Lennox Furnace Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 3, 1943

50 N.L.R.B. 80 (N.L.R.B. 1943)

In the Matter of LENNOX FURNACE COMPANY, COLUMBUS, OHIO PLANT
and UNITED AUTOMOBILE WORKERS, C. I. O.
In the Matter of LENNOX FURNACE COMPANY, COLUMBUS, OHIO PLANT
and UNITED AUTOMOBILE WORKERS. C. I. O.
Cases Nos. R-5162 and R-5163, respectively.Decided June 3,1943
- Mr. Webb I. Vorys, of Columbus, Ohio, for the Company.
Mr. Lewis Strickland, of Columbus, Ohio, for the C. 1.6. ,
Mr. Daniel If. Bevis, of Columbus, Ohio, for the Association.
Mr. Wallace E. Royster, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS'-
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon petitions duly filed by United Automobile Workers, C. I. O.,
herein called the C. I. 0., each alleging that a question affecting com-
merce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of Len-
nox Furnace Company, Columbus, Ohio, herein called the Company,
the National Labor Relations Board consolidated the petitions herein
and provided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice before
Jaines A. Shaw, Trial Examiner. Said hearing was held at Colum-
bus, Ohio, on April 12, 1943. The Company, thelC. I. 0., and Lennox
Employees Association, Independent Union, herein called the Asso-
'ciation, 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.
The Company and- the Association have submitted briefs which the
Board has considered. -
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Lennox Furnace Company is an Iowa corporation with plants in
several States. We are here concerned with the employees at the
50 N. L. R. B., No. 17
80
LENNOX FURNACE1 COMPANY 81
Cohunbus, Ohio plant where the Company is, engaged in the manu-
facture of aircraft parts for various companies. Approximately 50
percent of the raw materials used, at the plant is received by the
Company from points outside Ohio. Approximately 60 percent of
the finished products of the plant is shipped to points outside Ohio.
The entire production of the plant is used on aircraft destined for use
by the Army or the Navy. We find the Company to be engaged in
commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations , Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
United Automobile `Yorkers is a labor organization affiliated with
the Congress of Industrial Organizations, admitting to membership
employees of the Company. 1 -1
Lennox Employees Association, Independent Union, is an un-,.
affiliated labor organization, admitting to membership employees
of the Company.
III. THE QUESTIONS CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On February 9, 1943, the C. I. O. filed the petition in Case No.
R-5162 and on the same date wrote the Company advising it that the
C. 1. 0. represented a majority of the Company's production and main-
tenance employees and requesting recognition as the exclusive collec-
tive bargaining representative of such employees? including plant
guards, among others. The Company made no reply to this request
but subsequently, on March 10, 1943, entered into a collective bargain-
ing contract with the Association covering the employees claimed, by
the C. I. O. On March 25, 1943, the C. I. O. filed a petition in Case
No. R-5163 requesting certification as the exclusive bargaining repre-
sentative of plant guards employed by the Company. At the hearing
the Company refused to recognize the C. I. O. as the representative of
any of its employees.
As stated above, the Company and the Association entered into a
written collective bargaining contract on March 10, 1943, covering,
production and maintenance employees as well as plant guards in the
employ of the Company. Since 'the contract was signed a month
after the C. I. O. had notified the Company of'.its claims and since
1 In its brief and at the hearing. the Company criticized the tactics of the C. I 0 in
filing a petition alleging a request for iecogmtion and a refusal so to recognize by the
Company, when in fact the request was not received by the Company until the day follow-
ing the filing of the petition It is not argued that either the Company or the Association
was aggrieved thereby It is suggested however, that the act of the C. I 0 was a fraud
on the Board and an abuse of its processes while we are jealous of the dignity of the
Board and will not pea mit its processes to be used frivolously or wrongfully , we aie not
convinced that the petition in this case was filed with intent to deceive or for any purpose
other than to invoke the processes of the Board to determine a valid question concerning
representation
82, DECIKONS OF-NATIONAL LABOR R:EUATIONS BOARD,
the contract does not purport to cover a definite term- and presumably
is terminable at any time by either party, in accordance with our well
settled policy we do not find the contract to be a bar to the present
proceeding.
A statement of the Field Examiner, introduced into evidence, and a
statement of the Trial Examiner, made at the hearing, indicate that
&'C. I. O. and the Association each represents a substantial number
of employees in the units hereinafter found appropriate.2
We find that questions affecting commerce have 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 UNITS
The 'parties have stipulated that the production 'and maintenance
• employees of the Company, named in the petition in Case No. R-5162,
excluding guards among others, constitute an appropriate unit. How-
ever, the stipulation arrived at is to some extent confusing and
ambiguous; in its reference to supervisory employees. In accordance'
with our interpretation of the stipulation,-and our established practice
of excluding employees who have substantial supervisory authority,2
we find that the,production and maintenance employees of the Com-
pany at its Columbus, Ohio plant, excluding foremen, assistant fore,
men, other employees having, the authority to hire, discharge, or
recommend such actigA, office employees, clerical employees, and
guards, constitute a unit appropriate • for the purposes of collective
bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
In its petition, in Case, No. R-5163, the C. I. O. requests a unit
embracing the plant guards and excluding all other employees of the
Company. The Association has-included guards in the industrial unit
allegedly covered by the contract but does not object to a separate unit.
The Company argues alternatively that plant guards are deputies of
management and should not be represented for the purposes of col-
The Field Examiner stated that the C I 0 submitted 241 cards, all bearing apparently
genuine original signatures. One hundred and fifteen cards , of nhich 13 were undated
and the remainder dated from February to April 1943, bore the names of persons whose
names appear on the Company's list of employees dated Maich 29, 1943. The list con-
tains the names of 319 persons within the appropriate unit and 7 employed as plant
guards Four additional cards, dated in February and March 1943, bore the names of
persons appearing as plant guards on the Company's list
The Taal Examiner stated that the Association submitted 210 authorization cards, all
bearing apparently genuine original signatures Forty -two cards were undated and the
remainder bole dates from January to April 1943 . All signatures « ere the names of per-
sons appearing on the Company 's list of March 29, 1943 The Association also submitted
6 additional cards of which 2 were undated and 4 bore dates in April 1943 All 6 cards
bore the apparently genuine original signatures of persons whose names appear as plant
guards on the Company's list.
3 See Matter of Maryland Dry Dock Company and Local No. 31 of the Industrial Union
of Marine and Shipbuilding Workers of America, 49 N. L. R. B. 733.
LENNOX F'URNACE' COMPANY 83.
lective bargaining but, if they are to be represented, that they should
be included in a unit with production and maintenance employees.
The Company recognizes that,the•decisions of the Board have been
contrary to these contentions. The Company employs six plant guards
and- a chief guard. They are uniformed, armed, and under the super-
vision: of the military authorities. In accordance with our usual'
policy,we find that the plant guards employed by the Company at
the Columbus, Ohio plaint, excluding the chief guard and all other
employees of the Company, constitute a unit appropriate for the
purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b)
of the Act.4
V. THE DETERMINATION Or REPRESENTATIVES;
We shall direct that the questions concerning representation which
have arisen be resolved by elections by secret ballot among the em-
ployees in the appropriate units who were employed during the pay-
roll period or periods immediately preceding the date of the Direction
of Elections herein, subject to the limitations and additions set forth in
the Direction.
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
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 2, as amended, it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to, ascertain represents-
-tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Lennox Furnace
Company, Columbus, Ohio, separate elections 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 Ninth Region, 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
units found appropriate, in Section IV, above, who were employed
during the pay-roll period or periods immediately preceding the date
of this Direction, including employees who did not work during said
pay-roll period or periods because they were ill or on vacation or tem-
porarily laid off, and including employees in the armed forces of the
United States who present themselves in person at the polls, but ex
eluding any who have since quit or been discharged for cause, to deter-
mine whether they desire to be represented by United Automobile
`Yorkers,, C. I. 0., or by Lennox Employees Association, Independent -
Union, for the purposes of collective bargaining, or 'by neither.
See Matter of Chrysler Corporation , Highland Park Plant and Local 114, United Au-
tomobile, Aircraft and Agricultural Implement Workers of America, affiliated with the
0.11. 0., 44 N. L. It . B 881.