A. O. Smith Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jan 13, 1955

111 N.L.R.B. 200 (N.L.R.B. 1955)

200 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Intervenor at the Employer's three plants, at South Bellingham,
North Bellingham, and Anacortes, Washington, may constitute a
unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining? We shall
therefore make no final determination with respect to the crab process-
ing department employees at this time, but shall first ascertain the de-
sires of these employees as expressed in the election directed herein.
We shall direct an election among the following employees : All
production and maintenance employees in the Employer's crab
processing department at its South Bellingham, Washington, plant,
excluding office clerical employees, professional employees, licensed
refrigeration engineers, guards, all other employees, and supervisors
as defined in the Act.
If a majority of the employees in the voting group selects the Peti-
tioner, they will be taken to have indicated their desire to constitute
a separate appropriate unit and the Regional Director conducting the
election is instructed to issue a certification of representatives to the
Petitioner for such unit, which the Board, under such circumstances,
finds to be appropriate for purposes of collective bargaining. On the
other hand, if a majority of the employees in the voting group vote
for the Intervenor, they will be taken to have indicated their desire to
become part of the existing unit currently represented by the Inter-
venor, and the Regional Director will issue a certification of results
of election to that effect.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
3 United States Rubber Company, supra
A. O. SMITH CORPORATION , GRANITE CITY FRAME PLANT 1 and INTER-
NATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, LOCAL 309, AFL 2
AND UNITED STEELWORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO' AND DISTRICT No. 9,
INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS, AFL 4 AND INTERNA-
TIONAL UNION, UNITED AUTOMOBILE WORKERS OF AMERICA, AFL S
AND INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF BOILERMAKERS , IRON SHIP-
BUILDERS , BLACKSMITHS , FORGERS AND HELPERS, LOCAL 530, AFL,-
PETITIONERS. Cases Nos. 14-RC-2611114-RC-,-614,14-RC-2628,
14-RC-Pd6392, and 14-RC-26,64. January 13, 1955
Decision, Order, and Direction of Elections
Upon petitions duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a consolidated hearing was held before John M.
I The name of the Employer appears as amended at the hearing.
8 Herein called the IBEW.
8 Herein called the Steelworkers.
* Herein called the IAM.
5 Herein called the UAW.
6 Herein called the Boilermakers.
111 NLRB No. 34.
A. 0. SMITH CORPORATION 201
Schobel, 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 Act.
2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent certain em-
ployees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion 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's instant plant is new and began operations in
June 1954. It was specifically designed for the assembly line produc-
tion of automobile frames. There is no history of collective bargain-
ing at the plant. The Steelworkers and the UAW each seeks a unit
of production and maintenance employees. The IBEW seeks a unit
of electricians and helpers, and the Boilermakers a unit of welders
and burners. The IAM at the hearing amended its unit request to
conform to the Employer's job classifications, and seeks alternatively
a single unit, or two separate units, of "maintenance-men machine
repair machine," and "maintenance-men machine repair floor." The
Employer agrees with the Steelworkers and the UAW that, in view
of the integration of its operations, the only appropriate unit is an
overall production and maintenance unit.
In the absence of any objection to the appropriateness of the pro-
duction and maintenance unit sought by the Steelworkers and the
UAW, and in accordance with our usual policy, we find that this
overall unit may constitute an appropriate unit for purposes of col-
lective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
The Board has recently held 7 that where craft units are sought to
be established without prior bargaining history, the same standards
as to craft skills should apply as were set forth for craft severance in
the American Potash 8 case. The record in the present case discloses
that there is no apprenticeship or formal training program for any em-
ployees at the plant, and that the Employer hires mostly employees
with general maintenance backgrounds rather than individuals who
have attained a high degree of proficiency in one particular line. Some
15 or 20 maintenance employees have been permanently assigned to var-
ious production departments where they work under production super-
visors. The maintenance employees often perform work of more than
one craft, and the work of employees classified as in one group fre-
quently overlaps that done by employees belonging to the other groups.
Transfers take place between production and maintenance depart-
ments, and promotions have been made from one maintenance classifi-
4 Reynolds Metal Company, 108 NLRB 821.
8 Ame? scan Potash & Chein,cal Corporation , 107 NLRB 1418.
202 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
cation to another without regard to the line of progression in any given
skill. All maintenance employees are paid within the same rate range,
which is somewhat higher than the rates paid to the production em-
ployees.
The electricians sought by the IBEW have their headquarters in an
electrical shop which they use mostly for purposes of storing their
tools. They are assigned their tasks by several electrical foremen, and
work throughout the plant on various electrical equipment. The only
witness for the IBEW, a journeyman electrician, admitted that he prob-
ably had more experience than most of the Employer's other electri-
cians. His duties include troubleshooting, relocating electrical instal-
lations throughout the plant, and working on an unloading machine
in the production department under the supervision of a company
technician. The record contains no showing as to the training or ex-
perience of the other electricians. All of the Employer 's major elec-
trical construction work is performed by independent contractors. At
least one of the employees classified as maintenance-man machine re-
pair floor has performed some electrical work while in that classifica-
tion. We find that the record as a whole fails to establish that the em-
ployees sought to be represented by the MEW constitute a skilled craft
group entitled to separate representation.' We shall therefore dismiss
the petition in Case No. 14-RC-2611.
The welders sought by the Boilermakers consist of approximately
240 employees of whom all but a few work on the production line
under the supervision of production foremen; they do spot welding
on frames, which work requires little skill and is repetitive in nature.
At the end of the line is a more experienced welder who repairs any
defective welds made by spot welders on the production line. Em-
ployees with no previous welding experience have been placed on
the line after having been given only a few hours on-the-job training
in welding. We find that the welders are not true craftsmen, and we
shall accordingly dismiss the Boilermakers' petition in Case No.
14-RC-2654.10
As to the maintenance-men machine repair machine sought by the
fAM, the record indicates that they spend a substantial portion of
their time in the machine shop, where they work under separate super-
vision making and repairing machine parts and operating the cus-
tomary hand and machine tools associated with a machine shop. Al-
though maintenance-men machine repair floor, and handy men from
the production departments, occasionally come into the machine shop
to use the smaller hand tools, none of them operate the larger machines
or perform any of the more highly skilled functions required of the
machine repair machine men. The latter work from blueprints and
9 Tuxedo Candy Co . 106 NLRB 1399
10E I Dupont de Nemonrs and Company, 107 NLRB 1504.
A. O. SMITH CORPORATION 203
frequently are required to work to close tolerances. They perform
some work on the production floor under the direction of production
foremen, but on such occasions exercise the skills of their trade and
do no production work. Although the Employer has no apprentice-
ship for these employees, it seeks to employ individuals with experi-
ence in the machine field. We find that the maintenance-men machine
repair machine are craftsmen who may constitute a separate appro-
priate unit if they so desire." They may also, if they so desire,
appropriately be included in the plantwide unit.
The maintenance-men machine repair floor, whom the IAM also
seeks to represent, have their headquarters in the maintenance shop.
Their work generally consists of repairing and maintaining machines
in the plant and keeping them in operation. At least one employee
in this classification testified that in addition to his machine repair
work he had done a variety of jobs, including pipefitting work, weld-
ing, and some electrical work. The record does not disclose that the
machine repair floor men are in the line of progression to any higher
skilled classification. We find that the maintenance-men machine
repair floor lack sufficient craft characteristics to warrant their estab-
lishment as a separate unit.12
We shall likewise reject the IAM's alternative request for a depart-
irtental unit of both maintenance-men machine repair machine, and
machine repair floor, as these employees represent only a segment of
the entire maintenace department, the balance of which is not sought
by the Petitioner."
Accordingly, we shall direct separate elections in the following vot-
ing groups :
(A) All machine shop employees in the classification of mainte-
nance-men machine repair machine at the Employer's Granite City,
Illinois, plant, excluding all other employees, guards, and supervisors
as defined in the Act.
(B) All production and maintenance employees at the Employer's
Granite City, Illinois, plant, excluding all employees in voting group
A, office clerical employees, professional employees, guards, and su-
pervisors as defined in the Act.
If a majority of the employees in voting group (A) vote for the
IAM, they will be taken to have indicated their desire to constitute a
separate appropriate unit, and the Regional Director is instructed to
issue a certification of representatives to such labor organization for
such unit, which the Board under the circumstances finds to be ap-
propriate for purposes of collective bargaining. If the employees in
voting group (A) vote for the IAM and if a majority of the em-
11 Hotpoint Co, 108 NLRB 1383
lz Tuxedo Candy Co, supra
18 Moe Light, Inc, 109 NLRB 1013
204 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ployees in voting group (B) elect to be represented by either the
Steelworkers or the UAW, then the Regional Director is instructed
to issue a certification of representatives to such latter union for a
unit of production and maintenance employees, which the Board un-
der the circumstances finds to be appropriate for purposes of collec-
tive bargaining.
However, if a majority of the employees in voting group (A) do not
vote for the union seeking to represent them in a separate unit, such
group will be appropriately included in the same unit with the em-
ployees in voting group (B) and their votes will be pooled with those
in voting group (B). The Regional Director 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 bargaining.
[The Board dismissed the petitions in Cases Nos. 14-RC-2611 and
14-RC-2654.]
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
MEMBER RODGERS took no part in the consideration of the above De-
cision, Order, and Direction of Elections.
MEMPHIS FURNITURE MANUFACTURING COMPANY and UNITED FURNI-
TURE WORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO, PETITIONER. Case No. 32-RC-
770. January 13,1955
Supplemental Decision , Order, and Second Direction of Election
Pursuant to a Decision and Direction of Election issued herein on
August 23, 1954,1 an election by secret ballot was conducted on Sep-
tember 21, 1954, under the direction and supervision of the Regional
Director for the Fifteenth Region, among employees in the unit found
appropriate by the Board. Following the election, a tally of ballots
was furnished the parties, which shows that of 659 votes cast in the
election, 334 were for the Petitioner, 313 were against the Petitioner, 9
were void, and 12 were challenged. The challenged ballots are not
sufficient in number to affect the results of the election.
Thereafter, the Employer filed objections to conduct affecting the
results of the election. The Regional Director investigated the ob-
jections and, on November 5,1954, duly served upon the parties a report
1 Not reported in printed volumes of Board Decisions and Orders
111 NLRB No. 31.