Lancaster Iron Works, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jan 3, 1946

65 N.L.R.B. 105 (N.L.R.B. 1946)

In the Matter of LANCASTER IRON WORKS, INC. and INTERNATIONAL
ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS, A. F. OF L.
Case No. 5-R-1990.-Decided January 3, 1946
Mr. Paul A. Mueller, of Lancaster, Pa., for the Company.
Mr. Walter F. McKenna, of Baltimore, Md., for the Machinists.
Messrs. Charles A. Leone and J. R. Heater, both of Baltimore, Md.,
for the C. I. O.
Mr. Angelo J. Fiwmara, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF' THE CASE
Upon a petition duly filed by International Association of Ma-
chinists, A. F. of L., herein called the Machinists, alleging that a
question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation
of employees of Lancaster Iron Works, Inc., Perryville, Maryland,
herein called the Cofnpany, the National Labor Relations Board pro-
vided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice before Sidney J.
Barban, Trull Examiner. The hearing was held at Baltimore, Mary-
land, on August 13, 1945. The Company, the Machinists, and In-
dustrial Union of Marine and Shipbuilding Workers, Local No. 51,
CIO, herein called the C. I. 0., appeared and participated.' All
parties were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to examine and
cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing on the
issues. The rulings of the Trial Examiner made at the hearing are
free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. All parties were
afforded an opportunity to file briefs with the Board.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following:
I At the hearing , the Machinists objected to the C. I. 0 's motion to intervene on the
ground that the C. I. O. 's showing of interest was not evidenced by current membership
cards The Trial Examiner allowed the C. I. O. to participate in the - hearing but reserved
for the Board ruling on the motion . Since the C. I O.'s claim of interest was substantiated
in the manner set forth in footnote 6, infra, the motion to intervene is hereby granted.
65 N. L. R. B., No. 25.
105
106 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Lancaster Iron Works, Inc., a Pennsylvania corporation, operates-
in all two plants in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, and one plant in Perry-
aille, Maryland. We are here concerned solely with the operations at
the Perryville, Maryland, plant where the Company assembles barges,
ships, dredges, and tankers. During the first 6 months of 1945, almost
all the raw materials used by the Company at this plant came from:
points outside the State of Maryland. During this same period vir-
tually all the Company's finished products at the Perryville plant,
of a value in excess of $200,000, were shipped to points outside the
State.
The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
International Association of Machinists, affiliated with the Amer-
ican Federation of Labor, is a labor,organization admitting to mem-
bership employees of the Company.
Industrial Union of Marine and Shipbuilding W9rkers, Local No.
51, 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 refused to grant recognition to the Machinists
as the exclusive bargaining representative of certain of its employees
until the Machinists has been certified by the Board in an appropriate
unit. The C. I. O. contends that the Board should withhold a deter-
mination of representatives until the War Labor Board Shipbuilding
Commission decides in a pending proceeding whether the November
12, 1943, contract between it and the Company is currently in effect.
On May 12, 1942, pursuant to a consent election held on May 4, 1942,
the C. I. O. was designated by a Regional Director of the Board as the
bargaining representative of the Company's employees at its Perry-
ville, Maryland, plant. The Company and the C. I. O. thereafter
executed a collective bargaining contract on June 1, 1942, and again
on November 12, 1943. The 1943 contract 2 provided that it was to
remain in effect until June 23, 1944, and from year to year thereafter
2 This contract was made retroactive to June 23 , 1943, by virtue of a war Labor Board
Order. Both contracts embodied provisions respecting wages, hours , and conditions of
work.
LANCASTER IRON ' WORKS, INC. 107
unless terminated by either party upon 30 days' written notice before
any anniversary date. Neither contracting party gave notice of termi-
nation in 1944, but in 1945 the Company stayed the operation of the
automatic renewal clause by timely notice of its desire not to renew
the contract. The Company thereafter refused to negotiate with the
C. I. 0. with respect to extending the contract, and the matter was
certified to the War Labor Board about June 27,1945. The proceeding
was still pending at the time of the hearing.
The contract of November 12, 1943, was terminated as of June 23,
1945, and cannot, therefore, standing by itself, operate as a bar to
this proceeding. The C. I. 0., however, contends, in effect, that the
proceeding before the War Labor Board with respect to extending
that contract bars a present determination of representatives under
the doctrine of the Allis-Chalmers case .$ We do not agree.
The Board has repeatedly held that the mere submission of a dis-
pute to the War Labor Board will not, in every case, justify a post-
ponement in the consideration of a petition by a rival union. It is only
where the bargaining representative has been newly certified or recog-
nized and its initial efforts to secure benefits for the employees have
been of no avail because of voluntary submission to the procedures
of the War Labor Board that such proceedings will be held to be a
bar 4 In the instant case, the C. I. 0. was not a newly certified repre-
sentative at the time of commencement of the proceedings before the
War Labor Board; it had already been the bargaining representative
for more than 3 years at that time. Moreover, during its tenure as
bargaining representative, the C. I. 0. has had ample opportunity to
obtain, and has obtained, substantial benefits for the employees whom
it has been representing.-' In these circumstances, we find that there
is no bar to the present proceeding.
A statement of a Board agent, introduced into evidence at the
hearing, indicates that the Machinists represents a substantial number
of employees in the unit hereinafter found appropriate."
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning
the representation of employees of the Company, within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
8 50 N. L . R. B. 306.
4 See Matter of Jackson Boa Company, 59 N. L R. B. 808; and Matter of International
Harvester Company , 55 N. L. R. B. 497.
5 See Matter of The American Brass Company , 56 N. L. R. B. 1611 ; Matter of Caterpillar
Tractor Co ., 57 N L. R. B . 1798; Matter of American Tool Works Company, 59 N. L. R. B.
404; and Matter of American Chain d• Cable Company , Inc., 59 N. L. It. B. 644.
"The Field Examiner reported that the Machinists submitted 26 membership cards dated
June 5 , 1945, and that there are about 26 employees in the appropriate unit
The C. I. O. relies upon its recently expired contract as proof of its interest in this
proceeding.
108 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
We find, in accordance with the agreement of the parties, that all
employees of the Company at its Perryville, Maryland, plant, exclud-
ing office employees, timekeepers, and all supervisory employees with
authority to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect
changes in the status of employees, or effectively recommend such
action, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bar-
gaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
We shall direct that the question concerning representation which
has arisen be resolved by an election by secret ballot among the em-
ployees in the appropriate unit who were employed during the pay-roll
period immediately preceding the date of the Direction of Election
herein, subject to the limitations and additions set forth in the Direc-
tion.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National Labor
Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations
Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 9. of National Labor Rela-
tions Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3, as amended, it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Lancaster Iron
Works, Inc., Perryville, Maryland, an election by secret ballot shall
be conducted as early as possible, but not later than sixty (60) days
from the date of this Direction, under the direction and supervision
of the Regional Director for the Fifth Region, acting in this matter
as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Arti-
cle III, Sections 10 and 11, of said Rules and Regulations, among the
employees in the unit found appropriate in Section IV, above, who
were employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the
date of this Direction, including employees who did not work during
said pay-roll period-because they were ill or on vacation or temporarily
laid off, and including employees in the armed forces of the United
States who present themselves in person at the polls, but excluding
any who have since quit or been discharged for cause and have not been
rehired or reinstated prior to the date of the election, to determine
whether they desire to be represented by International Association
of Machinists, A. F. of L., or by Industrial Union of Marine and Ship-
building Workers, Local No. 51, C. I. 0., for the purposes of collective
bargaining, or by neither.