Alameda Tank Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 1, 1958

120 N.L.R.B. 288 (N.L.R.B. 1958)

288 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Any other result would be disruptive of the traditional patterns of
representation in the metal trades industries and destructive of craft
organizations for whom Congress indicated considerable concern less
their special capabilities as the representatives of craft employees
be impaired. Furthermore, the Board has, since the issuance of the
Hughes Aircraft decision, recognized, in accord with the basic pre-,
miSe underlying its decision herein, that in the metal trades, welding
is normally a function of a particular craft,8 and that welders are
appropriately represented by the craft union having jurisdiction over
the basic craft."
'Accordingly, as the welders sought by the Petitioner do not consti-
tute a 'separate and distinct craft group eligible for craft severance,
we shall dismiss the petition.10
[The Board dismissed the petition.]
9 Standard Oil Company , 118 NLRB 1099 ; Koppers Company, Inc., 117 NLRB 422;
cf. Olin Mathieson Chemical Corporation , 117 NLRB 1441, 1445.
e Koppers Company, Inc , supra.
10 In view of our decision herein , we find it unnecessary to pass upon other contentions
of the parties.
Alameda Tank Co.: American Pipe & Steel Corp .; Downey
Mfg. Co.; Graver Tank & Pump Co.; Lacy Mfg. Co.; L. W.
Lefort ; I National Tank Co.; Orange County Machine Wks.;
Pelton ' Water Wheel Co.; Southwest Welding & Mfg. Co.;
United Concrete Pipe Corp .; Vulcan Pipe Corp.; Willard
Concrete ' Machine Co. and National Union , United Welders
of America , Independent , Petitioner . Case No. 21-RC-4945.'
April 1, 1958
DECISION AND ORDER
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Ben Grodsky, hear-
ing 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 Employers, are engaged in commerce within the meaning
of the Act.
2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent employees,
of the Employers?
This 'Employer's name appears as set forth in the record
a International Brotherhood of Boilermakers , Iron Ship Builders , Blacksmiths , Forgers
and Helpers, AFL-CIO, Local 92, AFL-CIO, was permitted to intervene on the basis of
its contractual interest in the employees covered by the petition
120 NLRB No. 43.
ALAMEDA TANK CO. 289
3. No question affecting commerce exists concerning the represen-
tation 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:
The Employers are engaged in the manufacture, fabrication, and
construction of metal products from- steel plate, including many dif-
ferent kinds of pipes, tanks, containers, pumps, and pressure vessels,
the type of product varying from Employer to Employer. All but
two of the Employers produce some pressure vessels, on which the
welds must conform to specifications of the American Society of
Mechanical Engineers.
The employees engaged in the production of such products are
currently covered by separate but identical agreements between the
Employers and the Intervenor.' These agreements are the latest in
a series of agreements resulting from the Employers' joint bargain-
ing negotiations with the Intervenor. The Petitioner seeks to sever
from the unit covered by the above agreements, all employees who
devote 50 'percent of their time to welding and burning operations.
The Employers and the Intervenor contend that such employees are
not craftsmen and are therefore ineligible for severance.
We agree with the contention of the Employers and the Intervenor.
In the recent C F Braun & Co case' in which the Petitioner and the
Intervenor participated, we rejected Petitioner's contention that
under the Hughes Aircraft decision' welders who perform welding
operations normally associated with a metal trades craft, constitute
a separate a.. l distinct craft eligible for severance. We found instead
that such welders could not sever from units of metal trades craft
employees, with whom they work in close association. That decision
was based on a lengthy record, presenting in great detail, evidence
relating to the skill, training and experience required of welders
performing welding operations comparable to those performed by
the employees whom the Petitioner seeks to sever in this case, as well
as evidence relating to the traditional pattern of representation of
such welders by the various metal trades craft unions. That deci-
sion is controlling here.
Accordingly, as the employees sought by the Petitioner are engaged
in welding operations of the type normally performed by employees
3 As these agreements were executed after the Employers had received notice of the
Petitioner's claim to representation, and of the filing of the petition, we find no merit in
the Employers' and Intervenor's claim that the contract bars an election of representatives
at this time.
4120 NLRB 282
5 Hughes An craft Company, 117 NLRB 98.
483142-59 -vol 120-20
290 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
of the boilermaker craft, we find that they are ineligible for severance
from the existing unit. As the unit sought by Petitioner is therefore
inappropriate, we shall dismiss the petition.
[The Board dismissed the petition.]
Dierks Paper Company and International Brotherhood of Pulp,
Sulphite and Paper Mill Workers, AFL-CIO, and United
Papermakers and Paperworkers, AFL-CIO, and International
Association of Machinists, AFL-CIO, Petitioners. Cases Nos.
32-RC-1098, 32-RC-1102, and 32-RC-1103. April 1, 1958
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS '
Upon separate petitions filed under Section 9 (c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a consolidated hearing was held before Joseph W.
Bailey, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the
hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, the Board
has delegated its powers in connection with these cases to a three-
member panel [Chairman Leedom and Members Bean and Fanning].
Upon the entire record in these cases, 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.'
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the represen-
tation of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section
9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The Petitioners in Cases Nos. 32-RC-1098 and 32-RC-1102,
referred to herein as Pulp and Sulphite Workers, and Papermakers,
respectively, seek plantwide units of production and maintenance
employees. The Petitioner in Case No. 32-RC-1103, herein called
Machinists, and the Intervenors, International Brotherhood of Boiler-
makers, Iron Ship Builders, Blacksmiths, Forgers & Helpers, Local
Lodge No. 592, AFL-CIO, (Boilermakers), and Local Union 706,
United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing
I After the hearing was closed, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-
CIO, sought to intervene in order to appear on the ballot for a unit of electricians. As
the IBEW request is for a unit which none of the Petitioners sought to represent, it was
incumbent upon it to support its motion to intervene with a petitioner's showing of inter-
est. However, as the number of authorization cards which it supplied are less than
30 percent of the number of employees in the electricians group, we deny the motion to
intervene Thiokol Chemical Corporation, 114 NLRB 21 and 113 NLRB 547.
120 NLRB No. 45.