The Park Drop Forge Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Nov 17, 1954

110 N.L.R.B. 915 (N.L.R.B. 1954)

THE PARK DROP FORGE COMPANY ` 915
THE PARK DROP FORGE COMPANY and INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPER-
ATING ENGINEERS , LOCAL UNIONS 589 , 589-A , 589-B, and 589-C,
AFL,' PETITIONER
THE PARK DROP FORGE COMPANY, PETITIONER and INTERNATIONAL
UNION, UNITED AUTOMOBILE , AIRCRAFT & AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT
WORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO, AND ITS LOCAL 776.2 Cases Nos. 8 -RC-
0240 and 8-RM-112. November 17, 1954
Decision and Direction of Elections
Upon separate petitions duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the Na-
tional Labor Relations Act, separate hearings were held before Philip
Fusco, hearing officer.' Because of similarity of issues, we hereby con-
solidate both cases for the purpose of decision and direction of elec-
tions.' The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearings are free from
prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
..Upon the entire record in these cases, the Board finds: -
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the
National Labor Relations Act.
-2. The labor organizations involved herein claim to represent certain
employees of the Employer.
3. Questions affecting commerce exist 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 5
4. The appropriate units :
The Operating Engineers seeks to sever the Employer's powerhouse
employees from a unit composed of employees in its crank and heat-
trea^ing departments and powerhouse, which has been represented for
a number of years by the UAW-CIO. The Employer in its petition
requests an election among the employees in the unit represented by the
UAW-CIO. The UAW-CIO opposes the severance of the power-
house employees, contending that, in view of the history of collective
1 Hereinafter referred to as Operating Engineeis
E Hereinafter referred to as UAW-CIO
On April 5, 1954, International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders,
Blacksmiths, Forgers and Helpers, AFL, filed a petition in Case No. 8-RC-2229, which
was consolidated with Case No. 8-RC-2240 After a consolidated hearing in those cases
was held on May 11, 1954, the Boilermakers on May 24, 1954, requested permission to
withdraw its petition in Case No 8-RC-2229 While this request was pending the Em-
ployer filed its petition in Case No 8-RM-112 Oil June 16, 1954, the Board, over the
objection of the Employer, granted the Boilermakers' request to withdraw its petition
but with prejudice to its filing a new petition for a period of 6 months.
4 At the hearing on the Employer's petition in Case No 8-RM-112 on June 24, 1954,
the parties incorporated by reference the record of the prior proceedings
c At the hearings herein, the UAW-CIO contended that no elections should be held at
this time because certain unfair labor practice charges it had filed against the Employer
were pending on appeal to the Gencial Counsel from the Regional Director's dismissal of
these charges As the General Counsel has since sustained the Regional Director's dis-
missal of these charges. we find no uiei it in thin i onten! ion
110 NLRB No. 147.
916 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
bargaining and the similar interests and working conditions of all em-
ployees in the broader unit, a powerhouse unit is inappropriate. The
Employer agrees with this latter position.
The record discloses that the powerhouse employees work in-a sepa-
rate building which is located approximately 150 to 200 feet from
other plant buildings. The powerhouse processes steam for power.
The complement of employees therein employed is composed of 3 li-
censed engineers, 2 repairmen, 4 ash wheelers, 3 firemen,' and 2 coal
burners. The employees work under the immediate supervision of
the powerhouse supervisor. Unlike other departments, the power-
house is operated around the clock, 7 days a week. There is no ap-
preciable interchange between powerhouse employees and other
employees.
In view of the foregoing, and upon the record as a whole, we find
that the employees in the Employer's powerhouse constitute a func-
tionally distinct and separate departmental group of employees which
the Board has held may be separately represented, notwithstanding
a history of collective bargaining on a broader basis. Inasmuch as
the Operating Engineers is a union which has historically and tradi-
tionally represented such a group of employees, we find that the power-
house employees may constitute a separate appropriate unit if they
so desire? We further find that the powerhouse employees may be
included in the broader historical unit which we find may also be
appropriate.
We shall, therefore, direct elections in the following voting groups:'
Group I: All powerhouse employees at the Employer's Cleveland,
Ohio, plant, including ash wheelers, repairmen, and coal unloaders,
but excluding all other employees, office clerical employees, guards,
professional employees, and supervisors as defined in the Act.
Group II: All hourly paid employees at the Employer's Cleveland,
Ohio, plant, who are employed in the crank and heat-treating depart-
ments (including the cool down furnaces), restrike unit for restriking
crankshafts after heat-treating only, pattern shop, steelyard, labora-
tory machine shop, toolroom, and shipping room, arc and gas welders,
scarfers and burners, crank department yard laborers, and lathe hands,
truckers, sweepers, and helpers in the machine shop, and the employee
who cleans the dispensary, but excluding the following groups of
employees :
(a) The employees in the forge shop department, which include
hammermen, hammer drivers, helpers (heaters, scale blowers, tong
e The record does not establish with certainty whether the firemen are required to be
licensed as are the engineers.
a See American Potash & Chemical Corporation, 107 NLRB 1418.
8 The parties are in agreement as to the composition of the above voting groups, if
elections should be directed
THE PARK DROP FORGE COMPANY 917
men, and chairmen), upsetter operators , trimmer die setters, intensi-
fier operators, manipulator operators , overhead power crane operators
No. 48 hammer , hot inspectors , cold trim press operators , shop truck-
ers, counters , laborers , jackhammer operators , sweepers, and janitors.
(b) The employees in the maintenance and repair crew, which in-
clude carpenters , bricklayers , electricians , millwrights , oilers, pipe-
fitters, blacksmiths , pyrometer maintenance men, truck repairmen,
stockroom clerks, cleanup men, and helpers in the said classification.
( c) Optical furnace temperature checkers throughout the plant.
(d) The gantry crane operators and hookup men in the scrap yard.
(e) All diesinkers and their apprentices , including employees who
work on dies and parts of dies, now represented by Die Sinkers Con-
ference of Cleveland ( Independent).
( f) All powerhouse employees.
(g) Metallurgical assistants , timekeepers, clerical employees, fore-
men, assistants , and subforemen , and all other supervisors , guards, and
professional employees as defined in the Act.
If a majority of the employees in voting group I vote for the Op-
erating Engineers they will be taken to have indicated their desire
to constitute a separate appropriate unit and the Regional Director
conducting the elections directed herein is instructed to issue a certi-
fication of representatives to the Operating Engineers for that unit
which the Board , under such circumstances , finds to be appropriate for
the purposes of collective bargaining. In the event a majority of the
employees in group I do not vote for the Operating Engineers which
is seeking to represent them in a separate unit, that group will be ap-
propriately included in group II, and their votes shall be pooled with
those of the employees in group II ,° and the Regional Director conduct-
ing the elections is instructed to issue a certification of representatives
to the UAW-CIO if that labor organization is selected by a majority
of the employees in the pooled group , which the Board , in such cir-
cumstances , finds to be a single unit appropriate for the purposes of
collective bargaining.
5. There remains for consideration the question of the voting eli-
gibility of certain striking employees and certain employees who were
laid off for economic reasons before the strike. The UAW-CIO con-
tends that none of the employees hired as replacements for the em-
ployees who have been on strike since October 19, 1953 , should be
eligible to vote because the strikers are unfair labor practice strikers.
As pointed out above, the Regional Director 's dismissal of the
UAW-CIO's unfair labor practice charges was sustained by the Gen-
"If the votes are pooled, they are to be tallied in the following manner: The votes for
the Operating Engineers shall be counted as valid votes, but neither for nor against the
union seeking the more comprehensive unit ; all other votes are to be accorded their face
value, whether for representation by the union seeking the comprehensive group or for no
union.
'018 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
eral Counsel.on appeal. Under these circumstances, the striking em-
ployees are economic strikers, subject to replacement at the will of
the Employer. As the record discloses that all the employees on strike
have been permanently replaced, we find that they are not eligible to
vote in the elections directed herein.'0
There is also evidence in the record that in the fall of 1952 and in
the spring of 1953, the Employer, for economic reasons, laid off ap-
proximately 200 employees. At the time of the hearings the Employer
had recalled. or rehired approximately 15 to 20 of the 200 laid-off em-
ployees. It further appears that the Employer's present work force,
numbering approximately 214 employees, is adequately handling its
current production requirements and that the Employer anticipates
no increase in the near future in the size of its present complement of
employees. Under these circumstances, and in view of the fact that
these laid-off employees have no reasonable expectation of employ-
ment in the near future, we find, in accord with our well-established
policy, that they are not eligible to vote in the elections directed
herein.
[Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication.]
10 See Times Square Stores Corporation, 79 NLRB 361.
THE GREAT ATLANTIC & PACIFIC TEA COMPANY (PITTSBURGH BAK-
ERY) and CATHERINE KARDELL
BAKERY & CONFECTIONERY WORKERS' INTERNATIONAL UNION OF
AMERICA, LOCAL 12, A. F. L. and CATHERINE KARDELL. Cases No.
6-CA-778 and 6-CB-209. November 18, 1954
Decision and Order
Upon charges filed on September 22, 1953, and November 25, 1953,
by Catherine Kardell, an individual, the General Counsel of the Na-
tional Labor Relations Board, herein called the General Counsel, by
the Regional Director for the Sixth Region (Pittsburgh, Pennsyl-
vania), issued a consolidated complaint dated March 26, 1954, against
Bakery & Confectionery Workers' International Union of America,
Local 12, A. F. L., herein called the Union, and against The Great
Atlantic & Pacific Tea Company (Pittsburgh Bakery), herein called
the Company, alleging that the Respondents had engaged in and
were engaging in unfair labor practices affecting commerce, within
the meaning of Section 8 (b) (1) (A) and (2), Section 8 (a) (3)
and (1), and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations
Act, as amended, herein called the Act. Copies of the charges and
110 NLRB No. 146.