American Broach & Machine Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 9, 1944

56 N.L.R.B. 1238 (N.L.R.B. 1944)

In the Matter of AMERICAN BROACH & MACHINE COMPANY. and LOCAL
38, INTERNATIONAL UNION, UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AIRCRAFT AND AGRI-
CULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA, UAW-CIO
Case No. 7-R-1'716.Decided June 9, 1944
Mr. Louis • E. Burke, of Ann Arbor, Mich., I and Mr. G. Franklin
Killeen, of Lansing, Mich., for the Company.
Messrs. W. A. Magnor and Emerson Barriger, of Jackson, Mich.,
and Mr. Kenneth Sisson, of Ann Arbor, Mich., for the Union.
Mrs. Margaret L. Fassig, of counsel to the,Board.
DECISION
AND J
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon a petition duly filed by Local 38, International Union, United
Automobile, Aircraft and Agricultural Implement Workers of Amer-
ica, UAW-CIO, herein called the Union, alleging that a 'question
affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of em-
ployees of'American Broach & Machine Company, Ann Arbor, Michi'
gan, herein called the Company, the'National Labor Relations Board
provided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice before Max
Rotenbe'rg, Trial Examiner. Said hearing was held at Ann Arbor,
Michigan, on May 5,' 1944.. The Company and the Union 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. The, Company moved to dismiss the
petition because of the pendency of proceedings in which it is charged
with unfair labor practices.' The motion is hereby denied. The Trial
Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial
' Case No C-2276, reported at 45 N . L R. B. 241. The Board on October 31 , 1942'
found - that the Company had engaged in unfair labor practices within the meaning of
Section 8 ( 1), (2), and (3), and the Board's Order was enforced by the decree of the
Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals on December 17, 1943. On May 9, 1944 , the American
Broach Employees Protective Association filed a petition fors certiorari' in the Supreme
Court
56 N. L. R. B, No. 222.
1238
AMERICAN BROACH & MACHINE COMPANY 1239
error and are hereby affirmed. All parties were afforded an oppor-
tunity 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
American Broach & Machine Company, which is a Michigan cor-
poration and a wholly owned subsidiary of Sunstrand Machine Tool
Company, has its principal place of business in Ann Arbor, Michigan,
where it is engaged in the manufacture and sale of broaches and
broaching machinery. The Company annually purchases raw ma=
terials valued in -excess of $200,000, for Ilse in its manufacturing
operations and approximately 15 percent of 'such raw` materials is
purchased by the Company from sources outside the State of Michi-
gan and shipped to the Company at its plant in Ann Arbor, Michigan.
The company annually manufactures at its Ann Arbor plant broaches
and broaching machinery valued in excess of $500,000, of which ap-
proximately 50 percent is sold and shipped to points outside the
State of Michigan. The broaches and broaching machinery now be-
ing produced by the Company are furnished almost entirely to num-,
erous firms producing guns and other military- equipment for the'
prosecution of the war.
We find that the Company is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
H. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
Local 38, International Union, United Automobile, Aircraft' and
Agricultural Implement Workers of America, affiliated with the
Congress of Industrial Organizations, is a labor organization admit-
ting 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 its employees until the Union
has been certified by the Board in an appropriate unit.
A statement of a Board agent, introduced into evidence at the
hearing, indicates that the Union represents a substantial number of
employees in the unit hereinafter found appropriate.'
2 The Field Examiner reported that the Union submitted 72 designation cards ; that the
Company's pay roll contained the names of 205 employees in the appropriate unit ; and
that the cards were 'dated : 1 in November 1943, 60 in December 1943, 2 each in January
and March 1944, and 7 undated.
1240 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
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 alleges that all_ production and maintenance employees
of the Company, including inspectors and instructors, but excluding
office and shop clerical employees and supervisory employees with au-
thority to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or cause changes in the
status of other employees or effectively recommend such action con-
stitute an appropriate unit for collective bargaining purposes. Sub-'
ject to its motion to dismiss the petition herein, the Company agrees
with the Union on the unit except that it contends that instructors
should be excluded as supervisory employees.
It appears the Company has about 205 employees in the alleged
appropriate unit, including 12 persons classified as instructors, who
instruct new employees how to operate their machines, or instruct
older employees in new operations. The instructors are tinder the
assistant foremen who look to the instructors to see that they keep
the other men' busy on the machines., If an instructor finds that -a
man is not capable of doing work on a particular machine, the in-
structor so advises, the assistant foreman and the man is then shifted
to another station. In making such shifts, the foremen are guided
by the recommendations of t_he_ instructors. Also, there is 'testimony
that the Company has hired a number of men who have been recom-
mended by instructors. There is testimony that the rate of pay of
the instructors is much higher than that of the other production and
maintenance employees. We are of the opinion, and_find, that in-
structors in this Company's plant -are supervisory employees within
the meaning of our usual definition. -
We find that 'all production and maintenance employees of the
Company, including inspectors, but'excluding office and shop clerical
employees, instructors and all or any other 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 collec-
tive 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 among
employees in the unit found appropriate in Section IV, above.
The ,Upon contends that the Company's pay roll of May 6, 1944,
should be used to determine eligibility to vote jn the election, due
c
AMERICAN BROACH & MACHINE COMPANY 1241
to an alleged large turn-over of personnel in its employ. The Com-
pany did not expect any substantial' increase or decrease in its
employment program within the next 30 days following the hearing.
No special reason appears for departing from our usual practice,
and accordingly 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
this 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 Libor
Relations 'Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National
Labor Relations Board Rules and, Regulations-Series 3, it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as- part, of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with American Broach
& Machine Company, Ann Arbor, 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 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
inunediately preceding the date of, this Direction; 'including em-
ployees who did not. work 'durinb said pay-roll 'period because they
were ill or on vacation or temporarily laid off, andincluding em-'
ployees in the armed forces of the United States who present them-
selves 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
or not they desire to be'represented by Local 38; International Union,
United Automobile, Aircraft and Agricultural Implement Workers
of America, UAW-CIO, for the purposes of collective bargaining.
MR. GERARD D. REILLY took no part in the consideration of the
above Decision and Direction of Election.