Friden, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsSep 27, 1963

144 N.L.R.B. 907 (N.L.R.B. 1963)

FRIDEN, INC. AND/OR CALIFORNIA METAL TRADES ASSN. 907 Friden , Inc. and/or California Metal Trades Association and Tool and Die Craftsmen , National Independent Union Coun- cil, Petitioner and International Association of Machinists, AFL-CIO, and Its Affiliated Lodges Nos . 1176 and 1518, Inter- venors . Case No. 20-RC-5468. September 27, 1963 DECISION AND ORDER On May 7, 1963, the Petitioner filed a petition with the regional Director for the Twentieth Region seeking to add two tool hardeners, presently represented by Intervenor Local 1176, to its craft unit of tool and die employees at the Employer's plant. The Regional Direc- tor dismissed the petition. On July 18, 1963, upon review, the Board reinstated the petition, treating it as a motion to amend the Petitioner's certification. The Board also ordered a hearing for the purpose of taking testimony as to the duties of the two tool hardeners. A hearing was held before Hearing Officer M. C. Dempster. The Hearing Offi- cer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. 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 McCulloch and Members Leedom and Fanning]. Upon the entire record in the case the Board finds as follows: In 1954 the Board directed severance of a tool and die craft unit from 'a production and maintenance unit represented by Intervenor Local 1176.1 The Board excluded the two tool hardeners from the craft unit, saying : These employees are separately located in the heat-treating depart- ment. They heat-treat tools and dies for the tool and die makers only a small portion of their time. They spend the remainder of their time heat-treating parts for the production departments. The parties agree that these employees are not exercising skills of the tool and die craft, nor are they in the line of progression in that craft. Following an election, the Board certified the Petitioner as bargaining representative of the tool and die craft unit. The Petitioner now contends that testimony in the earlier case that these employees spend only a small portion of their time heat-treating tools and dies and the rest of their time heat-treating production parts was erroneous, that the reverse has always been the fact. Further, the Petitioner contends that the two tool hardeners are tool and die crafts- men doing tool and die work, and therefore belong in the tool and die 1 Friden Calculating Machine Co ., Inc., and Marchant Calculators , Inc., 110 NLRB 1618. 144 NLRB No. 86. 908 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD unit. Intervenor Local 1176 contends, in opposition, that the tool hardeners are not craftsmen, that they work with and under the same supervisor as production heat-treaters, and that they should continue to be part of the production and maintenance unit which it presently represents. The Employer is neutral. It appears from the present record that both tool hardeners now spend about 95 percent of their time hardening tools and dies. The record also reveals, however, that the nature of the jobs which the tool hardeners are performing has not changed since the Board's previous decision. Both tool hardeners work now, as then, in the Employer's heat-treating department, separated from the tool and die department and supervised by a heat-treating foreman. They have no working contact with tool- and die-makers, except when tool- and die-makers bring some of the tools and dies to them to be hardened. Neither is trained or qualified to make tools and dies; each learned the skills necessary for heat-treating tools sand dies while working with produc- tion parts. In view of the foregoing, the Board finds that the two tool hardeners are not members of the tool and die craft, notwithstanding the amount of time they spend hardening tools and dies. Their addition to the Petitioner's tool and die craft unit is not warranted. Accordingly, we shall dismiss petition. [The Board dismissed the petition.] Material Service Division , General Dynamics Corp . and District 2, Marine Engineers' Beneficial Association , AFL-CIO, Peti- tioner. Case No. 13-RC-9319. September 27, 1963 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Hearing Officer Hymen Bear. The Hearing Officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.' 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 [Chairman McCulloch and Members Leedom and Fanning]. Upon the entire record, the Board finds : 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. 1 Petitioner's request for oral argument is hereby denied as , in our opinion , the record, including the briefs , adequately present the issues and positions of the parties. 144 NLRB No. 89.