not
participate.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
The -Louisville Ordnance Division of Westinghouse Electric &
Manufacturing Company, a Pennsylvania corporation, is engaged in
the manufacture of armament apparatus, at Louisville, Kentucky.
1 Incorrectly named in the petition and order directing investigation and hearing as
Westinghouse Electric Mfg Co , Louisville Ordnance Division. At the hearing the petition
and order directing investigation and hearing were amended to designate the Company as
Westinghouse Electric & Manufacturing Company, Louisville Ordnance Division.
414 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
While the Louisville plant, including all tools and equipment, is owned
by the United States Navy Department, it is operated by the Com-
pany for, and on behalf of, the Navy Department under a lease
agreement. Approximately 90 percent of the raw materials used by
the Louisville Ordnance Division in the manufacture of armament is
obtained from points without the State of Kentucky. Approximately
all of the finished products of the plant will be shipped to points out-
side the State of Kentucky.'
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
International Association of Machinists, Local Lodge 681, is a labor
organization affiliated with the American Federation of Labor. It
admits to membership employees of the Company.
United Electrical, Radio R Machine Workers of America, is a labor
organization affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations.
It admits to membership employees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On September 9, 1941, representatives of the I. A. M. requested
recognition from the Company as the exclusive bargaining repre-
sentative of the employees in the unit claimed by it to be appropriate.
The Company refused to recognize the I. A. M., until such time as
it was certified by the Board.
A statement of the attorney for the Board introduced into evidence
at the hearing, and a pay-roll check statement'. prepared by the at-
torney for the Board after the hearing and made a part of the record
herein, disclose that the I. A. M. represents a substantial number of
employees in the unit alleged as appropriate.'
We find that a question has arisen concerning the representation
of employees at the Louisville Ordnance Division of the Company.
3 Although the plant began restricted production in August 1941, and is now in produc-
tion , no finished products had been turned out at the date. of hearing herein. Testimony at
the hearing disclosed that some of the units presently being manufactured and assembled
at the plant require several thousand man-hours of labor to complete.
4 Made pursuant to a stipulation entered into between the I. A. M. and the Company at
the hearing wherein both parties agreed that the Board might certify , upon the basis of a
check of I. A. M. authorization cards against the Company's pay roll, the I. A. M. as the
exclusive bargaining agent of the employees at the Louisville Ordnance Division. For rea-
sons hereinafter stated, we believe that the question concerning representation which we
hereinafter find to have arisen, can best be resolved by the holding of an election by secret
ballot.
6 The Board attorney ' s statement in the record shows that the I. A. M. submitted 175
authorization -for-representation cards , bearing dates ranging between August and October
1941 ; that 171 of these cards bore the apparently genuine signatures of persons whose
names appeared on the Company ' s pay roll of October 3, 1941 ; that, as of that date, there
were 188 employees in the unit claimed by the I. A. M. The Board attorney 's pay -roll check
statement , dated November 17, 1941 , shows that the I. A. M. submitted 233 authorization
cards bearing apparently genuine signatures ; that 222 of these cards bore the signatures of
persons whose names appeared on the Company 's pay roll of November 8, 1941; that the
Company's pay roll of that date listed 313 employees in the unit alleged as appropriate by
the I. A. M.
WEStrI'NGHOUSIE ELECTRIC & MANUFACTURING COMPANY 415
IV. THE EFFECT OF TIr -QUESTION - CONCERNING REPRESENTATION"
UPON COMMERCE
We find that • the question concerning representation which has
arisen, occurring in; connection with the operations of the Company
described in Section I above,' has a close, intimate , and substantial
relation to trade, traffic ,,and ommerce among the several States and
tends to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce
and the free flow of commerce. •
V. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The I. A. M. and the Company, agreed at the hearing, and we
find, that all production and maintenance employees, including' group
leaders, but excluding -executive, supervisory, and clerical employees,
and watchmen, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of
collective bargaining.s We also find that said unit will insure to
employees of _the Company the full benefit of their right to, self-
organization and -to collective bargaining and otherwise will effec-
tuate the policies of the Act. ,
VI. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES -
It appears from the record herein that the Louisville Ordnance
Division of the Company, while in actual production'and employing,
as of the date of hearing, some 313 production and maintenance em-
ployees, has not reached the peak of its planned expansion.' In
this respect the circumstances surrounding this proceeding are almost
identical to -the circumstances presented in the proceeding involving
the petition of the I. A. M. for an investigation and certification of
representatives at the Canton. Ohio, ordnance plant operated by the
Company .8
As in that proceeding, the U..E. R. M. herein- contends that the
petition should be dismissed and no election be directed on, the
ground that a certification at the present time-when the ' plant is
operating with but twenty percent of the working staff expected to
be necessary-would be premature in' that the large number of
workers who are expected to be employed within tlie^next year will
while the U. E. R M claimed tliat all hourly rated employees constitute the appropuatc
unit, it admitted at the hearing that the unit claimed by it is substantially the same as that
agreed upon by the I, A M and the Company
It was disclosed at the hearing that while restricted production at the Louisville Ord-
nance Division did not begin until August 1941, that it is now in production. The several
buildings presently comprising the plant are now practically completed and, at the date of
the hearing, 313 production and maintenance employees were engaged in work at the plant
The'plant expects to have a working personnel of 350'to 400 production and maintenance
employees by January -1942 A full personnel of about 1;200 men is planned by August or
September 1942 - The Navy Department has, under consideration, tentative plans calling
for the erection of two more buildings and the employment of an additional 500'to 600 inert
8 Matter of TVestinghouse'Electric & Manufacturing Company and International Associa-
tion of Machinists, Local 804, 38 N L R B 404
416 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
have no voice in the choice of their representative. For the reasons
stated in the Canton case, we shall, since the Louisville plant is in
actual production and a substantial number of employees are pres-
ently on,the pay roll, proceed with an immediate determination of
representatives. As explained in that case, we shall entertain a new
petition for an investigation and certification of representatives at
any time following issuance of any certification in this proceeding,
providing we are satisfied, under all the circumstances then 'shown
(including proof that there has been a substantial increase in the
number of employees at the Louisville Ordnance Division of the
Company, and that the petitioner represents a substantial number
of employees), that a question concerning representation affecting
commerce has arisen.
The U. E. R. M., although it participated in the hearing, offered
no documentary evidence to show that it represented any of the
employees at the Louisville Ordnance Division.9 The U. E. R. M.
based its claim of interest in this proceeding, primarily, on the
grounds that it has contractual relations with the Company covering
numerous employees at its other plants; that it has been certified
by the Board in those plants; and that it has an understanding with
the Company relating to the transfer of U. E. R. M. members em-
ployed in the Mansfield and other non-defense plants of the Com-
pany to both the Louisville and Canton ordnance plants.'0 There
is no evidence in the record that the U. E. R. M. has any contract
with the Company relating to the employees in the Louisville Ord-
nance Division, or with any plant of the Company providing for the
transfer of U. E. R. M. employees to the Louisville plant. We do
not consider that the circumstances above stated establish that the
U. E. R. M. has a sufficient interest in this proceeding, in the absence
of a showing of representation, to, entitle it to be placed on the
ballot in the election directed below."
Although the Company and the I. A. M. stipulated at the hearing
that the Board might certify the I. A. M. as the exclusive representa-
tive of the employees in the appropriate unit on the basis of the
evidence in the record, we believe that the question concerning repre
sentation which has arisen can best be resolved by the holding of
an election by secret ballot. In accordance with our usual practice
we shall direct that the employees at the Louisville Ordnance Divi-
sion, Louisville, Kentucky, operated by the Company eligible to vote
in the election shall be those in the appropriate unit who were em-
The U. E R. M admitted at the,hearing that it had no present membership in the plant.
io At the hearing the manager of the Louisville Ordnance Division testified that he knew
of no agreement between the Company and the U. E. R M concerning the transfer of men
from other Company plants, including Mansfield , to the Louisville Ordnance Division.
11 See Matter of Westinghouse Electric h Manaefgctvring Company and International
Association of Machinists , Local 804, supra , and the cases cited therein.
WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC & MANUFACTURING COMPANY 417
ployed 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.
Upon the basis of the above findings of fact, and upon the entire
record in the case, the Board makes the following=
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. A question affecting commerce •has arisen concerning the repre-
sentation of the employees 'at' 'the Louisville Ordnance Division,
Louisville, Kentucky, operated by Westinghouse Electric &--Manu-
facturing Company, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and-Section
2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
2. All production and maintenance employees of the Company
at the Louisville Ordnance Division, operated by it, including group
leaders, hut excluding executive, supervisory, and clerical employees
and watchmen, constitute a unit' appropriate for, the purposes of
collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b); of, the Act.
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 8, of National
Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended,
it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation authorized by.the Board
to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining
with Westinghouse Electric &• Manufacturing Company, Pittsburgh;
Pennsylvania, at the Louisville Ordnance Division,, operated by it, 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 Ninth Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National
Labor Relations Board, and subject to Article III, Section 9„ of said
Rules and Regulations, among all maintenance and production em-
ployees, including group leaders, of the Company, at the Louisville
Ordnance Division operated by it, who were employed during the
pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of this Direction,
including employees who did not work during 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 exclud-
ing executive, supervisory, and clerical employees and watchmen,
and those employees who have since quit or been discharged for
cause, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented by
the International Association of Machinists, Local Lodge 681, affili-
ated with the A. F. of L., for the purposes of collective bargaining.
438861-42-vol. 38-28
In the Matter Of WESTINGHOUSE 'ELECTRIC & MANUFACTURING COM-
PANY, LOUISVILLE ORDNANCE DIVISION and INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIA-
TION OF MACHINISTS, LOCAL LODGE 681
Case No. R-3294
AMENDMENT TO DIRECTION OF ELECTION
January SO, 1942
On' January 17, 1942, the National Labor Relations Board, herein
called the Board, issued a Decision and Direction of Election in the
above-entitled proceeding.' On January 23, 1942, the Board was
advised by the International Association of Machinists, herein called
the I. A. M., that subsequent to the filing of the petition herein,
the I. A. M' had chartered a new lodge "for all eligible employees
working at the Louisville Ordnance Division" of Westinghouse Elec-
tric & Manufacturing Company, Louisville, Kentucky. At the same
time the I. A. M. moved that the Board amend the Direction of
Election herein so as to substitute the name of the new lodge, which is
known as Local Lodge 830, for Local Lodge 681, the lodge in whose
name the petition herein was filed.2
The motion is hereby -granted and the Direction of Election is
hereby amended by striking out the words "International Association
of Machinists, Local Lodge 681, affiliated with the A. F. of L." and
substituting therefor the words "International Association of
Machinists, Local Lodge 830, affiliated with the A. F. of L."
1 38 N L R . B. 412. '
2 Lodge 681 is the general lodge of the I. A. M. in the City of Louisville
38 N. L . B. B., No. 82a
418