Westinghouse Electric Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 27, 1954

108 N.L.R.B. 556 (N.L.R.B. 1954)

556 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ballot . If, however , the International Longshoremen ' s Associa-
tion, Independent , or the American Federation of Labor, In-
ternational Longshoremen ' s Association , between the date of
this Second Direction of Election and the date of the election,
engages in conduct which the Board administratively deter-
mines to be designed to thwart or abuse the processes of the
Board , the Board reserves the right to deny such labor organi-
zation a place on the ballot.
In order to effectuate the purposes implicit in the Board's
Supplemental Decision . and Order issued April 1, 1954, to
avoid a multiplicity of challenges , to provide reasonably ade-
quate safeguards for the holding of a fair election , and to obviate
potential sources of objectionable conduct in this proceeding,
the Board further directs that : ( a) The Regional Director
mail to each eligible voter , who is required to register under
the regulations of the Bi -State Waterfront Commission, a
nontransferable International Business Machine card bearing
the seal of that Commission andthe address and social-security
number of the voter as based on the said Commission ' s records,
to be used as a voting card ; (b) eligible voters surrender said
voting cards to Board agents at the time of voting ; ( c) eligible
voters be required to exhibit to the Board agents at the time of
voting their Bi -State Waterfront Commission cards; ( d) each
party , at least 4 days prior to the date of the election, be re-
quired to furnish to the Regional Office of the Board , for its
approval , a list of its designated observers and alternates; (e)
transportation of voters to the polls by chartered buses or
other vehicles for hire be prohibited ; and (f) the Regional
Director forthwith promulgate such other necessary rules for
the conduct of the election and make appropriate arrangements
with the State and municipal authorities to assure reasonably
adequate conditions for the holding of the election , consistent
with Board policy , that will assure the voters a free , and un-
inhibited choice of collective -bargaining representatives.
Member Murdock took no part in the consideration of the above
Second Direction of Election
WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION and THEINTER-
NATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS, A.F.L.,
LOCAL 89,1 Petitioner
WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION and DISTRICT
LODGE NO. 52, INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MA-
CHINISTS, A.F.L.,' Petitioner
' Hereinafter referred to as the Operating Engineers.
z Hereinafter referred to as the IAM.
108 NLRB No. 87.
WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION 557
WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION and THE INTER-
NATIONAL UNION OF ELECTRICAL, RADIO AND MACHINE
WORKERS, C.I.O.,3 Petitioner
WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION and DISTRICT
LODGE NO. 52, INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MA-
CHINISTS, A.F.L., Petitioner. Cases Nos. 9-RC-2126,9-RC-
2141, 9-RC-2142, and 9-RC-2149. April 27, 1954
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, as amended, a hearing was held on
December 21, 1953, in Case No. 9-RC-2126 before Harold
M. Kennedy, hearing officer. The hearing was adjourned on
the same day without date. On January 5, 1954, that case was
consolidated with Cases Nos. 9-RC-2141, 9-RC-2142, and
9-RC-2149, by order of the Regional Director for the Ninth
Region, and the hearing was continued on January 18, 1954,
before Harold M. Kennedy, hearing officer, upon the consol-
idated cases. The hearing officer' s rulings made at the
hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby
affirmed.4
Upon the entire record in this proceeding, the Board finds:
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning
of the Act.
2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent
certain employees of the Employer.5
3. A 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.
4. The Employer is engaged in the production of household
electrical appliance at its Columbus, Ohio, plant, which is alone
involved in this proceeding. There is no history of collective
bargaining at this plant.
In Case No. 9-RC-2126, the Operating Engineers seeks a unit
of powerhouse employees. The IAM requests a separate unit of
maintenance employees in Case No. 9-RC-2141, and of tool-
room employees in Case No. 9-RC-2149. In its petition in
Case No. 9-RC-2142, the IUE seeks a production and main-
3Hereinafter referred to as the IUE.
4United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America (UE) (hereinafter called the
UE) intervened at the hearing. After the close of the hearing, the UE filed a motion with
the Board to reopen the hearing and take additional evidence as to whether an election should
be directed at this time in view of the alleged anticipated expansion of the Employer's
operations. The Employer and the IUE oppose this motion. The Employer asserts that it
now has a representative and substantial complement, and that an election should be directed
forthwith. The UE's motion contains no showing that the evidence proposed to be adduced
was not available to the UE at the time of the hearing herein. Consequently, we find no merit
in the UE's motion and it is hereby denied.
5 The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL (hereinafter called the IBEW)
intervened at the hearing.
558 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
tenance unit , including those groups of employees which the
other Petitioners wish to represent as separate units . The Em-
ployer , the IUE, and the two Intervenors (IBEW and UE) con-
tend that the overall production and maintenance unit is alone
appropriate .' The IAM, though conceding that the overall unit
is appropriate , argues that the smaller groups it seeks are also
appropriate and entitled to separate representation. The
Operating Engineers contends only that , irrespective of other
unit findings , its requested unit is entitled to separate repre-
sentation if the powerhouse employees so desire.
Case No. 9-RC-2142
The IUE seeks in its petition , as amended at the hearing, a
unit of production and maintenance employees . In the absence
of any objection to the appropriateness of this unit and in accord
with our usual policy, we find that this overall unit constitutes
an appropriate unit for purposes of collective bargaining within
the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
Case No . 9-RC-2126
The Operating Engineers contends that the unit it seeks is a
typical powerhouse unit , entitled under past Board decisions to
separate representation . There are assigned to the powerhouse
7 licensed engineers and 7 helpers who operate the powerhouse
equipment , which consists primarily of steam boilers and air
compressors . These employees, are not interchanged with any
other employees in the plant and are under separate immediate
supervision . Their work area is physically separated from other
work areas . In view of the foregoing, we find that the powerhouse
employees may constitute a separate appropriate unit if they so
desire. ' They may also , if they so desire, appropriately be
included in the plantwide unit.
Case No . 9-RC-2149
The IAM seeks a unit of all employees in the Employer's
toolroom or tool department , including tool and die makers,
tool and die repairmen , machine operators , welders, die
storage keepers , storekeeper , trucker-janitor , and heat treater
and tool welder .' Except for occasional visits by the tool and
die repairmen to production areas of the plant in order to repair
broken dies and tools, all these employees work in the toolroom
which, although not physically enclosed , is a separate area in
the plant . They have separate immediate supervision . The tool
6 The IBEW , however, concedes the appropriateness of the powerhouse unit sought by the
Operating Engineers.
7Schering Corporation, 107 NLRB 1540.
8 "Heat treater and tool welder" is one classification.
WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION 559
and die makers and repairmen perform the skilled work
usually associated with their classifications . The machine
operators work with such equipment as milling machines,
boring mills , grinders, shapers, and other metal - working
equipment . The welder does welding on tools,.dies, jigs, and
fixtures for the toolroom, while the heat treater and tool
welder tempers steel for the building and repair of dies,
tools, or fixtures and does some welding of such equipment.
The storekeeper sharpens and grinds drills and handles tool
steel , while the die storage man looks after the storing of
dies and handles them in and out of bins . The trucker -janitor
moves dies from the storage depot to the presses and back to
storage. In his spare time he performs janitorial work in the
toolroom. It is clear from the foregoing that the toolroom
employees compose a functionally distinct and separate group.
Accordingly, we find that if they desire they may constitute a
separate appropriate unit ,9 or may appropriately be included
in the plantwide unit.
Case No. 9-RC-2141
In addition to its proposed toolroom unit , the IAM seeks a
separate unit of maintenance employees classified as mill-
wrights, millwright helpers, oilers, yardmen , janitors , elevator
operators, welders, electricians , carpenters, storekeepers,
pipefitters , sheet - metal men, hand tool repairmen, and shop
clerks . These employees are in the Employer's works engi-
neering department and are under the separate immediate
supervision of the maintenance supervisor. They are respon-
sible for plant maintenance generally and work throughout the
plant doing such work as painting , electrical repair, and
pipefitting . Certain classifications of these employees such
as the millwrights, electricians, pipefitters ; and carpenters
spend part of their time in work shops assigned to them in
the separate plant maintenance area.'
Where, as here , there is no collective -bargaining history
on a broader basis, the Board has found that an identifiable,
homogeneous group of maintenance employees , similar to
those involved herein, possess a sufficient community of
interest , apart from that of production employees , to warrant
their separate representation , if they so desire ." Accordingly,
we find that if they so desire all the maintenance employees
sought in this case by the IAM may constitute a separate
9John Deere Planter Works of Deere & Company, 107 NLRB 1497; Lee Brothers Foundry,
Inc., 106 NLRB 212; Landis Machine Company, 101 NLRB 629.
m There is no evidence that the Employer has any employees who do maintenance work
other than the employees in the works engineering department, the toolroom, and the power-
house.
I,Schering Corporation, supra; National Carbon Company, 107 NLRB 1486.
560 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
appropriate unit , " or may appropriately be included in the
plantwide unit.
In view of the foregoing , we shall make no final unit deter-
minations at this time , but shall direct that the questions con-
cerning representation be resolved by separate elections by
secret ballot among the employees in the following groups of
employees at the Employer's Columbus, Ohio, plant, excluding
from each group all office and office clerical employees, is
professional employees , guards, and all supervisors as defined
in the Act:
Group (a): All powerhouse employees.
Group (b): All toolroom ( tool department ) employees.
Group ( c): All maintenance employees , including the zone
maintenance men, but excluding those employees in voting
groups ( a) and (b), above.
Group (d): All production employees.
If a majority of the employees in voting group ( a) vote for the
Operating Engineers or if a majority in voting groups ( b) or (c)
vote for the IAM, they will be taken to have indicated their
desire to constitute a separate appropriate unit or units, and
the Regional Director conducting the elections herein is
instructed to issue a certification of representatives to such
labor organization or organizations for such unit or units, which
the Board under the circumstances finds to be appropriate for
purposes of collective bargaining . If the employees in voting
groups ( a) through ( c) vote in each instance for the union
seeking to represent them separately and if a majority of the
employees in voting group ( d) also elect to be represented by
a union , then the Regional Director is instructed to issue a
certification of representatives to such union for a separate
unit of production employees , which the Board under the
circumstances finds to be appropriate for purposes of collective
bargaining.
However , if a majority of the employees in any of the voting
groups ( a)to(c ) do not vote for the union seeking to represent
them in a separate unit , such group or groups will be appro-
12 In addition to the maintenance employees listed above who report to the maintenance
supervisor , there are certain zone maintenance repairmen who work in a particular pro-
duction zone or area of the plant doing relatively unskilled maintenance work. These mainte-
nance employees report directly to the production supervisors. The fact that they are
assigned to work in production areas and work with the production employees does not re-
quire their exclusion from the maintenance unit. See National Carbon Company, supra. In
fact, as these employees do maintenance work only, we find that their interests are more
closely allied to those of the other maintenance employees than to those of the production
employees . Accordingly , we shall include them in the voting group (c) set forth below.
lIThe parties stipulated that the employees in the following classifications are office
clerical employees: General duty clerks , plant area clerks, stenographers , general typists,
time clerks , routine clerks , posting machine operators , secretary- stenographers, file
clerks, production clerks , tool estimators , accounting time clerks, order clerks , accounting
clerks , senior accounting clerks, traffic clerks , and all special- duty clerks.
OHIO HOIST & MFG. CO., INC. 561
priately included in the same unit with the employees in voting
group jd) and their votes will' be pooled with those in voting
group (d).14 The Regional Director conducting the elections is
instructed to issue a certification of representatives to the labor
organization selected by a majority • of the employees in the
pooled group, which the Board in such circumstances finds to
be a single unit appropriate for purposes of collective bar-
gaining.
(Text of Direction of Elections' omitted from publication.]
Member Beeson took no part in the consideration of the
above Decision and Direction of Elections.
14Following the hearing in this proceeding, the Board determined to apply in cases such
as these the pooling method of tallying ballots which was adopted in American Potash &
Chemical Corporation , 107 NLRB 1418.Schering Corporation, Cases Nos. 2-RC-6397, order
amending Decision and Direction of Election, dated April 6, 1954 ( not reported in printed
volumes of Board Decisions and Orders.)
if the votes are pooled, they are to be tallied in the following manner: The votes for the
Operating Engineers, which seeks a separate unit only, shall be counted among the valid
votes cast but neither for nor against any union seeking to represent the more compre-
hensive unit; all other votes are to be accorded their face value, whether for representation
by a union seeking the comprehensive unit or for no union.
is With the exception of the Operating Engineers, which desires to be on the ballot for
voting group (a) only, all unions wish to appear on the ballots for-voting groups (b), (c), and
(d). At the hearing, the IAM, the IBEW, and the UE stated that they did not desire to be
placed on the ballot for voting group (a), the powerhouse group. The IUE, however, wishes
to compete for these employees. Contrary to the situation at the time of the hearing in this
proceeding, the results of the election for the powerhouse group may now, under the recently
adopted pooling method of tallying ballots, affect the results of the election for the production
group for which the IAM, the IBEW, and the UE, as well as the IUE, wish to compete. Conse-
quently, we shall place the IAM, the IBEW, and the UE on the ballot for voting group (a). How-
ever, as these unions originally requested that they not be placed on the powerhouse group
ballots, we shall permit them, upon prompt request to the Regional Director, to have their
names removed from these ballots.
J. W. DICKEY AND R. L. ROUND, doing business as OHIO
HOIST AND MANUFACTURING COMPANY, A PARTNER-
SHIP, AND OHIO HOIST & MFG. CO., INC., A CORPO-
RATION and INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF BOIL-
ERMAKERS, IRON SHIPBUILDERS, BLACKSMITHS, FORG-
ERS & HELPERS, AFL. Case No. 8-CA-856. April 28, 1954
DECISION AND ORDER
On January 11, 1954, Trial Examiner Arthur E. Reyman
issued his Intermediate Report in the above-entitled pro-
ceeding, finding that the Respondent Partnership and its
successor, the Respondent Corporation, had engaged in certain
unfair labor practices and recommending that the Respondent
Corporation cease and desist therefrom and that both Respond-
108 NLRB No. 89.
339676 0 - 55 - 37