Bethlehem Steel Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 5, 1941

33 N.L.R.B. 1064 (N.L.R.B. 1941)

In the Matter of BETHLEHEM STEEL COMPANY ( SHIPBUILDING DIVISION )b
and INTERNATIONAL MOLDERS AND FOUNDRY WORKERS UNION OF
NORTH AMERICA , LOCAL No. 81 (A. F. OF L.)
In the Matter of BETHLEHEM STEEL COMPANY ( SHIPBUILDING DIVISION)
and LOCAL 96, INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS-
(A. F. OF L.)
In the Matter of BETILEHEM STEEL COMPANY ( SHIPBUILDING DIVISION)
and INDUSTRIAL UNION OF MARINE AND SHIPBUILDING WORKERS OV
AMERICA, LOCAL No. 12 (C. I. 0.)
In the Matter of BETHLEHEM STEEL COMPANY ( SHIPBUILDING DIVISION)
and LOCAL 807 , INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS , CHAUF-
FEURS, WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS (A. F. OF L.)
Cases Nos. R-2691 to R-96.94 inclusive .Decided August 5, 1941
Jurisdiction : shipbuilding and ship repairing industry.
Investigation and Certification of Representatives : existence of question: re-
fusal to bargain with any of unions involved until determination of units by
Board and until majority in such units select representatives ; election
necessary.
Units Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : single or separate units com-
prising: (1) all employees except certain foundry employees and other desig-
nated supervisory and technical employees; and (2) foundry employees, except
crane operators and pattern makers; determination of, dependent upon elec-
tions-separate units of engineers and truck drivers found inappropriate.
Practice and Procedure : petitions dismissed where no appropriate units found
within scope of petitions.
Cravath, de Gersdorff, Swaine d Wood, by Mr. Kenneth L. Houck,,
of New York City, for the respondent.
Mr. George P. Delaney, of Washington, D. C., Mr. Frank P. Jen-
rette, of New York City, Mr. William Megge, of Bayonne, N. J., and
Mr. James H. Blankley, of Mariners Harbor, N. Y., for the Molders.
Mr. Patrick Heffernan, of Staten Island, N. Y., for the Operating
Engineers. -
Mr. Samuel L. Rothbard, of Newark, N. J., and Mr. Philip H. Van
Gelder, of Camden, N. J., for the Industrial Union.
Rice d Maguire, by Mr. Harold F. Berg, of New York City, and
Mr. Michael Igoe and Mr. William S. Devery, of New York City, for
the Teamsters.
Mr. Herbert N. Shenkin, of counsel to the Board.
33 N. L. R B., No 185.
1064
BETHLEHEM STEEL CORPOiRATMN 1065
DECISION
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
AND
ORDER
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On April 14, 1941, International Molders and Foundry Workers
Union of North America, Local No. 81, affiliated with the American
Federation of Labor, herein called the Molders, filed with the Regional
Director for the Second Region (New York City) a petition alleging
that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the repre-
sentation of employees of Bethlehem Steel Company (Shipbuilding
Division), Staten Island, New York, herein called the Company, and
requesting an investigation and certification of representatives, pursu-
ant to Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449,
herein called the Act. On April 15, May 13, and June 13, 1941, re-
spectively, Local 96, International Union of Operating Engineers,
affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, herein called the
Operating Engineers, Industrial Union of Marine and Shipbuilding
Workers of America, Local No. 12, affiliated with the Congress of
Industrial Organizations, herein called the Industrial Union,' and
Local 807, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Ware-
housemen and Helpers, affiliated with the American Federation of
Labor, herein called the Teamsters, filed similar petitions with the
Regional Director. On June 23, 1941, the National Labor Relations
Board, herein called the Board, acting pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the
Act and Article III, Sections 3 and 10 (c) (2), of National Labor
Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, or-
dered an investigation, authorized the Regional Director to conduct it
and to provide for an appropriate hearing upon due notice, and con-
solidated the four cases.
On June 24, 1941, the Regional Director issued a notice of hearing,
copies of which were duly served on all parties. Pursuant to notice,
a hearing was held on June 30, 1941, at New York City, before Will
Maslow, the Trial Examiner duly designated by the Chief Trial
Examiner. The Company, the Molders, the Operating Engineers, the
Industrial Union, and the Teamsters were represented by counsel or
their representatives; all participated in the hearing. Full oppor-
tunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to
introduce evidence bearing on the issues was afforded all parties.
'In this opinion , the parent organization and other locals affiliated with it, are occa-
sionally so called.
1066 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
During the course of the hearing , the Trial Examiner made numerous
rulings on motions and on objections to the admission of evidence.
The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner and finds
that no prejudicial errors were committed. The rulings , except as
noted below , are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Bethlehem Steel Company is a Pennsylvania corporation having
offices for its Shipbuilding Division in New York City . It operates
a shipyard at Mariners Harbor, Staten Island, New York, where it
is engaged in the repair , reconditioning , construction , and' reconstruc-
tion of ships .- This is the only plant of the Company involved in this
proceeding , and it is herein called the Staten Island Yard. During
1940 the aggregate value of all materials used by the Company at
the Staten Island Yard was in excess of $6,900,000, of which more
than 70 per cent was delivered to the Staten Island Yard from points
outside the State of New Yo"k. During the same year the aggregate
amounts billed by the Company for the repair , reconditioning, con-
struction , and reconstruction of ships at the Staten Island Yard was
in excess of $9,500,000 , of which more than 95 per cent represented
work on ships destined for use in interstate or foreign commerce.
The Company , either directly or indirectly, also owns and operates
three - other shipyards in the Port of New York, one located in Ho-
boken, New Jersey , and two in Brooklyn , New York.
The Company stipulated at the hearing that it was engaged at the
Staten Island Yard in commerce within the meaning of the Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
International Molders and Foundry Workers Union of North Amer-
ica, Local No . 81, affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, is
a labor organization admitting to membership foundry employees of
the Company.
Local 96, International Union of Operating Engineers , affiliated
with the American Federation of Labor , is a labor organization ad-
mitting to membership all engineers employed by the Company in
the operation of cranes , hoists, boilers , engines, and compressors.
Local 807, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs,
Warehousemen and Helpers , affiliated with the American Federation
of Labor, is a labor organization admitting to membership truck
drivers employed by the Company.
BETHLEHEM STEEL CORPORAT'I'ON 1067
Industrial Union of Marine and Shipbuilding Workers of America,
Local No. 12, affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations,
is a labor organization admitting to membership employees of the
Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Company has declined to bargain with any of the unions in-
volved in this proceeding as the exclusive representative of all the
employees in any of the bargaining units alleged to be appropriate
by any of the unions until the appropriate bargaining unit has been
determined by the Board and representatives have been selected by a
majority of the employees in such unit. These facts were stipulated
by all parties at the hearing.
A statement of the Regional Director introduced into evidence indi-
cates that each of the unions has been designated as bargaining repre-
sentative by a substantial number of the Company's employees within
the units alleged by each to be appropriate.2
We find that questions have arisen concerning the representation of
the employees of the Company.
IV. THE EFFECT OF THE QUESTIONS CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
UPON COMMERCE
We find that the questions concerning representation which have
° arisen, occurring in connection with the operations of the Company
described in Section I, above, have a close, intimate, and substantial
relation to trade, traffic, and commerce among the several States and
tend to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce and
the free flow of commerce.
The Regional Director reported : ( 1) that the Molders submitted to her membership
books of 78 employees in the foundry of the Staten Island Yard , that the names on these
books corresponded to names on the foundry pay roll of the Company , and that there
were 85 names on such pay roll; ( 2) that the Operating Engineers submitted to her their
membership roster containing 34 names of persons in the unit alleged by it to be appro-
priate, that 29 of these names corresponded to names of employees in such unit, and that
there were 67 employees in such unit ; ( 3) that the Teamsters had submitted to her their
membership roster containing 15 names, that 14 of these names corresponded to names
in the allegedly appropriate unit on the Company's pay roll, and that there were 21 em-
ployees in such unit ; and (4 ) that the Industrial Union submitted to her 2 ,477 membership
application cards of employees in the unit alleged by it to be appropriate , all of which
were dated between April 1, 1936 , and June 1 , 1941, that all of the signatures appeared to
be genuine , that 1,170 of the 2 ,477 signatures were the names of persons on the Company's
June 5, 1941 , pay roll, and that there were approximately 3,400 names on this pay roll.
The Teamsters presented three additional applications for membership to the Trial Ex-
aminer at the hearing . The Trial Examiner stated that the signatures on the applica-
tions appeared to be genuine and that two of the three names appeared on the Company's
pay roll . The third man appeared to have been taken on as a truck driver after the date
of the available pay roll
1068 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
V. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Molders contend that all foundry employees in the Staten
Island Yard engaged in the production of castings, exclusive of crane
operators and pattern makers, constitute an appropriate unit. The
Operating Engineers contend that all engineers in the Staten Island
Yard engaged in the operation of cranes, hoists, boilers, engines, and
compressors constitute an appropriate unit. The Teamsters contend
that all truck drivers in the Staten Island Yard constitute an appro-
priate unit. The Industrial Union and the Company contend that
the appropriate unit should consist of all employees in the Staten Island
Yara, excluding all salaried employees and executives or supervisors
who do not work with tools, foremen, timekeepers, draftsmen, watch-
men, employees of the engineering department including technical
employees in that department, janitors and janitresses, office and cleri-
cal employees, snappers who are paid on a salary basis, and all technical
employees working on a salary.
Collective bargaining at the Staten Island Yard dates back to
1934. In that year an unaffiliated welders union requested the old
National Labor Relations Board to hold a craft election restricted
to welders at the Staten Island Yard. At that time the Staten Island
Yard, as well as the three other shipyards in the Port of New York
now owned and operated by the Company, was owned and operated
by United Dry Docks, Incorporated'. The Marine Workers Metal
Trades District Council of the Port of New York, affiliated with the °
American Federation of Labor, herein called the Council, intervened
in that proceeding and contended for a plant-wide unit. The old
Board decided against craft representation, and since no request
had been made for a plant-wide election, no election was held,'
Thereafter, the Industrial Union began organizing in the New
York area, and arranged for a consent election at the Staten Island
Yard in the spring of 1936. The employees were given a choice be-
tween the Industrial Union and the American Federation of Labor;
the former received a majority of the votes. On June 4, 1936, the
Industrial Union and United Shipyards, Inc.4 entered into an exclu-
sive collective bargaining contract for the Staten Island Yard. This
contract ran for a 1-year period and covered an industrial unit, in-
cluding all employees at the Staten Island Yard, with certain
designated exceptions not here material.
8 Matter of United Dry Docks, Incorporated, and International Association of Mechanical
Welders, Local No. 13 , et al, 1 N L. R. B. (old) 150
4 Which had at this time acquired ownership of the four shipyards now owned and
operated by the Company.
BETHLEHEM STEEL CORPORATION 1069
At the expiration of the 1936 contract, negotiations for its renewal
broke down and the Industrial Union called a strike. The Staten
Island Yard was closed for approximately 2 months, but on August
6, 1937, United Shipyards, Inc., executed a contract with the Council.
This contract provided for an industrial unit with the Council repre-
senting the various A. F. of L. craft unions affiliated with it; it
remained in force for one year and was not renewed.
Following the expiration of the August 6, 1937, contract, the Indus-
trial Union was reorganized and put on a new drive for members at
the Staten Island Yard. Organizational activities also went forward
at the Hoboken and Brooklyn Yards, and representation proceedings
involving these yards were instituted before the Board. On August
2, 1939, the Board certified the Industrial Union as the exclusive
representative of the employees in those yards.5 The labor organi-
zations involved in that representation proceeding were the Industrial
Union and the Council. All parties stipulated that the appropriate
unit in each of the three shipyards should consist of all employees,
with certain designated exceptions. This unit, which the Board
found to be appropriate, is the same as that contended for in this
case by the Industrial Union and the Company. The Industrial
Union and the Company entered into a contract on May 3, 1941,
covering the industrial unit at the Hoboken Yard, but no contracts
have yet been executed for the other two shipyards in which the
Industrial Union was certified.
On June 10, 1941, the Industrial Union entered into a Memorandum
of Understandings with the Company which provided, in substance,
that the Company would enter into negotiations with the Industrial
Union looking toward an agreement covering the various Atlantic
Coast shipbuilding yards of the Company and its subsidiaries, and
that when the Industrial Union wad certified as the collective bar-
gaining representative in an industrial unit at any of those yards,
the agreement so consummated would cover them. The purpose of
this Memorandum is recited to be this : that when the Industrial
Union has been certified in all of the Company's shipyards, one
master agreement covering all employees in the industrial unit at all
the shipyards would be in effect. Upon objection, the Trial Exam-
iner refused to admit a copy of this Memorandum into evidence,
and it was received as a rejected exhibit. We reverse this ruling of
the Trial Examiner and 'admit the Memorandum of Understandings
into evidence."
5Matter of United Shipyards, Inc. and Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corporation, Ltd. and
Industrial Union of Marine and Shipbuilding Workers of America, 14 N. L. R B. 169.
During the pendency of this proceeding Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corporation, Ltd. acquired
the property, and assets of United Shipyards, Inc.
0 Designated C. I. 0 Exhibit 3 at hearing.
1070 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
The unit contended for by the-Operating Engineers includes all
engineers engaged in the operation of cranes, hoists, boilers, engines,
and compressers. These employees work throughout the shipyard and
consist of those who operate and tend to equipment as distinguished
from technical engineers. There are about 67 -employees in this
group, of whom the Operating Engineers appear to represent 29.
The Industrial Union also has several members among this group of
employees.
There is no history of separate collective bargaining between the
Operating Engineers and the various owners of the Staten Island
Yard, The record does not clearly indicate whether these engineers
were covered by the consent election agreement of 1936 or whether
they participated in the election; the June 4, 1936, contract ostensibly
covered them. The Operating Engineers actively participated in
the negotiation of the contract between the Council and United Ship-
yards, Inc. ; and an international representative of the union signed
the contract. About a year ago the Operating Engineers secured a
general wage increase from the Company for all engineers in the
Staten Island Yard. -
Under these circumstances, and particularly in view of the col-
lective bargaining history at the Staten Island Yard, we are of the
opinion that the unit requested by the Operating Engineers is not
appropriate. We shall therefore, dismiss the petition filed by the
Operating Engineers.
The Teamsters contend for a unit consisting of all truck drivers
employed by the Company in the Staten Island Yard. These em-
ployees transport materials in the shipyard and also make trips out-
side the shipyard for that purpose. There appear to be 21 such
employees, of whom the Teamsters represent 16.
Although the Teamsters secured members at the Staten Island
Yard about 3 years ago, there is no history of separate bargaining
between the Teamsters and any of the owners of the Staten Island
Yard. There has been but one meeting of the Teamsters local at
the Staten Island Yard, and the Teamsters have not taken up griev-
ances or questions of wages and hours with the Company on behalf
of the truck drivers. Under these circumstances and particularly in
view of the collective bargaining history at the Staten Island Yard,
we find the unit contended for by the Teamsters to be inappropriate.
We shall, therefore, dismiss the Teamsters' petition.
As indicated above, the Molders contend for a craft unit consisting
of all foundry employees in the Staten Island Yard engaged in the
production of castings, excluding crane operators and pattern makers.
There are approximately 83 employees in this unit ; according to
the Regional Director's report, the Molders appear to represent 78
BETHLEHEM STEEL CORPORATTON 1071
,of such employees. The foundry is located in a separate building
about a quarter of a mile away from the shipyard proper. The work
in the foundry is specialized, and foundry employees are not readily
interchangeable with employees in the rest of the shipyard. The
evidence indicates that not all shipyards have foundries; the one at
the Staten Island Yard is the only foundry in the Port of New York.
This foundry is what is known as it "jobbing shop"; that is, it pro-
duces castings of all types. About 80 per cent of the castings are
for shipbuilding purposes and some of these are sold to other ship-
building companies.
The Molders have had members among foundry employees ever
since the foundry was built in 1916. There have been no separate
collective bargaining agreements between the various owners of the
Staten Island Yard and the Molders, but the Company has recog-
nized the Molders as the representative of foundry employees for
the presentation of grievances., Furthermore, in October 1939, the
Molders secured a general wage increase for molders and core mak-
ers in the foundry, and within the past year the Molders also secured
a wage increase for helpers in the foundry.
Foundry employees were' not covered by-the consent election agree-
ment of 1936, nor did they participate in that election. A representa-
tive, of the Industrial Union testified that the reason for this was
that the foundry was considered somewhat separate from the ship-
yard. However, foundry employees were apparently covered by the
June 4, 1936, contract. The strike call in 1937 was not addressed to
foundry employees, and they continued to work during the strike.
The Molders was not a party .to the contract consummated by the
Council in 1937. The Industrial Union does not appear to have any
members among the foundry employees.
The history of collective bargaining at the Staten Island Yard,
as well as the organizational developments in the Hoboken and
Brooklyn Yards, support the contention of the Industrial Union for
a plant-wide unit at the Staten Island Yard. The 1936 and 1937
contracts both cover units substantially the same as that contended
for by the Industrial Union here. Furthermore, recent developments
in the shipbuilding industry indicate a trend toward industry-wide
collective bargaining, supplemented by individual contracts between
particular unions and shipyards on an industrial basis.? We find that
the industrial unit contended for by the Industrial Union and the
Company may constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of
7 Under the auspices of the Shipbuilding Stabilization Committee of the Office of Pro-
duction Management , agreements have been consummated on a coast -wide basis between
the Metal Trades Department (A F. of L ) and west Coast shipbuilders, and between the
Industrial Union and Atlantic Seaboard shipyards See 8 L. R. R. 269, 585.
1072 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
collective bargaining." However, because of the physical separation
and the organizational and bargaining history of foundry employees,
we find that the foundry employees could function either as a sepa-
rate unit or as part of the industrial unit. We shall, therefore,
direct that an election be held among all foundry employees of the
Company in the Staten Island Yard engaged in the production of
castings, but excluding crane operators and pattern makers, to deter'-
mine whether they desire to be represented by the Molders, by the
Industrial Union, or by neither. On the results of this election will
depend the appropriate unit. If these employees select a bargaining
1epresentative other than the representative selected by the employees
in the plant-wide industrial unit, they will constitute a separate and
distinct appropriate unit. If they choose the same representative
as the employees in the plant-wide unit, they will be merged into a
single unit with such employees.
We find that all the employees of the Company at the Staten Island
Yard, excluding all salaried employees and executives or supervisors
who do not work with tools, foremen, timekeepers, draftsmen, watch-
men, employees of the engineering department including technical
Employees in that department, janitors and janitresses, office and
clerical employees, snappers who are paid on a salary basis, and all
technical employees working on a salary, may properly constitute a
unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining which
would insure to such employees the full benefit of their right to
self-organization and to collective bargaining and otherwise effectuate
the policies of the Act. As indicated above, all foundry employees
of the Company in the Staten Island Yard engaged in the production
of castings, excluding crane operators and pattern workers, may or
may not be included within such unit, depending upon the results
of an election which we shall direct. We shall, therefore, make no,
final determination of the appropriate unit or units pending the-
election to be conducted among the foundry employees.
VI. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
We have heretofore decided that a separate election will be held'
to determine the collective bargaining representative for the foundry
employees in the unit described above. We find that the question
concerning representation of the employees in the plant-wide indus-
trial unit can best be resolved by means of an election by secret
8 See Matter of Robert Jacobs, Inc and Industrial Union of Marine Shipbuilding Work-
ers of America, Local 38, 32 N L R B 646; Matter of Robins Dry Dock & Repair-
Company and Industrial Union of Marine Shipbuilding WorLers of America, Local 39,
33 N L R B 15 In both of these shipyard cases the Board found industrial unit-
to be appropriate , despite craft union contentions to the contrary.
BETHLEHEM STEEL CORPORATION 1073
ballot. Since none of the craft unions have any substantial member-
ship among the employees in the industrial unit, we shall direct that
the employees in such unit shall decide whether or not they desire
to be represented by the Industrial Union for collective bargaining
purposes.
At the request of the Trial Examiner, the various parties expressed
their preference as to the pay-roll date to be used if an election or
elections should be *directed. However, no reason appears why, in
accordance with our usual policy, the pay roll immediately preceding
the date of the Direction of Elections should not be used. Accord-
ingly, we shall direct that all employees of the Company at the Staten
Island Yard in the groups set forth above who were employed by the
Company during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date
of the Direction of Elections herein, subject to such limitations and
additions as are set forth in the Direction, shall be eligible to vote.
Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and upon the entire
record in the case, the Board makes the following :
CONCLUSION OF LAW
Questions affecting commerce have arisen concerning the repre-
sentation of employees of the Bethlehem Steel Company (Shipbuild-
ing Division), Staten Island, New York, within the meaning of Sec-
tion 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations
Act.
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 Re-
lations Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 8, of National Labor
Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, it
is hereby -
DIREcTEn that, as part of the investigation authorized by the Board
to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining
with the Bethlehem Steel Company (Shipbuilding Division), Staten
Island, New York, 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 Second Region, acting in this matter as agent for
the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Article III, Secs
tion 9, of said Rules and Regulations :
1. Among all foundry employees in the Staten Island Yard of the
Company engaged in the production of castings, who were employed
during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of this
1074 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Direction, including employees who did not work during said pay-roll
period because they were ill, or on vacation, or in the active military
service or training of the United States, or temporarily laid off, but
excluding crane operators and pattern makers, and any employees
who have since quit or been discharged for cause, to determine
whether they desire to be represented by International Molders and
Foundry Workers Union of North America, Local No. 81, affiliated
with the American Federation of Labor, or by Industrial Union
of Marine and 'Shipbuilding Workers of America, Local No. 12,
affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, for the
purposes of collective bargaining, or by neither;
2. Among all employees of the Company at the Staten Island
Yard who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately
preceding the date of this Direction including employees who did
not work during such pay-roll period because they were ill, or on
vacation, or in the active military service or training of the United
States or temporarily laid off, but excluding all foundry employees
(other than crane operators and pattern makers) engaged in the
production of castings, all salaried employees and executives or super-
visors who do not work with tools, foremen, timekeepers, draftsmen,
watchmen, employees of the engineering department including tech-
nical employees in that department, janitors and janitresses, office
and clerical employees, snappers who are paid, on a salaried basis,
and all technical employees working on a salary, and any employees
who have since quit or been discharged for cause, to determine
whether or not they desire to be represented by Industrial Union
of Marine and Shipbuilding Workers of America, Local No. 12,
affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, for the
purposes of collective bargaining.
ORDER
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact, the National
Labor Relations Board hereby orders that the petitions for investi-
gation and certification of representatives of employees of Bethlehem
Steel Company (Shipbuilding Division), Staten Island, New York,
filed by Local 96, International Union of Operating Engineers, and
Local 807, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs,
Warehousemen and Helpers, both affiliated with the American Fed-
eration of Labor be, and they hereby are, dismissed.
MR. EDWIN S. SMITH, dissenting :
I see no justification for granting foundry employees the privilege
of splitting themselves off from the industrial unit iri this case.
BETHLEHEM STEEL CORPORATION 1075
They constitute employees in one of many departments in an inte-
grated shipbuilding yard. The collective bargaining history at the
Staten Island Yard, as the majority of the Board points out, has
been on an industrial basis, and what separate bargaining there has
been between the foundry employees and the Company has occurred
subsequent to the establishment of bargaining on an industrial basis.
In marked contrast to the bargaining history of the Industrial
Union and the. Council , both of which received exclusive recognition
and signed contracts , the foundry employees have never received
separate craft recognition from the Company , nor have they entered
into any collective bargaining agreements with the Company.9 I
think the reasons expressed in my dissenting opinions in the Allis-
Chalmers 10 and subsequent cases are here applicable , and under these
circumstances I would find the unit sought by the Industrial Union
to be appropriate.
If, however , a separate election is to be held among the foundry
employees , as a majority of the Board has directed , I believe for
the reasons stated by me in previous dissenting opinions',' that the
Board's decision should provide that if the foundry employees do
not vote themselves out of the industrial unit by designating the
craft union , they should then be considered a component part of the
industrial unit.
9 For these reasons I would not apply the rule set forth in my concurring opinion in
Matter of American Hardware Corporation and United Electrical and Radio Workers or
America, 4 N. L R B 412.
10 Matter of Allis-Chalmers Manufacturing Company and International Union, United
Automobile Workers of America, Local 248, 4 N L R B 159, 175
u Matter of The Cudahy Packing Company and Local 55, United Packinghouse Workers
of America, of Packinghouse ' Workers Organizing Committee , C. 1 0, 32 N L R B
72; Matter of Quaker Oats Company and United Cereal Workers Local Industrial Union,
No 1105. 32 N L R B 312.
450122-42- i-ol 33--09