The Coleman Co., Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Oct 28, 1952

101 N.L.R.B. 120 (N.L.R.B. 1952)

120 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
a craft group of the type to whom we have frequently awarded sev-
erance," they may, if they so desire constitute a separate appropriate
unit. We shall direct a self-determination election for the following
employees of the Employer : 9
All foundry production employees, including helpers and appren-
tices, engaged in the making and processing of aluminum castings,
but excluding the inspector and his helper,10 office and clerical em-
ployees, all other production and maintenance employees, and super-
visors as defined in the Act.
If a majority vote for the Petitioner, they will be taken to have
indicated their desire to constitute a separate appropriate unit, and
the Regional Director conducting the election directed herein is in-
structed to issue a certification of representatives to the Petitioner
for the voting group heretofore described which the Board, under
such circumstances, finds to be an appropriate unit for purposes of
collective bargaining. In the event a majority vote for the Inter-
venor, the Board finds the existing unit to be appropriate and the
Regional Director will issue a certification of results of election to
such effect.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this
volume.]
constituting appropriate units. Texas Foundries , Inc., 83 NLRB 679; National Farm
Machinery Cooperative , Inc., 88 NLRB 125; Goslin-Birmingham Manufacturing Company,
84 NLRB 957.
8 The Fayscott Corporation, 78 NLRB 1256 ; W. A. Jones Foundry tG Machine Co., 83
NLRB 211; United States Pipe A Foundry Co., 87 NLRB 115.
9 By reason of the fact that no other member of the association conducts an operation
similar to the one herein involved , the unit described is limited to employees of the
Employer rather than expanded to be coextensive with the multiemployer association,
Members of The California State Brewers Institute , 90 NLRB 1747. Cf. Pacific Coast
Association of Pulp and Paper Manufacturers , 94 NLRB 477 , where although only one
member of a multiemployer association conducted a lithographic operation , the Board
granted craft severance for a broad unit coextensive with the association . In that case
the petitioner sought the broader unit whereas in the instant case the Petitioner seeks a
single employer unit.
io The record discloses that the inspector and his helper , whom the Petitioner would
include and the Employer exclude, perform inspection duties in other departments of the
John Bean western division and are separately supervised . They are therefore excluded
from the voting group.
THE COLEMAN COMPANY, INC. and INTERNATIONAL UNION, UNITED
AUTOMOBILE, AIRCRAFT & AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORMERS OF
AMERICA (UAW-CIO), PETITIONER. Case No. 17-RC-1•3219. Oc-
tober 28,195f2
Decision and Certification of Representatives
Pursuant to a stipulation for certification upon consent election,
an election by secret ballot was conducted on August 15, 1952, under
101 NLRB No. 51
THE COLEMAN COMPANY, INC. 121
the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Seven-
teenth Region, among the employees in the stipulated unit. There-
after, a tally of ballots was furnished the parties, showing that of
approximately 1,214 eligible voters, 1,118 cast valid ballots, of which
403 were for the Petitioner, 71 were for International Association of
Machinists, District Lodge No. 70, AFL, herein called the Machinists,
598 were for National Independent Union Council, Independent Ap-
pliance Workers' Union, herein called the Independent, and 5 were
against the participating labor organizations; there were 41 chal-
lenged ballots. On August 22, 1952, the Petitioner filed objections to
conduct affecting the results of the election.
In accordance with the Board's Rules and Regulations, the Regional
Director conducted an investigation of the matters raised by the Peti-
tioner's objections and, on October 8, 1952, issued and duly served upon
the parties his report on objections, in which he found that the objec-
tions did not raise substantial or material issues with respect to the
election, and recommended that the objections be overruled and that
the Independent be certified on the basis of the tally of ballots. There-
after, the Petitioner filed a document entitled motion to withhold
certification, and the Independent filed an answer thereto.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor
Relations Act, as amended, the Board has delegated its powers in con-
nection with this case to a three-member panel. [Chairman Herzog
and Members Styles and Peterson].
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the Act.
2. The Petitioner, the Machinists, and the Independent are labor
organizations claiming to represent certain employees of the Em-
ployer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9
(c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. As stipulated by the parties, the following employees of the
Employer constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective
bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act :
All production and maintenance employees at all of the Employer's
plants located in and around Wichita, Kansas, including shipping and
receiving employees, but excluding employees in department 31 (tool-
room employees wherever located), lithographic production employ-
ees, office clerical employees, factory clerks, professional employees,
guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act.
5. In support of its motion to withhold certification, the Petitioner
relies on (1) matters pertaining to the alleged noncompliance of the
122 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Independent with the provisions of Section 9 (g) of the Act; (2) the
alleged failure of the Independent properly to administer in a non-
discriminatory fashion, the contract which it had executed on Jul v
15, 1950, for a 2-year period, as the representative of the employees
involved in this proceeding; and (3) alleged assistance and support
given to the Independent by the Employer during the period prior to
the filing of the petition in this case. These matters were not, how-
ever, raised by the Petitioner in its objections, and the Petitioner does
not take exception to the specific findings and conclusions made by
the Regional Director in his report on objections. We find accord-
ingly, in agreement with the Regional Director, that the Petitioner's
objections are without merit,. and they are hereby overruled.
With respect to the matters raised for the first time in the Petitioner's
motion, the Board has consistently held, as to (1), that the fact of
compliance by a labor organization which is required to comply is a
matter for administrative determination and the Board is administra-
tively satisfied that the independent is and, at all times material to
this proceeding, has been in compliance? We find, accordingly, that
this contention is without merit. We also find that contentions (2)
and (3) do not constitute a valid basis for withholding certification
at this time 2 As to (2), the Board has held that a statutory bar-
gaining agent is charged with the duty of according equal representa-
tion to all employees in the bargaining unit, and that the Board has
power to rescind its certification in the event such equal representa-
tion is not accorded 3 The Independent has denied that it has failed
to accord equal representation to all employees in the unit. More-
over, the Petitioner's motion does not establish that the Independent
will not accord adequate representation to all employees in the appro-
priate unit. We shall therefore not withhold certification of the In-
dependent on the basis of the Petitioner's allegations with respect to
such matters. Such action is, however, without prejudice to the
Board considering the recission of such certification, in the event it
is later shown, upon appropriate motion, that the Independent has
failed to accord equal representation to any employee in the certified
unit.4 As to (3), the Petitioner had filed charges with the Regional
Director embodying the substance of this contention and had, prior
to the election, filed a waiver with respect to the matters contained
in such charges. Moreover, this contention in substance alleges that
the Employer has violated Section 8 (a) (2) of the Act, and the Board
' See Sunbeam Corporation, 94 NLRB 844; Swift & Company, 94 NLRB 917; cf. N. L. R. B.
v. Highland Park Manufacturing Company, 341 U. S. 322.
2 As these contentions were not timely raised with respect to the election, we shall not
consider them as a basis for setting aside the election. See National Container Corporation
of Wisconsin, 99 NLRB 1492.
8 Veneer Products, Inc., 81 NLRB 492, 493.
Veneer Products, Inc., supra.
MORRISON-KNUDSEN COMPANY, INC. 123
has held that it will not, in a representation proceeding, determine
whether the Employer has so violated the Act .5 We find, accordingly,
that this contention is without merit, and the Petitioner's motion is
hereby denied.
As we have overruled the Petitioner's objections and denied its
motion, we shall certify the Independent in accordance with the
tally of ballots.
Certification of Representatives
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED that National Independent Union Council,
Independent Appliance Workers' Union, has been designated and
selected by a majority of the employees of The Coleman Company,
Inc., Wichita, Kansas, in the appropriate unit, described in paragraph
numbered 4, above, as their representative for the purposes of collec-
tive bargaining and that, pursuant to Section 9 (a) of the Act, the
said organization is the exclusive representative of all the employees
in such unit for the purposes of collective bargaining with respect
to rates of pay, wages, hours of employment, and other conditions
of employment.
5 The Electric Auto-Lite Company, 89 NLRB 1407, 1410.
MORRISON-KNUDSEN COMPANY, INC. AND PETER KIEWIT SONS' COM-
PANY 1 and HADLEY WOODROW STEPHENS
OPERATIVE PLASTERERS AND CEMENT FINISHERS INTERNATIONAL Asso-
CIATION, LOCAL No. 867, AFL and HADLEY WOODROW STEPHENS.
Cases Nos. 19-CA-550 and 19-CB-175. October 29, 1952
Decision and Order
On February 19, 1952, Trial Examiner Martin S. Bennett issued his
Intermediate Report in the above-entitled proceeding, finding that
the Respondents had engaged in and were engaging in certain unfair
labor practices, and recommending that they cease and desist there-
from and take certain affirmative action, as set forth in the copy of
the Intermediate Report attached hereto. Thereafter the Respondent
Company filed exceptions to the Intermediate Report and a supporting
brief. The General Counsel and the Respondent Union filed no
exceptions.
The Board 2 has reviewed the rulings made by the Trial Examiner
at the hearing and finds that no prejudicial error was committed.
I Herein jointly called Respondent Company.
2 Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act , the Board has delegated its
powers in connection with this case to a three -member panel [ Chairman Herzog and
Members Styles and Peterson].
101 NLRB No. 40.