Lewis T. Kline Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 20, 1947

74 N.L.R.B. 329 (N.L.R.B. 1947)

In the Matter of LEwIs T. KLINE COMPANY, EMPLOYER and INTER-
NATIONAL UNION, UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AIRCRAFT AND AGRICULTURAL
IMPLEMENT WORKERS, AFFILIATED WITH THE CONGRESS OF INDUS-
TRIAL ORGANIZATIONS, PETITIONER
Case No. 7-R-2619.-Decided June 00, 1947
Mrs. D. K. Woelk, of Alpena, Mich., for the Employer.
Messrs. Maurice Sugar and John N. Tucker, by John N. Tucker, of
Detroit, Mich., for the Petitioner..
Messrs. Charles A. Kistler and Irving F. Sturm, of Detroit, Mich.,
for the Intervenor.
Mr. Stanley Segal, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at Alpena,
Michigan, on May 5, 1947, before Harold L. Hudson, hearing officer.
The hearing officers's rulings made at the hearing are free from
prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations
Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
Lewis T. Kline Company, owned by the estate of Elizabeth L. Kline,
is engaged at its plant in Alpena, Michigan, in general machine re-
pairing, and manufacturing of grey iron, bronze, aluminum castings,
and woodwork machinery. During 1946-47 the Employer purchased
materials valued in excess of $25,000, of which approximately 75 per-
cent was purchased outside the State of Michigan. During the same
period the Employer sold finished products valued in excess of $100,-
000, of which approximately 75 percent was shipped to points outside
the State.
The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
74 N L. R. B., No. 53. 329
330 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
H. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress
of Industrial Organizations, claiming to represent employees of the
Employer.
United Construction Workers, Local Union No. 439, U. M. W. A.,
herein called the Intervenor, is a labor organization affiliated with the
American Federation of Labor, claiming to represent employees of the
Employer.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Employer refuses to recognize the Petitioner as the exclusive
bargaining representative of employees of the Employer until the Pe-
titioner has been certified by the Board in an appropriate unit. The
Employer and Intervenor assert that an existing collective bargaining
contract between them, entered into on March 10, 1947, is a bar to
this proceeding.
On January 18, 1943, as a result of a consent election conducted un-
der the auspices of the Board, the Intervenor was designated as exclu-
sive bargaining representative of employees of the Employer., From
1943 to 1946 the Employer and Intervenor enjoyed an uninterrupted
contractual relationship through a series of collective bargaining
agreements. On March 1, 1946, the Employer and Intervenor executed
a contract providing that it should remain in effect until March 1, 1947,
and from year to year thereafter in the absence of a written notice
given by either party to the other 30 days before any anniversary date,
signifying an intention not to renew the contract. More than 30 days
before the anniversary date of the contract, the'Intervenor made writ-
ten request upon the Employer to open the contract for negotiation of
changes. On February 28, 1947, the Employer and Intervenor signed
an agreement extending the termination date of the 1946 contract for a
period of 10 days. The Petitioner then notified the Employer on
March 3, 1947, that it represented a majority of the Employer's em-
ployees and asked to be recognized as their bargaining agent. The
Employer replied on March 7, 1947, that it would not recognize the
Petitioner inasmuch as the employees were represented by the Inter-
venor. On March 10, 1947, the Employer and the Intervenor executed
a 1-year collective bargaining agreement,2 and on March 12, 1947, the
Petitioner filed its petition with the Board. Inasmuch as the Peti-
tioned notified the Employer of its claim to representation before the
1 Case No 7-R-1260.
a It is not clear whether the 1947 contract was actually executed on March 10 , 1947, or
sometime after that date we assume for the purposes of this decision that the contract
was entered into on March 10, 1947.
LEWIS T. KLINE COMPANY 331
execution of the 1947 contract and filed its petition within 10 days after
such notice, we find that the contract of March 10, 1947, is not a bar to
this proceeding.3
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning
the representation of employees of the Employer, within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
In accordance with the agreement of the parties, we find that all
employees of the Employer, excluding office and clerical employees,
members and descendants of the Lewis T. Kline family, foremen,
supervisors, and all 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 collective bargaining within the
meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION 4
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining with Lewis T. Kline Company, Alpena,
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 Di-
rection, 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 Sections 203.55 and 203.56, of
National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-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 represented by
8 See Matter of General Electric X-Ray Corporation, 97 N L. R. B 997. Although the
Intervenor contends that the Petitioner's representation claim of March 3, 1947, was
inadequate because it inaccurately described the Employer, the record shows that the
Employer's manager received and read this claim, fully aware that it was directed to the
Employer, and answered the Petitioner on behalf of the Employer on March 7, 1947, 3 days
before the execution of the 1947 contract. We, accordingly, find this contention to be
without merit.
' Any participant in the election herein ordered may, upon its prompt request to, and
approval thereof by, the Regional Director, have its name removed from the ballot.
332 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
International Union, United Automobile, Aircraft and Agricultural
Implement Workers, affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Or-
ganizations , or by United Construction Workers, Local Union No. 439,
U. M. W. A., AFL, for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by
neither.
CHAIRMAN HERZOG took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Direction of Election.