General Mills, Inc. And Foreman's Association Of America, Chapter No. 165, 1423 (1946)

In the Matter of GENERAL MILLS, INC. and FOREMAN's ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, CHAPTER NO. 165 Case No. 13-R-3085.-Decided March 29, 1946 Messrs. D. E. Balch and Edward K. Thode, both of Minneapolis,

Minn., for the Company.

Walter M. Nelson, Esq., of Detroit, Mich., by Messrs. Bernard E.

Konopka and Hugh P. Davis, both of Chicago, Ill., for the Union.

Mr. A. Sumner Lawrence, of counsel to the Board.

DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION STATEMENT OF THE 'CASE Upon an amended petition duly filed by Foreman's Association of America, Chapter No. 165, herein called the Union, alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of General Mills, Inc., Chicago, Illinois, herein called the Company, the National Labor Relations Board provided for the appropriate hearing on due notice before Gustaf. B. Erickson, Trial Examiner. The hearing was held at Chicago, Illinois, on September 12, 13, and 14, 1945. The Company and the Union appeared and participated.' All parties 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. All parties were afforded opportunity to file briefs with the Board.

Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following:

1In addition to the parties above named, the International Union of Operating Engineers filed a motion to intervene but later withdrew from the hearing when its representative was assured by counsel for the Union that the chief engineer, otherwise known as the power foreman, was not within the unit alleged to be appropriate by the Union.

Other unions representing the rank and file employees filed waivers and disclaimers.

66 N. L R. B., No. 176.

1423 FINDINGS OF FACT I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY General Mills, Inc., a Delaware corporation with its principal office and place of business in Minneapolis, Minnesota, is engaged in the manufacture of flour and cereal products with nllmerous nation-wide plants, included among which is a plant known a FThe South Chicago Plant,2 located at Chicago, Illinois, and the onl- plant involved in this proceeding. The Company annually receives at its South Chicago Plant raw materials valued in excess of $2,000,000, of which approximately 90 percent is obtained from points outside the State of Illinois. Of the finished products manufactured annually by the Company at its South Chicago Plant and,lued in excess of $2,000,000, approximately 70 percent is shipped to points outside the State of Illin'ois. vr The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.

2. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED Foreman's Association of America, Chapter No. 165, unaffiliated, is a labor organization admitting to membership employees of the Company.

3. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION The Company has refused to grant recognition to the Union as exclusive bargaining representatives of any of its supervisory employees upon the ground that its supervisors are a part of management.

   A statement of a Board agent, introduced into evidence at the hearing, indicates that the Union represents a substantial number of employees in the unit hereinafter found appropriate.3 We find that a question affecting commerce 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.

4. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT The Union seeks a unit of supervisory employees of the Company in the classifications of planner, packing foreman, relief packing 2 The South Chicago Plant is divided into three units comprising a cereal plant, a flour mill, and the Rialto Elevator.

   SThe Field Examiner, reported that the Union had submitted 24 application cards bearing the names of 24 employees from among a total of 25 employees in the claimed appropriate unit: and that the cards are dated between January and April 1945.

   foreman, loading foreman, unloading foreman, Kix milling foreman,

   Wheaties milling foreman, forelady assistant to packing foremen, and head cook at the cafeteria, in the cereal plant; and second miller, packing and loading foreman, and sack foreman, in the flour mill;

   excluding employees in the Rialto Elevator. The Company contends that the unit claimed is not appropriate upon the grounds that foremen are not employees within the meaning of Section 2 (3) of the Act and that they are an inseparable part of management.

   In support of its contention that foremen are not employees within the meaning of Section 2 (3) of the Act, the Company has set forth no...