International Harvester Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 6, 1947

73 N.L.R.B. 1485 (N.L.R.B. 1947)

In the Matter of INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER COMPANY ( CANTON
WORKS), Ei1IPLOYER and UNITED FARM EQUIPMENT AND METAL
WORKERS OF AMERICA, C. I. 0., PETITIONER
In the Matter Of INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER COMPANY (CANTON
WORKS), EMPLOYER and INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHIN-
ISTS, PETITIONER
Cases Nos . 13-R-4210 and 13-R-.424/ 9, respectively .Decided June 6,
1947
Mr. D. B. Oldaker , of Chicago , Ill., for the Employer.
Meyers , Meyers & Rothstein , by Mr . David B. Rothstein , of Chi-
cago, Ill., for the United.
Mr. P. L. Sieiniller , of Chicago , Ill., for the Machinists.
Mr. John L. Mayo, of Peoria, I11., for District 50.
Mr. William O'Connell, of Chicago, Ill., for the Association.
DECISION
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
AND
ORDER
Upon separate petitions duly filed, a consolidated hearing in these
cases was held at Canton, Illinois, on March 21, 1947, before Robert
Ackerberg, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the
hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed
Upon the entire record in the case, the Nitional Labor Relations
Board makes the following:
1 At the hearing the Employer and the United moved to dismiss the Machinists' petition
by reason of the alleged inappropriateness of the unit therein sought. For reasons set
forth in Section IV, infra, the motion is hereby granted.
All parties agreed at the hearing to incorporate into the instant record certain portions
of the record (and accompanying exhibits) in Matter of International Harvester Company,
Canton Works, Cases Nos. 13-R-2772, 2791, and 2797 (61 N. L. R. B. 1199). The
Machinists then moved to incorporate the entire record and exhibits of that consolidated
case, but this motion was opposed by the Employer, the United, and District 50. Since all
the parties to the instant proceeding were parties to the earlier case, and the issues in both
cases were substantially the same, we fail to see how any party would be prejudiced by the
admission into the instant record of the entire record (including exhibits) of Cases
Nos. 13-11-2772, 2791, and 2797. We, therefore, hereby grant the Machinists' motion.
The United requested oral argument, but subsequently withdrew its request.
73 N. L. R. B., No. 250.
1485
1486 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
FINDINGS of FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
International Harvester Company, a New Jersey corporation, has
its principal offices in Chicago, Illinois, and operates plants in several
States. The instant proceeding is concerned solely with the Em-
ployer's plant at Canton, Illinois, known as the Canton Works, where
it is engaged in the manufacture of tillage implements. Raw materials
valued in excess of $100,000 are each year shipped to the Canton Works
from points outside the State of Illinois. Approximately the entire
annual production of the Canton Works, which is valued in excess of
$1,000,000, is shipped to points outside the State. '
The Employer admits that, with respect to its operations at the
Canton Works, it is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the
National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
United Farm Equipment and Metal Workers of America, herein
called the United, is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress
of Industrial Organizations, clauning to represent employees of the
Employer.
International Association of Machinists, herein called the Machin-
ists, is a labor organization claiming to represent employees of the
the Employer.
District 50, United Mine Workers of America, Local Union 12633,
herein called District 50, is a labor organization affiliated with the
American Federation of Labor, claiming to represent employees of
the Employer.
Canton Employees Association, Independent, herein called the
Association, is a labor organization, claiming to represent employees
of the Employer.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION; THE ALLEGED QUESTION
CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Employer refuses to recognize either of the Petitioners as the
exclusive bargaining representative of employees of the Employer
until the Petitioners have been certified by the Board in appropriate
units.
We find that, in Case No. 13-R-4210, a question affecting commerce
has arisen concerning the representation of employees of the Eu1-
ployer, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7)
of the Act.
Inasmuch as the bargaining unit sought to be established by the
Machinists, the Petitioner in Case No. 13-R-4249, is hereinafter found
to be inappropriate, we find that, in the latter case, no question has
A
INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER COMPANY 1487
arisen concerning the representation of employees of the Employer
within an appropriate unit within the meaning of Section 9 (c) of the
Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE IINIT: THE ALLEGED APPROPRIATE UNIT IN CASE
NO. 13-R-4249
The United requests an election among all the Employer's produc-
tion and maintenance employees at the Canton Works, excluding
plant-protection personnel, salaried employees, office and factory cleri-
cal workers, indentured apprentices, student executives, and super-
visory personnel.2 The Machinists seeks a separate unit limited to
all employees of Department No. 9 of the Canton Works, excluding
janitors and laborers,3 office and clerical workers, and supervisory per-
sonnel4 District 50-which now represents the Employer's produc-
tion and maintenance workers under contract-and the Employer,
both of whom are in accord with the United's contention that only a
plant-wide unit (including Department 9) is appropriate, oppose the
request of the Machinists for a separate unit. The Association takes
no position with respect to the Machinists' petition, but desires an
election in a plant-wide unit. Thus, the sole issue in this case is
whether the Department 9 workers should be established as a separate
unit.
For the past 6 years, the Employer has entered into written con-
tracts with labor organizations covering all production and mainte-
nance employees, including those in Department 9, at the Canton
Works. In May 1942, the Machinists lost a consent election held
among the Department 9 workers-the very same unit it now seeks
to represent-and the victorious Association subsequently entered into
a plant-wide agreement with the Employer, which was consistent in
coverage with an earlier contract between the same parties entered
into in 1941.5 In May 1945, the Board denied the request of the
Machinists (as well as two other craft (rroups) for a separate election,
and directed an election in a plant-wide unit.' At that time the
2 The United is apparently willing also to exclude all pattern makers and their apprentices,
and no other party specifically requests their inclusion . Pursuant to a consent election
held in November 1946 (Case No 13-R-4003 ), the Pattern Makers Association of Peoria
was designated as bargaining representative , of the Employer 's pattern makers and their
apprentices . We shall, therefore , exclude these employees from the unit hereinafter found
appropriate.
3
At the hearing, the Machinists moved to amend its original petition to exclude janitors
and laborers , and this motion was granted without objection
4 The Machinists expressed willingness , in the event that the Board should find a unit
limited to Department 9 employees inappropriate by reason of the failure to include in the
requested unit somewhat similar categories of employees in Department I (the Forge
Department ), to include any such categories the Board might deem proper.
° The consent election agreement does not indicate that the 1942 election was a "Globe"
election , but it would appear that the purpose of the election was to permit employees to
vote out of the plant-wide unit or to remain in it.
° Matter of International Harvester Company, Canton Works, 61 N. L R. B. 1199.
739926-47-vol. 73-95
1488 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Board found, in the main, that the Machinists had been dormant for
a considerable part of the 3-year period since the 1942 consent elec-
tion, had to a certain extent acquiesced in the plant-wide bargaining
history, and had not shown that it had maintained its membership
over a period of years. District 50 won that election and subsequently
entered into a 1-year contract with the Employer, dated February 2,
1946, likewise covering all production and maintenance workers.7
The record in the instant case indicates that neither the operations
of the Canton Works nor the duties of Department 9's personnel have
changed to any appreciable extent since 1945, when the Machinists'
last request for a separate election was denied." Nor was any evidence
adduced of recent substantial activity at the Canton Works on the part
of the Machinists. In fact, it appears that two employees from De-
partment 9 are now members of District 50's local negotiating com-
mittee, that other Department 9 workers serve as District 50 officers
and as members of District 50's grievance committee, and that Dis-
trict 50 has handled frequent grievances for the employees of Depart-
ment 9 in routine fashion. Obviously, District 50 has been repre-
senting Department 9 employees very actively and with their acqui-
escence. And, as we noted in our previous Decision,9 the workers
sought by the Machinists had an opportunity to indicate their desires
as to separate representation, and chose to continue to be bargained
for as part of a plant-wide unit. In view of all these circumstances,
including the fact that the employees sought by the Machinists have
already been afforded an opportunity to express their desires as to
separate representation, we are of the opinion that the unit here sought
by the Machinists is inappropriate for the purposes of collective bar-
gaining 10 We shall, therefore, dismiss the Machinists' petition."
We find that all production and maintenance employees at the
Employer's Canton Works plant, including the employees in Depart-
ment 9, but excluding pattern makers and their apprentices, plant-
protection employees, salaried employees, office clerical employees, fac-
tory clerical employees, indentured apprentices, student executives,
foremen, assistant foremen, acting assistant foremen, and all other
supervisory employees with authority to hire, promote, discharge,
° This contract is not urged as a bar to the instant proceeding
The Machinists argues that the recent consent election among the Employer's pattern
makers ( see footnote 2, supra ), won unanimously by the Pattern Makers Association of
Peoria, the only union on the ballot, "dissipates" the industrial unit in the Canton Works.
However, the mere fact that the Employer, the plant union (District 50) and the Pattern
Makers-and no other parties-agreed to afford one craft group the opportunity to express
its desires in a separath election would not, standing alone , seem to confer automatically
on other craft groups the right to obtain similar elections.
8 Furthermore , there is no evidence that there has been any substantial turnover among
the employees of Department 9 since 1942 or 1945
° Case No 13-I1-1242
10 See Matter of F I. do Pont de _Nemours and Company, 73 N L R B 1167
11 The Machinists stated at the hearing that it did not desire to appear on the ballot in
any plant-NNtde election
A
INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER COMPANY 1489
discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or
effectively recommend such action, constitute a unit appropriate for
the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9
(b) of the Act.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION 12
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining with International Harvester Company
(Canton Works), Canton, 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 supervision of the
Regional Director for the Thirteenth Region, acting in this matter as
agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Sections
203.55 and 203.56, of National Labor. Relations Board Rules and Reg-
ulations-Series 4, 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 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 repre-
sented by United Farm Equipment and Metal Workers of America,
C. I. 0., or by District 50, United Mine Workers of America, Local
Union 12633, A. F. L., or by Canton Employees Association, Inde-
pendent, for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by none of these
labor organizations.
ORDER
IT Is HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for investigation and certifica-
tion of representatives of employees of International Harvester Com-
pany (Canton Works), Canton, Illinois, filed in Case No. 13-R-4249,
by International Association of Machinists, be, and it hereby is,
dismissed.
MR. JAMES J. REYNOLDS, JR., took no part in the consideration of the
above Decision, Direction of Election and Order.
13 Any participant in the election herein may , upon its prompt request to , and approval
thereof by , the Regional Director, have its name removed from the ballot.
739926-47-vol. 73 96