Replogle Globes, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Nov 24, 1953

107 N.L.R.B. 152 (N.L.R.B. 1953)

152 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
In addition to the stainless steel foundry, the Employer
operates a second foundry in the plant, known as the kirksite
foundry, which , insofar as the record discloses , is also inte-
grated with the Employer's manufacturing operations. In this
foundry molders and general helpers, who also perform the
customary functions of foundry employees, produce castings
of lead and kirksite. The Petitioner does not seek to repre-
sent these employees. It contends, in substance, that their
skills are not comparable to those exercised by the employees
in the stainless steel foundry. The fact appears, however,
that the skills of the molders in the kirksite foundry and those
of the molder and coremakers in the stainless steel foundry
are basically the same. Indeed, the Employer, when it organized
the stainless steel foundry, transferred into that foundry
molders from the kirksite foundry. Some of these molders
later became supervisors. While it is true that different
techniques are employed in the stainless steel foundrybecause
of the particular characteristics of stainless steel alloy, it
is not disputed that basically the operations in both foundries
are alike.
Without determining whether all the foundry employees might
be severed from the production and maintenance unit, we find
that, where, as here, the proposed unit would exclude other
foundry employees in the plant possessing comparable skills
and interests , apart from other considerations , such a unit
is too narrow to warrant separate representation . Accordingly,
we shall grant the Machinists ' motion and dismiss the petition.
[The Board dismissed the petition.]
REPLOGLE GLOBES, INC. and UNITED ELECTRICAL, RADIO
& MACHINE WORKERS OF AMERICA, Petitioner. Case
No. 13 -RC-3556 . November 24, 1953
DECISION AND ORDER
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Albert Kleen,
hearing officer. The hearing officer' s rulings made at the
hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby
affirmed.
Upon the entire record in this case , the Board finds:
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning
of the National Labor Relations Act.
2. The Petitioner is a labor organization claiming to repre-
sent certain employees.of the Employer.
3. No question affecting commerce exists concerning the
representation of employees of the Employer within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act, for the
following reasons:
107 NLRB No. 57.
MENDELSON-ZELLER CO. 153
The Employer is engaged in the manufacture of visual
education equipment at Chicago , Illinois . In April of this year,
it began the construction of a new plant at a site 8 miles
distant from the present plant. The Employer expects to stop
work at its present location in December and to resume opera-
tions at its new location sometime after the first of the year.
There are approximately 165 workers at the old plant.
Approximately 80 percent of these workers livewithin4 blocks
of the plant . Fifty percent of the workers are women. The
Employer has been informed by foremen at the old plant, who
have questioned employees as to their desire to continue to
work for the Employer at the new location , that the majority
of the employees have expressed the opinion that the new
plant is too distant from their homes to permit them to con-
tinue their employment after the change in location is effected.
Anticipating , therefore , that a large number of its present
employees may not wish to transfer , the Employer has set up
a personnel office at the new plant to take applications for
work.
The Employer moves to dismiss the instant petition , urging
that, under the circumstances , no election should take place
at this time. We find merit in the Employer's position. We are
of the opinion that no useful purpose would be served by
processing this petition, as too short a time remains when
work will be carried on at the present location , and as it is
not anticipated that a representative number of the present
employees will continue their employment after operations are
moved to the new plant . We shall, therefore , dismiss this
petition without prejudice to the filing of a new petition when
the new plant is in operation and a substantial and representa-
tive working force is there employed.'
[The Board dismissed the petition.]
ICf. Pride Manufacturing Company, 98 NLRB 445.
PALMER C. MENDELSON AND EDWARD ZELLER, general
partners , and JOE CROSETTI, CARL DOBLER, MRS. OLGA
ZELLER, JEANETTE MENDELSON AND LEE ESCHEN, lim-
ited partners , a limited partnership , d/b/a MENDELSON-
ZELLER CO.' and UNITED FRESH FRUIT & VEGETABLE
WORKERS LOCAL INDUSTRIAL UNION NO. 78, CIO, Peti-
tioner. Case No. 20-RC-2353. November 24, 1953
DECISION AND ORDER
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before James A.
1 The name of the Employer appears as corrected at the hearing.
107 NLRB No. 55.