Combustion Engineering Co., Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Feb 20, 1940

20 N.L.R.B. 602 (N.L.R.B. 1940)

In the Matter of COMBUSTION ENGINEERING COMPANY, INC. and LODGE
1230, AMALGAMATED ASSN. OF IRON, STEEL & TIN WORKERS OF NORTH
AMERICA
Case No. C-1108.-Decided February 20, 1940
. Boiler and Pipe Manufacturing Industry-Interference, Restraint , and Coer-
cion-Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : all employees classified as
boilermakers in former representation proceeding, and other production and
maintenance employees , exclusive of supervisory and clerical employees , foundry
employees, and machinists ; unit determined in prior representation proceeding,
Globe election-Representatives : proof of choice : certification in prior repre-
sentation proceeding , after Globe election-Collective Bargaining : charges of
refusal to bargain sustained , where respondent refused to grant exclusive recog-
nition on ground that inclusion,by Board of all types of boilermakers in a single
unit rendered unit inappropriate , and on asserted ground that. grant of exclu-
sive recognition would cause strike of dissenting minority of employees.
Mr. Alexander E. Wilson, Jr., for the Board.
Sizer, Chambliss d Kefaurver, by Mr. Burnet Sizer and Mr. Jac
Chambliss, of Chattanooga, Tenn., for the respondent.
Mr. Noel R. Beddow, of Birmingham, Ala., for the Amalgamated
and the S. W. O. C.
•. Miss Edna Loeb and Mr. Guy Farmer, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
ORDER
• STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon charges duly filed on July 30, 1938, by Lodge 1230, Amal-
gamated Association of Iron, Steel & Tin Workers of North America,
herein called the Amalgamated, the National Labor Relations Board,
herein called the Board, by the Regional Director for the Tenth
Region (Atlanta, Georgia), issued its complaint, dated October 8,
19381 against Combustion Engineering Company, Inc., Chattanooga,
Tennessee, herein called the respondent, alleging that the respondent
had engaged in and was engaging in unfair labor practices affecting
commerce within the meaning of Section 8 (1) and (5) and Section
2 (6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449,
herein called the Act. Copies of the complaint and accompanying
20 N. L . R. B., No. 62.
602
COMBUSTION ENGINEERING C0AIPAN'Y, INC.'-'- - 603
notices of hearing were duly served upon the respondent- and the
Amalgamated. The complaint, in substance, alleged that on or about
July 1, 1938, and at all times thereafter, the respondent refused to
bargain collectively with the Amalgamated 1 as the exclusive repre-
sentatives of the respondent's employees in an appropriate unit con-
sisting of all boilermakers and helpers, welders and welding-machine
operators, welders' helpers and apprentices, galvanizers, form-press
operators, form-machine operators, fit-up men' (except those working
on cast iron boiler castings), layers-out and helpers, chippers, grinders,
burners, .furnace ;operators, riveters and rivet-machine operators, rivet
heaters , reamers, rod room men, testers, test-pit helpers, boilermakers'
mechanics, tube men, inspectors and helpers, punch-shear operators,
X-ray helpers, sub-foremen, flange workers, tapping-machine opera-
tors and helpers, and all other production and maintenance employees,
exclusive of foundry employees, supervisory employees, clerical
employees, machinists, machinists'. helpers and apprentices, 'header-
mill specialists, drill-press operators and helpers; milling-machine
operators, drill-machine operators, bolt-machine operators, handy-
men, engineers, crane operators employed in the machine shops, planer
operators, repairmen, maintenance men, and tool-room helpers em-
ployed at the respondent's Hedges-Walsh-Weidner division, Chatta-
nooga, Tennessee, and that the. respondent by this and other conduct
interfered with, restrained, and coerced its employees in the exercise
of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act.
On October 14,_ 1938, the respondent filed its answer, admitting
the allegations of the.complaint concerning the nature and scope of
its business, denying the. refusal to bargain, but admitting that it had
refused to recognize the Amalgamated as the exclusive representative
of the employees in the alleged appropriate unit.
Pursuant to notice, a hearing was held at Chattanooga, Tennessee,
on October 17, 1938, before Earl S. Bellman, the Trial Examiner
duly. , designated by , the Board. The Board, the respondent, the
Amalgamated, and Steel. Workers Organizing Committee, herein
called the S. W. O. C., were represented by counsel and participated
in the hearing. Full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-
examine witnesses ; and to introduce evidence bearing upon the issues
was afforded all parties. During the course of the hearing, counsel
for the respondent moved to have the record in the 'representation
proceeding' hereinafter. referred to 2 made a part of the record in the
present proceeding. The Trial' Examiner reserved ruling on this
motion for 'his Intermediate' Report. At the close of the Board's
The Board in the representation proceeding hereinafter referred to certified Amalgam-
ated Association of Iron, Steel & Tin' Workers of North America which is the parent
organization of the Amalgamated .. For the purposes of this proceeding we consider the
Amalgamated and its parent organization as one and - the same labor organization.
a See Section III below.
604 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
case counsel for the Board moved to have the pleadings .conformed
to the proof. The motion was granted by the Trial Examiner. - The
Board has reviewed the rulings of. the Trial Examiner at the hearing
on motions and on objections to the admission of evidence and finds
that no prejudicial errors were committed. The rulings are hereby
affirmed.
On December 27, 1938, the Trial Examiner issued his Intermediate
Report, finding that the respondent had engaged. in and was en-
gaging in the unfair labor practices alleged in the complaint, and
recommending that the respondent cease and desist therefrom and
upon request bargain collectively with the Amalgamated as the ex-
clusive representative of its employees in the unit. In his Inter-
mediate Report the Trial Examiner denied the motion made by the
respondent at the hearing to incorporate the record in the repre-
sentation case into the record of this proceeding. The Board has
reviewed this ruling and finds that the Trial Examiner erred in
denying the motion of the respondent. The ruling is hereby re-
versed and the record in the representation case is hereby made a
part of the record in the present proceeding. On January 9, 1939,
the respondent filed exceptions to the Intermediate Report and, on
February 9, 1939, filed a brief. Pursuant ' to notice to the respond-
ent, the Amalgamated, and the S. W. O. C., a hearing was held
before the Board in Washington, D. C., on April 13, 1939, for the
purpose of oral argument. The respondent appeared by counsel and
participated in the oral argument. The Board has considered the
respondent's exceptions to the Intermediate Report and its brief in
support thereof, and to the extent that they are inconsistent with the
findings, conclusions, and order below, finds the exceptions to be
without merit.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE RESPONDENT
Combustion Engineering Company, Inc., is a Delaware corpo-
ration with its principal executive offices located in New York City
and branch offices located in a number of States in the United States.
The issues in this case are confined to the plant which the re-
spondent operates at Chattanooga, Tennessee. At this plant, which
is known as the Hedges-Walsh-Weidner division, the respondent is
engaged in the manufacture of range boilers, power boilers, miscel-
laneous pressure vessels, soil pipe, and boiler accessories. _ All the
raw materials used in the operation of the Hedges-Walsh-Weidner
division are procured from points outside Tennessee. Approximately
COMBUSTION ENGINEERING. COMPANY, INC. 605
12,000 tons of pig iron, 6,000 tons of sheet steel, 1,000 tons of struc-
tural steel plate, 500 tons of steel bars, 6,000 tons of steel boiler plate,
and 345 tons of spelter (zinc), all used in the course of a year, are
shipped to the plant by rail from Alabama, Pennsylvania, Maryland,
and Texas. The products manufactured and sold by this division
annually are valued at approximately $3,500,000, and over 90 per
cent of such products are shipped to points outside Tennessee. The
pay roll lists 913 employees, exclusive of supervisory and clerical
employees.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
Amalgamated Association of Iron, Steel & Tin Workers of North
America is a labor organization affiliated with the Committee for
Industrial Organization. Lodge 1230 is a local union chartered by
that organization and admits to membership employees of the re-
spondent. Steel Workers Organizing Committee is likewise a labor
organization' affiliated with the Committee for Industrial Organiza-
tion. It organizes workers on behalf of the Amalgamated, and
forms, supervises, guides, and assists lodges thereof.
International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders
and Helpers,. Subordinate Lodge No. 656, is a labor organization
affiliated with the Building Trades Department, the Metal Trades
Department, and the Railway Employees Department of the Ameri-
can Federation of Labor. It admits to membership all employees
of the Hedges-Walsh-Weidner divison engaged in the construction,
assembly, and erection of boilers, drums, tanks, and parts thereof.
III. THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
In June 1937, the S. W. O. C„ for and in behalf of the Amalgamated,
filed a petition with the Regional Director, alleging that a question
affecting commerce had-arisen concerning,the representation of the
respondent's employees in its Hedges-Walsh-Weidner division, and
requesting an investigation and certification of representatives, pur-
suant to Section 9 (c) of the Act. On February 16, 1938, after hearing
upon due notice, the Board issued its Decision and Direction of Elec-
tions, finding, inter alia, that the determination of the appropriate
unit or units for the purposes of collective bargaining among the re-
spondent's employees at its Hedges-Walsh-Weidner division would
depend upon the desires of the employees within certain groups, these
desires to be ascertained by elections. The Board directed the Re-
gional Director to conduct elections by secret ballot among, inter alia,
two groups of employees, consisting of (1) all boilermakers and help-
3 Matter of Combustion Engineering . Company, Inc. and Steel Workers Organizing Com-
mittee, for and in behalf of the Amalgamated Association of Iron , Steel t Tin Workers
of North America, .5 N. L.-•R ."-B«8'4
606 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ers, welders and. welding-machine operators, welders' helpers., and ap-
prentices; galvanizers, form-press operators, form-machine operators,
fit-up men (except those working on cast iron boiler;castings);:layers-
out and helpers, chippers, grinders, burners, furnace operators, riveters
and rivet-machine operators, rivet heaters, reamers, rod-room men,
testers, test-pit helpers, boilermakers' mechanics, tube men, inspectors
and helpers, punch-shear operators, X-ray helpers, subforemen, flange
workers, and tapping-machine operators. and helpers, exclusive of
those employed-in the foundry, and (2) all other production and main-
tenance employees, except' supervisory employees, clerical employees,
foundry employees, machinists, machinists' helpers and apprentices,
header-mill specialists, drill-press operators and helpers, milling-
machine operators, drill-machine operators, bolt-machine operators,
handymen, engineers, crane operators employed -in-the machine shops,
planer operators, repairmen, maintenance men, and toolroom helpers,
to determine whether the employees in the first group, herein called
the boilermakers, desired to be represented by the S. W. O. C. or by the
International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders and
Helpers, Subordinate Lodge No. 656, herein called the Brotherhood,
and whether or not the employees in the second group desired to be
represented by the S. W. O. C. The Board determined that if the
employees in both groups chose the S. W. O. C., both groups would to-
gether constitute a single appropriate' unit.
On February 28, 1938, the respondent. filed objections to the Board's
Decision and Direction of Elections, and moved that, for purposes of
the elections, the Direction be modified by dividing the boilermakers
into three groups, namely, the power-boiler, the range-boiler, and the
sheet-metal employees. The respondent contended in its objections
that because, of the difference in. the character of their work and re-
muneration and because of the fact that the three groups worked in
separate and distinct departments, all these employees should not be
grouped- together in a single unit for purposes of the elections. The
respondent at no time requested leave to. argue orally before the Board
with respect to these objections. The Board considered the respond
ent's objections, and on March 7, 1938, issued its order denying the
respondent's motion for modification of the Direction of Elections in
that respect. On the same date the Board issued its Amendment to
Direction of Elections, making certain alterations in its original Di=
rection which were also requested by the respondent'but which are not
relevant in this proceeding.4.
Pursuant to the Direction of Elections, as amended, elections were
conducted among the respondent's employees on, March. 21, 1938. A
'Matter of Combustion Engineering Company, Inc. and Steel Workers Organizing Comm
mittee, for and in behalf of the Amalgamated *Associatiowof Iron, Steel and Tin Workers
of North America, 5 N. L: R. B. 356.
_COMBUWION.ENGINEERING COMPANY, INC. 607
majority of the employees in each group described above voted for the
S. W: O. C. On April 7, 1938, the Board issued its Supplemental De-
cision and Certification of Representatives,5 in which it found that the
boilermakers, together with all other production and maintenance. em-
ployees, except supervisory employees, clerical employees, foundry em-
ployees, machinists, machinists' helpers and apprentices, header-mill
specialists, drill-press operators and helpers, milling-machine oper-
ators, drill-machine operators, bolt-machine operators, handymen, en-
gineers, crane operators employed in the machine shops, planer
operators, repairmen, maintenance men, and toolroom helpers con-
stitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining,
and certified the Amalgamated as the exclusive collective bargaining
representative of the employees in such unit.
Thereafter, the respondent, the Brotherhood, and a group of ap-
proximately 220 employees employed in the respondent's power boiler
and sheet-metal shops filed petitions requesting the Board to recon-
sider its Certification of Representatives described above, and protest-
ing against the inclusion in one unit of the boilermakers'employed in
the power-boiler, range-boiler, and sheet-metal shops. The petition
of the respondent also alleged that the employees of the power-boiler
and sheet-metal shops went on strike on April *13, 1938, in protest
against the Board's findings with respect to the appropriate unit. The
Board considered these petitions and on May 11, 1938, issued its Order
Dismissing Petitions."
On or about April 22, 1938, shortly after the Certification of
April 7, O. S. Baxter, an official of the S. W. O. C., and other
representatives of the Amalgamated presented to A. J. Moses, gen-
eral manager of the respondent's Hedges-Walsh-Weidner division,
a proposed contract providing, inter alia, for the recognition of the
Amalgamated as the exclusive bargaining agent of the employees in
the appropriate unit found * by the Board. Thereafter, Moses -met
frequently with representatives of the Amalgamated and discussed
with them individual grievances and, also, the proposed contract.
Throughout these conferences, however, Moses consistently refused
to accept the contract granting the Amalgamated the exclusive recog-
nition requested. In so doing Moses maintained that the unit estab-
lished by the Board was not an appropriate one for the purposes of
collective bargaining. On or about July 13, 1938, the Amalgamated
-again presented to Moses a proposed agreement containing provisions
similar to those. of the first proposal. Moses replied on or about
5 Matter of Combustion Engineering Company, Inc . and Steel Workers Organizing Com-
mittee, for and in behalf of the Amalgamated Association of Iron, Steel & Tin Workers
of North America, 6 N. L. R . B. 488.
"Matter of Combustion Engineering Company, Inc. and Steel Workers Organizing Com-
mittee, for and in behalf of the Amalgamated Association of'Iron, Steel & Tin Workera
of North America, 7 N. L. R . B. 123. .
608 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
July 20 by offering the Amalgamated as a counterproposal an
agreement providing for the recognition of the Amalgamated as the
bargaining agent of its members only. The Amalgamated refused to
accept the counterproposal and soon thereafter filed with the Board
the charges here involved. Shortly before the hearing in this pro-
ceeding Baxter had a conference with Moses in a final attempt to
secure the desired exclusive recognition contract. This attempt also
proved unsuccessful, however, because of Moses' refusal to recognize
the Amalgamated as the exclusive representative of the employees in
the unit fixed by the Board on the ground that he "didn't like the
unit set down by the Board-and was going to try to get them
changed." In its answer the respondent admitted, and it was stipu-
lated at the hearing, that the respondent has refused to bargain with
the Amalgamated as the exclusive representative of the employees
in the unit determined by the Board.
The respondent seeks to justify its refusal to bargain with the
Amalgamated as the exclusive representative of the group of em-
ployees herein called the boilermakers on the ground previously urged
by it in connection with the representation proceeding, namely, that
those employees classified as boilermakers should not have voted as
a group to determine who should represent them but should have
been separated into three units consisting, respectively, of the em-
ployees in the two power-boiler shops, employees in the range-boiler
shop, and employees in the sheet-metal shop. The respondent's con-
tention to that effect and its reasoning in support thereof are similar
in all respects to its objections set forth in the petition filed by it in
the representation proceeding protesting against the unit fixed by
the Board. In our Order Dismissing Petitions referred to above we
considered the respondent's objections to the unit established by the
Board and for the reasons set forth therein and which we shall not
here. restate we overruled such objections. We have reconsidered
these contentions and again find them to be without merit. In our
Decision of February 16, 1938, we discussed the facts upon which
we based our findings that the determination of the bargaining unit
or units would depend upon the desires of certain groups of em-
ployees and the facts upon which we based our Direction of Elections.
The determination of the bargaining unit in the representation case
followed the desires of the Brotherhood as indicated in the record
of that proceeding, and the unit against which the respondent pro-
tests represents the expressed desires of the majority of employees in
the Brotherhood's own craft as indicated by the results of the election
conducted by the Board. The respondent has introduced no evidence
to persuade us that the unit heretofore found by us to be appropriate
is inappropriate. We therefore find that at all times since the
Board's Certification of April 7, 1938, all boilermakers and helpers,
B COMBUSTION ENGINEERING COMPANY, INC . 609
welders and welding.-machine operators, welders' helpers and ap-
prentices, galvanizers, form-press operators, form-machine operators,
fit-up men except those working on cast iron boiler castings, layers-
out and helpers, chippers, grinders, burners, furnace operators, rivet-
ers and rivet-machine operators, rivet heaters, reamers, rod-room
men, testers, test-pit helpers, boilermakers' mechanics, tube men, in-
spectors and helpers, punch-shear operators, X-ray helpers, subfore-
men, flange workers, and tapping-machine operators and helpers, and
all other production and maintenance employees, except supervisory
employees, clerical employees, foundry employees, machinists,
machinists' helpers and apprentices, header-mill specialists, drill-press
operators and helpers, milling-machine operators, drill-machine op-
erators, bolt-machine operators, handymen, engineers, crane operators
employed in the machine ships, planer operators, repairmen, mainte-
nance men, and tool-room helpers employed in the Hedges-Walsh-
Weidner division have constituted and that they now constitute a
unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the
meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
The respondent in its answer denies that a majority of the boiler-
makers designated the Amalgamated as their representative for the
purposes of collective bargaining in the secret balloting and contends
that the Board's Certification is therefore invalid. The tabulation of
the results of the balloting, as set forth in our Supplemental Decision
and Certification of Representatives, shows that a majority of the
eligible boilermakers cast ballots and that the Amalgamated received
the votes of a majority of those voting. In certifying the Amalgam-
ated upon the basis of the balloting, we followed our established
practice in holding that in Section 9 (a) of the Act the phrase "des-
ignated . . . by the majority of the employees" means designated by
the majority of the employees voting in an election and that the
organization receiving a majority of the votes cast is to be certified
as the exclusive representative.7 We find therefore that at all times
since the Board's Certification of April 7, 1938, the Amalgamated was
and that it is the exclusive representative of all the employees in the
appropriate unit here involved at the Hedges-Walsh-Weidner divi-
sion for the purposes of collective bargaining in respect to rates of
pay, wages, hours of employment, and other conditions of
employment.
We have hereinbef ore found that although the respondent met with
representatives of the Amalgamated on several occasions and dis-
cussed the contract submitted by it, the respondent consistently re-
7 Matter of R. C: A. Manufacturing Company, Inc. and United Electrical d Radio
Workers of America, 2 N. L. R. B. 159; Matter of Cudahy Packing Company and
Packing House Workers Union, Local No. 5, Amalgamated Meat Cutters and Butcher
Workmen of North America, 4 N. L. R. B. 39; Matter of Schwartz-Bernard Cigar Com-
pany and United Cigar Workers of America, Local No. 1, 7 N. L. R. B. 503.
610 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
fused to bargain with it except with regard to its own members only.
Such refusal clearly constitutes a violation of the Act. We have
repeatedly held that for an employer to meet with the duly desig-
nated representatives of a majority of his employees and to offer to
bargain with it for its members only, withholding recognition as the
exclusive bargaining agent, does not satisfy the requirements of the
Act.' It is incumbent upon the employer to recognize the union
which is the exclusive representative of his employees and to negoti-
ate with it as such.9
The respondent also seeks to justify its refusal to bargain on the
ground that to grant the Amalgamated exclusive recognition would
work a hardship on the respondent for the reason that the employees
of the power-boiler shops have indicated their refusal to be repre-
sented by the Amalgamated and consequently will strike if such
recognition is granted. In support of this argument the respondent
introduced evidence indicating that from April 13 to 16, 1938, a
3-day strike, not authorized by the Brotherhood, took place at the
power-boiler shops in protest against the Board's findings with re-
spect to the appropriate unit set forth in its Certification of April 7,
1938. The respondent also introduced in evidence a written state-
ment subsequently presented to its superintendent on May 20, 1938,
by three boilermakers, to the effect that they represented 219 employ-
ees of the power-boiler shops who would "not accept the N. L. R. B.
ruling making the C. I. O. the bargaining agent." The statement
contained no signatures other than those of the three employees who
presented it and there is no evidence to indicate that they repre-
sented the number of employees claimed. On the basis of the above
facts we are not convinced that the respondent's alleged fear of a
strike in the event that it recognizes the Amalgamated is justified.
There is no evidence that the Brotherhood has threatened any such
action nor have any representations to that effect been made to the
respondent since about May 1938, by the committee purporting to
represent the 219 employees. In fact, H. E. Eskew, a member of that
committee, admitted at the hearing that he could not recall that any
employee had indicated to him during about two months prior to the
hearing that he would refuse to work under an agreement negotiated
by the Amalgamated. Even assuming, however, that there is some
basis for- the respondent's alleged fear of a strike, to subordinate the
8 Matter of Biles-Coleman Lumber Company and Puget Sound District Council of Lumber
and Sawmill Workers, 4 N. L. R . B. 679, enf 'd N. L. it. B. v. Biles-Coleman Lumber Com-
pany, 98 F. ( 2d) 18 (C. C. A 9) ; Matter of Fedder8 Manufacturing Co., Inc. and Amalgam-
ated Association of Iron, Steel d Tin Workers of North America, Lodge 1753. 7 N. L. R. B.
817; Matter of Burnside Steel Foundry Co. and Amalgamated Association of Iron, Steel
J Tin Workers of North America, Lodge No. 1719, 7 N. L. It. B. 714.
O Matter of Acme Air Appliance Company, Inc. and Local No. 1223 of the United Elec-
trical Radio and Machine Workers of America, 10 N. L. It. B. 1385.
COMBUSTION ENGINEERING GOM-PAN'Y, INC. '- 611
rights of the majority of the respondent's employees within the ap-
propriate unit to the wishes of a dissenting minority would both mili-
tate against the policies of the Act and run counter to its express
language. Potential hardship to the respondent resulting from. the
action of such a minority does not justify a violation of the Act10
Upon the basis of all the above findings, and after consideration of
all the contentions of the respondent, we find that in July 1938 and
at all times thereafter, the respondent refused and still refuses to
bargain collectively with the Amalgamated which has been certified
as the exclusive representative of the employees in an appropriate
bargaining unit..
We further find that the necessary effect of such refusal was to dis-
courage affiliation with the Amalgamated, and the designation of it
as bargaining representative and that the respondent thereby inter-
fered with, restrained, and coerced its employees in the exercise of
the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act.
IV. THE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES UPON COMMERCE
We find that the activities of the respondent set forth in Section III
above, occurring in connection with. the operations of the respondent
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.
V. THE REMEDY
We have found that the respondent has committed unfair labor
practices. We shall order it to cease and desist from so doing.
We have found that at all times since April 7, 1938, the Amalga-
mated was and that it is the exclusive representative of the em-
ployees in an .appropriate unit at the respondent's Hedges-Walsh-
Weidner division. We have also found that in July 1938 and there-
after the respondent refused to bargain with the Amalgamated as
such representative. We shall, therefore, in order to effectuate the
policies of the Act, order the respondent to bargain with the Amal-
10 See N. L. R. B. v. Star Publishing Company, 97 F. (2d) 465 (C. C. A. 9), enf'g - Matter
of Star Publishing Company and Seattle Newspaper Guild, Local No. 82, 4 N. L. R. B. 498.
In that case a contention similar to that now made by the respondent was answered
by the court as follows :
The respondent further contends that it was necessary to make the transfer and
thus engage in the unfair labor practices , because its business would otherwise
be disrupted , and therefore , under all the facts , the transfer was excusable. We
think, however , the act is controlling . The act prohibits unfair labor practices
in all cases. . It. permits no immunity because the employer may think that the
exigencies .' of;-th ,,e: moment require'. infraction of the statute . In fact, nothing in
the statute permits or justifies. its violation by the employer.
612 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
gamated upon request as the execlusive.xepresentative of., its employees
in the appropriate unit.
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and upon the
entire record in the proceeding, the Board makes the following :
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. Lodge 1230, Amalgamated Association of Iron, Steel & Tin
Workers of North America, and Steel Workers Organizing Com-
mittee are labor organizations, within the meaning of Section 2 (5)
of the Act.
2. All boilermakers and helpers, welders and welding-machine .
operators, welders' helpers and apprentices, galvanizers, form-press
operators, form-machine operators, fit-up men (except those work-
ing on cast iron boiler castings), layers-out and helpers, chippers,
grinders, burners, furnace operators, riveters and rivet-machine
operators, rivet heaters, reamers, , rod-room men, testers, test-pit
helpers, boilermakers' mechanics, tube men, inspectors and helpers,
punch-shear operators, X-ray helpers, subforemen, flange workers,
tapping-machine operators and helpers, and all other production and
maintenance employees, exclusive of foundry employees, supervisory
employees, clerical employees, machinists, machinists' helpers and
apprentices, header-mill specialists, drill-press operators and helpers,
milling-machine operators, drill-machine operators, bolt-machine
operators, handymen, engineers, crane operators" employed -in the
machine shops, planer operators, repairmen, maintenance men, and
tool-room helpers employed in the Hedges-Walsh-Weidner division,
Chattanooga, Tennessee, of the Combustion Engineering Company,
Inc., New York City, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes
of collective bargaining, within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the
Act.
3. Lodge 1230, Amalgamated Association of Iron, Steel & Tin
Workers of North America was on April 7, 1938, at all times there-
after has been, and now is, the exclusive representative of the re-
spondent's employees in an appropriate unit, within the meaning
of Section 9 (a) of the Act.
4. By its refusal to bargain collectively with Lodge 1230, Amal-
gamated Association of Iron, Steel & Tin Workers of North America,
as exclusive representative of the employees in an appropriate unit,
the respondent has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor'
practices, within the meaning of Section 8 (5) of the Act.
5. By interfering with, restraining, and coercing its employees in
the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act, the
respondent has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices,
within the meaning of Section 8 (1) of the Act.
COMBUSTION ENGINEERING COMPANY, INC. 613
6. The ;afaresaid.:unfair..:aabor^practices1 are unfair-labor practices
affecting commerce, within the meaning of Section 2 (6) and (7) of
the Act.
ORDER
Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and conclusions of
law, and pursuant to Section 10 (c) of the National Labor Relations
Act, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that Combus-
tion Engineering Company, Inc., Chattanooga, Tennessee, its officers,
agents, successors, and assigns shall:
1. Cease and desist from :
(a) Refusing to bargain collectively with Lodge 1230, Amalga-
mated Association of Iron, Steel & Tin Workers of North America,
as the exclusive representative of all boilermakers and helpers, weld-
ers and welding-machine operators, welders' helpers and apprentices,
galvanizers, form-press operators, form-machine operators, fit-up men
(except those working on cast iron boiler castings), layers-out,and
helpers, chippers, grinders, burners, furnace operators, riveters and
rivet-machine operators, rivet heaters, reamers, rod-room men, testers,
test-pit helpers, boilermakers' mechanics, tube men, inspectors and
helpers, punch-shear operators, X-ray helpers, sub-foremen, flange
workers, tapping-machine operators and helpers, and all other pro-
duction and maintenance employees, exclusive of foundry employees,
supervisory employees, clerical employees, machinists, machinists'
helpers and apprentices, header-mill specialists, drill-press operators
and helpers, milling-machine operators, drill-machine operators, bolt-
machine operators, handymen, engineers, crane operators employed in
the machine shops, planer operators, repairmen, maintenance men,,
and tool-room helpers employed in the Hedges-Walsh-Weidner divi-
sion, Chattanooga, Tennessee;
(b) In any other manner interfering with, restraining, or coercing
its employees in the exercise of their rights to self-organization, to
form, join, or assist labor organizations, to bargain collectively through
representatives of their own choosing, or to engage in concerted activi-
ties for the purposes of collective bargaining or other mutual aid and
protection, as guaranteed in Section 7 of the National Labor Relations:
Act..
2. Take the following affirmative action, which the Board finds will.
effectuate the policies of the Act :
(a) Upon request, bargain collectively with Lodge 1230, Amal-
gamated Association of Iron, Steel & Tin Workers of North America,
as the exclusive representative of all boilermakers and helpers, welders:
and welding-machine operators, welders' helpers and apprentices, gal-
vanizers, form-press operators, form-machine operators, fit-up men
(except those working on cast iron boiler castings), layers-out and
283031-41-vol. 20-40
614 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
helpers, chippers, grinders, burners, furnace operators, riveters and
rivet-machine operators, rivet heaters, reamers, rod-room men, testers,
test-pit helpers, boilermakers' mechanics, tube men, inspectors and
helpers, punch-shear operators, X-ray helpers, subforemen, flange
workers, tapping-machine operators and helpers, and all other produc-
tion and maintenance employees, exclusive of foundry employees,
supervisory employees, clerical employees, machinists, machinists'
helpers and apprentices, header-mill specialists, drill-press operators
and helpers, milling-machine operators, drill-machine operators, bolt-
machine operators, handymen, engineers, crane operators employed in
the machine shops, planer operators, repairmen, maintenance men, and
tool-room helpers employed in the Hedges-Walsh-Weidner division,
Chattanooga, Tennessee, with respect to rates of pay, wages, hours of
employment, and other conditions of employment;
(b) Immediately post notices in conspicuous places throughout the
Hedges-Walsh-Weidner division, Chattanooga, Tennessee, and main-
tain such notices for a period of at least sixty (60) consecutive days,
stating that the respondent will cease and desist in the manner set
forth in paragraphs 1 (a) and (b), and that it will take the affirmative
action set forth in paragraph 2 (a) of this Order;
(c) Notify the Regional Director for the Tenth Region in writing,
within ten (10) days from the date of this Order what steps it has
taken to comply herewith.
MR. WILLIAM M. LEISERSON took no part in the consideration of the
above Decision and Order.