B. F. Avery & Sons Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Sep 20, 1949

86 N.L.R.B. 24 (N.L.R.B. 1949)

In the Matter of B. F. AvERY & SONS COMPANY, EMPLOYER and LODGE
681, INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS, PETITIONER
In the Matter of B. F. AVERY & SONS COMPANY, EMPLOYER and
ELECTRICAL WORKERS UNION LOCAL No. 369, INTERNATIONAL
BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, A. F. L., PETITIONER
Cases Nos. 9-RC-530 and 9-RC-535, respectively.Decided
September 00, 1949
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
Upon petitions duly filed, a consolidated hearing was held before
William A. McGowan, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings
made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby
affirmed. For the reasons given in paragraph 4, below, the motions
to dismiss the petitions made by the Employer and United Auto-
mobile Workers of America, Local Union No. 715, A. F. L., herein
called the Intervenor, upon the ground that the units sought are
inappropriate, are hereby denied.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor
Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with
this case to a three-member panel [Chairman Herzog and Members
Reynolds and Gray].
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the National Labor Relations Act.
2. Th labor organizations involved claim to represent certain em-
ployees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting comerce exists concerning the representation
of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9 (c) (1)
and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The appropriate unit; determination' of representatives :
The Petitioner in Case No. 9-RC-530, herein called the IAM, seeks
to sever from the existing plant-wide unit, a unit of all employees in
the Employer's maintenance machine shop and toolroom. The Peti-
tioner in Case No. 9-RC-535, herein called the I. B. E. W., similarly
86 N. L. R. B., No. 6.
24
B. F. AVERY & SONS COMPANY 25
seeks to sever a unit of maintenance electricians . The Employer and
the Intervenor contend that only the existing plant-wide unit is appro-
priate.
The Employer is a comparatively small manufacturer of farm ma-
chinery, which presently employs about 350 employees at its plant in
Louisville , Kentucky. Since 1941 the Employer has recognized the
Intervenor as bargaining representative of all its production and
maintenance employees, except foundry workers, who have been repre-
sented by International Molders and Foundry Workers of America,
AFL.
Case No. 9-RC-530
The toolroom and machine shop units that the I. A. M. seeks to sever
would include all the employees in the toolroom and in the mainte-
nance machine shop. The 2 groups have their headquarters in separate
buildings, and each is under the supervision of its own foreman. The
machine shop crew comprises 7 maintenance machinist mechanics, an
unspecified number of shop machinists, a die fitter, a forging diemaker,
2 helpers, a tool crib attendant, and an automotive repairman. The
toolroom crew is composed of 13 tool and die makers and 3 toolroom
machinists.'
The maintenance machine mechanics work throughout the plant,
keeping the plant machinery in repair, and occasionally making parts.
The shop machinists work in the machine shop, making parts for use
by the maintenance machine mechanics. The toolroom machinists
work in the toolroom making parts for tools and dies. All these em-
ployees are highly skilled workmen who perform the usual duties of
the machinist's trade. Taken together, and with other employees in
the machine shop and toolroom, they would form an appropriate unit,2
except for the fact that, in this case, the Employer employs many other
skilled machinists who differ from the maintenance and toolroom
machinists only in that they do production work, making parts for
the machinery that is sold by the Employer, not for the machinery
used by the Employer. For example, there are 14 such skilled ma-
chinists in the tractor machine shop, and 3 in the harvester shop. As
the proposed unit of toolroom and machine shop employees comprises
only a segment of a craft group possessing similar skills and perform-
ing comparable work, we find that it is inappropriate.3
I The record is not clear as to whether or not there is a tool crib attendant in the
tool room.
2 Matter of International Harvester Company, 79 N. L. R. B. 1452.
8 Matter of Et1 yl Corporation (Sodium and Tetraethyl Lead Areas), 80 N. L. R. B. 6
Matter of Teletype Corporation, 79 N. L. R. B. 1051; Matter of Shell Oil Company, In-
corporated, 79 N. L. R. B. 618; Matter of International Harvester Company, 77 N. L. R. B.
520.
26 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
At the hearing, the IAM declared that it wishes to represent any
part of the unit sought which the Board might find appropriate. The
toolroom alone, with its complement of 13 tool and die makers, who
form the craft nucleus, and 3 toolroom machinists who make parts
for the tools and dies, constitutes such a unit.4 The toolroom em-
ployees work only in the toolroom, which is separately located and
under separate supervision. The tool and die makers perform the
usual duties of their craft. They are highly skilled employees whose
skills do not appear to be matched by those of related categories of
employees elsewhere in the plant. Accordingly, we believe that the
toolroom employees may, if they so desire, constitute a separate unit,
and properly may be severed from the existing plant-wide unit, not-
withstanding a history of collective bargaining on a more comprehen-
sive basis.
Case No. 9-RC-535
The Petitioner in this case, the IBEW, seeks to represent a unit
of four electricians who constitute a part of the maintenance depart-
ment. The group sought is composed of one leadman, two electricians,
and one apprentice. The leadman and the electricians are highly
skilled craftsmen. The leadman is not a supervisor-he merely trans-
mits to his fellow electricians the work orders given him by the main-
tenance foreman who is the immediate supervisor of all the electri-
cians. These employees are engaged exclusively in work relating to
electrical repair and maintenance throughout the plant. Although
upon occasion an employee from a production department may be
"lent" to the electricians as a helper, the electricians are not trans-
ferred to other departments. These employees form an identifiable,
homogeneous, and skilled craft group such as we have often held may
constitute an appropriate bargaining unit, if they so desire, notwith-
standing their previous inclusion in a broader unit.,'
We shall direct separate elections in the following voting groups,
excluding from each group all other employees, guards, and super-
visors as defined in the Act :
(1) All employees in the toolroom of the Employer's plant in Louis-
ville, Kentucky.
(2) All maintenance electricians at the Employer's plant in Louis-
ville, Kentucky, including the leadman.
However, we shall make no final unit determination at this time,
but shall first ascertain the desires of the employees as expressed in
4 Matter of Robertshaw -Fulton Controls Company, 77 N. L. R. B. 316 ; Matter of General
Motors Corporation , 74 N. L . R. B. 18; Matter of The Beach Company, 72 N. L. R. B. 510.
4Matter of International Harvester Company ( Fort Wayne , Indiana, Plant), 80
N. L. R. B. 1451.
B. F. AVERY & SONS COMPANY 27
the elections hereinafter directed. If a majority in either voting
group vote for the Petitioner for that group, they will be taken to have
indicated their desire to constitute a separate appropriate unit.
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining with the Employer, elections by secret
ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than 30 days
from the date of this Direction, under the direction and supervision of
the Regional Director for the Region in which this case was heard,
and subject to Sections 203.61 and 203.62 of National Labor Relations
Board Rules and Regulations, among the employees described in para-
graph numbered 4, above, who were employed during the pay-roll
period immediately preceding the date of this Direction of Elections,
including employees who did not work during said pay-roll period
because they were ill or on vacation or temporarily laid off, but exclud-
ing those employees who have since quit or been discharged for cause
and have not been rehired or reinstated prior to the date of the elec-
tions, and also excluding employees on strike who are not entitled to
reinstatement, to determine :
(a) Whether the employees in voting group (1) desire to be repre-
sented, for purposes of collective bargaining, by Lodge 681, Inter-
national Association of Machinists, or by United Automobile Workers
of America, Local Union No. 715, A. F. L., or by neither; and
(b) Whether the employees in voting group (2) desire to be repre-
sented, for purposes of collective bargaining, by Electrical Workers
Union Local No. 369, international Brotherhood of Electrical Work-
_ ers, A. F. L., or by United Automobile Workers of America, Local
Union No. 715, A. F. L., or by neither.