Glenn L. Martin Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 11, 1943

50 N.L.R.B. 412 (N.L.R.B. 1943)

In the Matter of GLENN L. MARTIN COMPANY and INTERNATIONAL
UNION, UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AIRCRAFT AND AGRICULTURAL IMPLE-
MENT WORKERS OF AMERICA , UAW-CIO
Case No. R-5445--Decided June 11, 11943
Mr. Earle K. Shawe, for the Board.
Mr. Charles C. C. Evans; of Baltimore, Md., for the Company.
Leider, Witt cQ Cammer, by Mr. Harold I. Camvaer, of 'New York
City, Mr. Maurice Sugar, of Detroit, Mich., and Mr. Nicholas Dragon,
of Baltimore, Md., for the UAW-CIO.
Mr. Paul R. Hutchings and Mr. J. E. Poulton, of Washington, D. C.,
for'the I. A. M.
Mr. Dulany Foster, of Baltimore, Md., for the Association.
Mr. Louis Cokin, of counsel to the Board. .
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon petition duly filed by International Union, United Automo-
bile, Aircraft and Agricultural Implement Workers of America, herein
called the UAW-CIO, alleging,that a question affecting commerce
had arisen concerning the representation of employees of Glenn L.
Martin Company, Middle River, Maryland, herein called, the Com-
pany, the National Labor Relations Board provided for an appropriate
-hearing upon due notice before Will Maslow, Trial Examiner. Said
hearing was held at Baltimore, Maryland, on May 27 and 28, 1943.
At the commencement of the hearing, the Trial Examiner granted
motions of International Association of Machinists, herein called the
I. A. M., and Middle River Aeronautical Employees Association, In-
corporated, herein called the Association, to intervene. The Board,
the Company, the UAW-CIO, the I. A. M., and the Association ap-
peared at and participated in the hearing.' All parties were afforded
1 Although the Pattern Makers League of North America and International Brotherhood
of Firemen , Oilers, Powerhouse Operators, Ice Plant Employees , and Maintenance Men,
Local No. 341 , were served with notice of hearing , they did not appear
50 N L R. B., No. 63.
412
GLENN L. MARTIN COMPANY 413,
full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses,
and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues. During the course
of the hearing, the Company moved to dismiss the petition on the
ground that the UAW-CIO failed to make a substantial showing of
representation. Decision thereon was reserved for the Board. For
reasons appearing below, the motion is denied. During the course
of-the heariiig, counsel for the UAW-CIO moved to have the Trial
'Examinerinvestigate additional authorization cards. The Trial Ex-
aminer reserved ruling. The motion is hereby denied. The Trial
Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error
and are hereby affirmed.
On June 4, 1943, the I. A. M. and the Company filed briefs which
the Board has considered.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Glenn L. Martin Company is a Maryland corporation with its prin-
cipal operations at Middle River, Maryland, where it operates the
largest single aircraft plant in the United States. During 1942, the
Company purchased raw materials from points outside the State of
Maryland valued in excess of $100,000,000. During the same period,
the Company manufactured and distributed airplanes and airplane
parts to points outside the State of Maryland valued in excess of
$250,000,000. The Company admits, for the purposes of this pro-
ceeding, that it is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the
National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
International Union, United Automobile, Aircraft and Agricultural
Implement Workers of America, is a labor organization affiliated
with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, admitting to member-
ship employees of the Company. -
International Association of Machinists is a labor organization,
.admitting to membership employees of the Company.
Middle River Aeronautical -Employees Association, Incorporated,
is an unaffiliated labor. organization, admitting to membership em-
ployees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Company refuses to recognize the UAW-CIO as the exclusive
collective bargaining representative of its employees until such time
as the UAW-CIO is certified by the Board.
414
i
D'ECISIO'NS OF NATIONAL: LA,BOiR.REiLAT10NS 'BOARD
' A statement of 'the Regional Director, introduced into evidence
at the hearing,, indicates that the UAW-CIO represents a substantial
number of employees in the unit hereinafter, found to be appropriate.2
We find that a question affecting comnierce 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 UAW-CIO contends that all production, maintenance, cafe-
teria, and garage employees of the Company in the Baltimore, Mary-
land, area, including employees employed by the Company but work-
iiig'at the Crown Cork 'and Seal Plant at Baltimore, leaders and
working leaders, but excluding supervisory employees above the rank
of leaders, employees assigned to the office and wearing office badges,
plant or office clerical employees (but not shop timekepers, stock
chasers and expediters), plant protection employees, plant'and equip-
ment enginers, accounting department employees, marine department
employees, time-keeping department employees (but not departmental
timekeepers, who check time on the floor ), building and field engineers
('but not laborers in said department), tool design and tool engineering
employees, purchase and proOhrement department employees (but
not raw stores, shipping, and receiving employees), engineering de-
partment employees, technical and industrial engineers, and labor
control, employees, personnel department employees, executives' chauf-
i feurs, sub-contracting department employees, employees engaged in
airport operations (but not mechanics), first-aid, hospital, and medical
employees, technical laboratory and research employees (but not non-
professional and non-technical employees), office production and plan-
ning employees (but not employees who work on the plant floors),
and industrial relations department employees, constitute an appro-
priate unit. The only controversy with respect to the unit concerns
leaders.
The Company employs approximately 1,500 employees designated
by it as leaders. The UAW-CIO and the I. A. M. would include
2 The statement sets forth that the UAW-CIO presented authorization cards bearing the
names of 23 75 , percent of the employees on the March 26, 1943 , pay roll of the Company.
It further shows that the Association has authorization cards signed by 9.35 percent of
the employees on the March 26, '1943, pay roll ' Duplications representing designations on
behalf of the UAW-CIO and the Association represent 2 74. percent of the names on that
pay roll. The I A. M presented authorization cards bearing apparently genuine signatures
of 4 5 percent of the employees on the March 26, 1943 , pay roll
The Company moved to dismiss the UAW-CIO petition upon the ground that the
UAW-CIO's 23 75 percent showing , as indicated on the,said statement, was not substantial.
In finding that the UAW-CIO has made a substantial showing, we have taken into consid-
eration the Company's high labor turnover, as well as the results of the check of,the
Association' s and the I A. M's authorization cards The said motion of the Company is
hereby denied, See Matter of Douglas An craft Company, Ive (El Segundo Division)' and
International Association of Maclunzsts, Aeronautical District Lodge 22 , AFL, 49 N L. R B:
819
GLENN 'L. MARTIN: COMPANY 415
such'employees in the unit, while the Company and the Association
would exclude them.
Each-of the leaders has from 6 to 30 people under him and- is
responsible for their productive labor. The leaders recommend in-
creases in pay and discharge of their subordinates, and are charged
with the duty of making one of the ratings on the Company's regular
merit-rating forms.. The leaders spend a majority of their time per-
forming supervisory functions and represent the Company in the
handling of grievances with their subordinates. The time worked
by the leaders is charged by the Company to overhead rather than
production. The leaders attend regular supervisory, meetings con-
ducted by the Company. We find that leaders are supervisory em-
ployees and we shall exclude them from the unit.3
We find that all production, maintenance, cafeteria, and garage
employees of the Company in the Baltimore, Maryland, area, includ-
ing employees employed by the Company but working at the Crown
Cork and, Seal Plant at Baltimore and working leaders, but exclud-
ing leaders and supervisory employees above the rank of leaders,
employees assigned to the office and wearing office badges, plant or
office clerical employees (but not shop timekeepers, stock chasers
and expediters), plant protection employees, plant and equipment
engineers, accounting department employees, marine department em-
ployees, time-keeping department employees (but not departmental
timekeepers who check time on the floor), building and field engineers
(but not laborers in said department), tool design and tool engineering
employees, purchase and procurement department employees (but not
raw stores, shipping, and receiving employees), engineering depart-
ment employees, technical and industrial engineers and labor control
employees, personnel department employees, executives' chauffeurs,
sub-contracting department employees, employees engaged in airport
operations' (but not mechanics), first-aid, hospital, and medical em-
ployees, technical laboratory and research, employees (but not non-
professional and - non-technical employees), office production and -
planning employees (but not employees who work on the plant floors);
and industrial relations department employees, constitute a unit appro-
priate for the purposes of collective bargaining, within 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 means of an election by secret ballot among
8 All parties agree, the record indicates , and we , find that working leaders are not
supervisory employees . They have no authority to recommend the discipline or discharge
of other employees.
416 DECIISIIONS OP NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD,
the employees in the appropriate units 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.
The UAW-CIO requests that it appear on the ballot as "UAW-
CIO." The I. A. M. requests that -it appear on. the ballot as=Interna-
tional Association of Machinists, I: A. M." , The requests are hereby
granted.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
ti
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 2, as amended, it is
hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes.of collective bargaining' with Glenn L., Martin
Company, Middle River, Maryland, 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 Director of the Field Division, acting in this matter as agent for
the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Article III,
Section 10, 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, to determine whether
they desiie to be represented by the UAW-CIO, or by International
Association of Machinists, I. A. M., or by Middle River Aeronautical
Employees Association Incorporated, for the purposes of collective
bargaining, or by none of said organizations. -