Blake Rivet Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsJun 20, 1963

142 N.L.R.B. 1360 (N.L.R.B. 1963)

1360 DECISIONS Or NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD the Employer took exception to the Regional Director's finding that the conduct interfered with the exercise of the employees' free choice. We agree with the Regional Director that the Ideal Electric case, supra, was not intended to, nor did it, overrule the Board's interpreta- tion of the cutoff principle, as set forth in Joanna TV'estern Mills Com- pany, 119 NLRB 1789. It was there held, in effect, that any objec- tionable conduct occurring on or after the day of the beginning of the critical period (in the instant case the day of the filing of the petition) would be consiedred on its merits as a basis for setting aside an elec- tion. However, under all the circumstances, we find, contrary to the Regional Director, that three incidents here involved, all occurring more than 4 months before the election, one consisting of simple in- terrogation and the other two of suggestions to a single employee that benefits might be lost, are isolated and unsubstantial and are not sufficient to warrant setting aside the election. We, therefore, over- rule the objections. As the Petitioner has failed to secure a majority of the valid ballots cast, we shall certify the results of the election. [The Board certified that a majority of the valid votes was not cast for the International Union of Operating Engineers, Local No. 191, AFL-CIO, and that said labor organization is not the exclusive representative of the employees in the unit found appropriate.] MEMBER BROWN, dissenting in part: In disagreement with my colleagues, I would affirm the Regional Director's decision to set the election aside and order a second elec- tion. Two of the three incidents relied upon by the Regional Direc- tor concern threats to the employees' jobs and their means of earning a livelihood. It is difficult to conceive of conduct more likely to in- terfere with an election. Blake Rivet Company and International Association of Machin- ists, District Lodge #94, Local Lodge #311, Petitioner. Case No. 21-RC-1921. June 20, 1963 DECISION AND ORDER CLARIFYING CERTIFICATION On May 25, 1951, the Petitioner was certified as the bargaining representative for all production and maintenance employees of the Blake Rivet Company, South Gate, California, excluding all office and clerical employees, watchmen, guards, professional employees, and supervisors. Since then, the Employer and the Petitioner have been parties to collective-bargaining agreements. Their current con- tract of 2 years' duration expires on August 10, 1964. 142 NLRB No. 143. BLAKE RIVET COMPANY 1361 On April 22, 1963, the Petitioner filed a motion to amend its cer- tification, requesting that employees engaged in the production of bolts be specifically included in the certified unit. Thereafter, on April 26,1963, the Employer replied to the motion. 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 [Members Leedom, Fanning, and Brown]. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds : Since the certification, the Employer has been engaged in the manu- facture of rivets at its plant located at 5030 Firestone Boulevard, South Gate, California. About 2 years ago, the Employer established a bolt division at Sun Valley, California. In late 1962 or early 1963, this division, its employees and machinery, was moved to a building in South Gate, adjacent to the rivet plant. These employees have never been represented by a labor organization, and no labor organization other than the Petitioner now seeks to represent them. There are 17 employees engaged in the manufacture of bolts in the newly occupied building, and 44 employees who manufacture rivets in the adjoining plant. Since the transfer of the bolt-manufacturing process to South Gate, the designation "Bolt Division" has been dis- continued by the Employer. Responsibility for all production and maintenance employees, those manufacturing bolts as well as rivets, is vested in a single individual. A tool-and-die leadman has recently been transferred from the rivet section to become superintendent of the bolt manufacturing employees. There is no substantial disparity in wage rates between employees manufacturing bolts and those pro- ducing rivets; a plan to eliminate any differences is being evolved. Both groups have basically the same hours and fringe benefits. It also appears that shipping functions for both the rivet and bolt sec- tions are performed by the same employees. The bolt manufacturing employees do not undergo any training or apprenticeship which is distinct from that of other unit employees. Rivet employees have been assigned to the manufacture of bolts, and tool-and-die facilities at the rivet plant have been used in connection with the bolt operation. It is evident from all the foregoing that the bolt-manufacturing employees have a close community of interest with the rivet em- ployees in the existing certified unit. Had they been in existence and functioning at the South Gate site at the time of the original proceeding and certification they manifestly would have been included in the unit. In the circumstances of this case, we find that they con- stitute an accretion to the existing unit, and shall clarify the exist- ing certification by specifically including therein the employees who manufacture bolts.' 1 Although believing that the bolt employees are an accretion to the existing unit, th Employer stated its desire that the Board decide the issue. 1362 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the unit covered by the certification here- tofore issued in the above-captioned proceeding be, and hereby is, clarified to read as follows : All production and maintenance employees of the Blake Rivet Company, at its Firestone Boulevard, South Gate, California, plants, including those engaged in the manufacture of rivets and bolts, but excluding all office and clerical employees, watchmen, guards, professional employees, and supervisors as defined in the Act. The American Ship Building Company and Local 374, Inter- national Brotherhood of Boilermakers , Iron Ship Builders, Blacksmiths, Forgers and Helpers. Case No. 13-CA-4504. June 21, 1963 DECISION AND ORDER On May 31 , 1962, Trial Examiner George J. Bott issued his Inter- mediate Report in the above -entitled proceeding , finding that the Respondent had not engaged in unfair labor practices and recom- mending that the complaint be dismissed in its entirety , as set forth in the attached ,Intermediate Report. Thereafter, the General Coun- sel and Charging Party filed exceptions to the Intermediate Report and supporting briefs. The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner made at the hearing and finds that no prejudicial error was committed . The rul- ings are hereby affirmed . The Board has considered the Intermedi- ate Report , the exceptions and briefs , and the entire record in this case, and hereby adopts the findings and conclusions of the Trial Examiner only to the extent consistent with this Decision and Order.' Contrary to the conclusion of the Trial Examiner , we find that the American Ship Building Company, hereinafter called Respondent, violated Section 8 (a) (1) and ( 3) of the Act when it laid off its em- ployees at the South Chicago , Illinois, shipyard. On August 11, 1961 , Respondent notified its employees at the Chicago yard that they were being laid off . The Trial Examiner found that the layoff was precipitated by Respondent 's fear of a strike either when a ship was brought in for repairs , or at a later time as Respondent 's busy season drew near . He concluded that Respond- ent "locked out" its employees as a defensive measure in order to pro- tect the property of its customers from being tied up in a strike. 1 The request of the Charging Party for oral argument is hereby denied inasmuch as the issues are adequately presented in the record add in the briefs. 142 NLRB No. 133.