American Can Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Dec 16, 1954

110 N.L.R.B. 1640 (N.L.R.B. 1954)

1640 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
tioner contends that their duties are supervisory in nature and that
they should be excluded from the unit, whereas the Employer con-
tends that they are nonsupervisory and should be included.
At the hearing the Petitioner introduced no evidence to support its
contention in regard to the lead drivers. The Employer however
introduced detailed testimony to the effect that although the lead
drivers receive overtime work preference and are more experienced
than the other drivers, they perform only routine delivery duties in
conformance with a checklist prepared for them by the front office;
that they have no power to hire, discharge, direct, discipline, or trans-
fer, or to recommend such actions with respect to their fellow em-
ployees ; and, in sum, that the lead drivers have no supervisory powers
whatsoever. In view of this uncontradicted testimony we find that
the duties of the lead drivers are not supervisory in nature and that
they may properly be included in the unit.
Accordingly, We find that all drivers and helpers employed by the
Employer at the Idlewild Airport, Long Island, New York, including
lead drivers, but excluding office clerical and professional employees,
watchmen, guards and supervisors as defined in the Act, constitute a
unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the
meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
AMERICAN CAN COMPANY and CARPENTERS ' DISTRICT COUNCIL OF ST.
Louis, AFFILIATED WITH THE UNITED BROTHERHOOD OF CARPENTERS
AND JOINERS of AMERICA, AFL, PETITIONER. Case LNNo. 14-RC-2396.
December 16,1954
Decision and Direction of Election
Upon a petition duly filed tinder Section 9 (c) of the National. Labor
Relations Act, a hearing Was held before Harold B. Norman and
William F. Trent, hearing officers.' The hearing officers' 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 employees
of the Employer.2
'A special assignment prevented Mr Noiman from continuing Ntiith the hearing after
the third session, and Mr . Trent conducted the hearing thereafter
The United Steelworkers of America , CIO, was permitted to intervene at the hearing
on the basis of its current contract for the existing production and maintenance unit.
District No. 9, International Association of Machinists , AFL, which represents the Em-
ployer's machinists at the plant in question intervened to protect its interest , and later
withdrew.
110 NLRB No. 249
AMERICAN CAN COMPANY 1641
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 appropriate unit :
The Petitioner seeks to sever a unit of all millwrights and mill-
wrights' helpers from an existing production and maintenance unit
at the Employer's plant No. 83-A, located at 3200 South Kingshigh-
way, St. Louis, Missouri.
The Intervenor, United Steelworkers of America, CIO, has rep-
resented the production and maintenance unit, including the mill-
wrights, since 1945. The current contract between the Employer
and the Intervenor was executed after the filing of the petition herein,
and is not urged as a bar to this proceeding.
The Employer and the Intervenor oppose severance of the unit
requested, contending that the employees in question do not possess,
and their duties do not require the utilization of, craft skills, and also
that the work of the millwrights is closely integrated with that of
certain other employees.
The Employer is engaged in the manufacture of a variety of metal
and fiber cans. At the plant here involved, 26 production lines, op-
erating 24 hours daily, produce in excess of I billion cans per year.
The plant has approximately 1,000 employees.
The Employer has 19 employees classified as millwrights, and 1
millwright helper. The current contract between the Employer and
the Intervenor specifies that millwrights "shall be recognized as skilled
craftsmen," but the Employer and Intervenor maintain that they are
not so considered. The millwrights are assigned to the "utility and
maintenance department," and their only immediate supervisor is
the foreman of this department, who is responsible to the assistant
master mechanic and the master mechanic, and through them, to the
plant manager. The millwrights have their headquarters in a sep-
arate enclosed area near the center of the plant which is approxi-
mately 40 feet wide and 80 feet long. The area contains drill presses,
grinders, power hacksaws, buffers, an arbor press, and welding equip-
ment, together with work benches and a parts storage area. With
the exception of the millwright who does the welding required in
the millwrights' work, the millwrights spend a minor portion of their
time doing tasks in the millwright shop, and the shop is occasionally
used by other employees. There is no interchange between the mill-
wrights and any other employees, and there have been only 3 trans-
fers into the millwright group in 10 years.
The millwrights are responsible for keeping the machinery of the
Employer's 26 production lines in running order. They spend
approximately 75 or 80 percent of their time in repairing, or dis-
mantling and replacing parts in the production machinery. The
1642 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
installation of new machinery is "to a great degree" performed by
outside millwrighting contractors, but relocation and reinstallation
of old machinery is done by the Employer's millwrights whenever re-
quired. The millwrights are expected to own most of the necessary
tools, except the heavier and more expensive tools. Several do not
own such measuring tools as calipers and micrometers, but certain
of the work requires tolerances not exceeding one ten-thousandth of
an inch.
Although the Employer has no formal apprenticeship program, it
is estimated that it takes a minimum of 2 years to become qualified
to perform the millwright duties required in the Employer's work.
Prior to the January 1954 contract between the Employer and the
Intervenor, the Employer maintained 2 classes of millwrights' help-
ers, 3 classes of "B," and 2 classes of "A" millwrights. There are now
only the classifications of "millwrights" and "millwrights' helpers."
While there has been no specified schedule for progression from one
class to another, the only millwright who testified concerning his pro-
gression to class A from the date of his employment, stated that he
remained in class B for 5 years. The plant manager stated that the
time a millwright spent in class B • was considered a "kind of
training program," and that those receiving the top millwright
pay were expected to have the equivalent of 5,000 hours experi-
ence. Since classes A and B have been disposed of, new employees
with experience are paid as millwrights while training, and inex-
perienced employees are hired as millwrights' helpers. With the
exception of 4 experienced maintenance mechanics hired as mill-
wrights during January 1954, the millwrights have experience rang-
ing from 1 to 14 years as millwrights with the Employer.
The millwrights spend about 20 or 25 percent of their time in build-
ing maintenance duties, which include concrete work, plumbing,
installing floorings, roofing, and repair of the heating systems. The
Employer contends that the performance of these duties for this por-
tion of their total time demonstrates that the millwrights do not
function as craftsmen, but merely as maintenance employees. We
do not agree. The Board has held that millwrights performing
building maintenance duties during about 25 percent of their time
are entitled to separate representation as craftsmen, if qualified as
craftsmen in other respects.' It is further contended by the Em-
ployer that the millwrights should not be severed from the production
and maintenance unit because of a high degree of integration of their
work with the work of certain production employees, known as pro-
duction mechanics. Production mechanics are trained by the Em-
ployer and assigned to monitor the operation of certain production
8 United Screw and Bolt Corporation , 106 NLRB 1308.
AMERICAN CAN COMPANY 1643
machines, and they work only on the machine for which they are
trained. Whenever the machine to which a production mechanic is
assigned requires a repair or alteration which would interfere with
production, the production mechanic calls for a millwright to make
the repair. In making these repairs, it is occasionally necessary for
the millwrights to work in conjunction with production mechanics,
electricians, or others, but the millwrights perform and are responsible
for the specific functions of their own trade. There is no evidence
that the production mechanics act as helpers in performing mill-
wrights' tasks. We therefore find no merit in the Employer's con-
tention, nor does it appear that the millwrights' functions are dupli-
cated by the production mechanics.
On the basis of the record before us, we find that the millwrights
are engaged predominantly in work characteristic of their craft, and
are either hired with experience, or trained to the required degree of
proficiency by the Employer. It also appears that their function in
the maintenance and repair of the Employer's production machinery
requires the exercise of their craft skills on a broad basis.' We find,
therefore, that the millwrights in question exercise the skills of their
craft, and constitute a true craft group. As they are sought by a labor
organization which historically and traditionally represents them,'
they may constitute an appropriate unit if they so desire.
In view of the foregoing determinations, we shall direct an election
among the following employees of the Employer at its plant No. 83-A,
St. Louis, Missouri, which we hereby find may constitute an appro-
priate unit for the purposes of collective bargaining within the mean-
ing of Section 9 (b) of the Act: All millwrights and millwrights'
helpers, excluding supervisors as defined in the Act, and all other
employees.
If a majority vote for the Petitioner, they will be taken to have
indicated their desire to constitute a separate unit, which the Board
finds, under the circumstances, to be appropriate for purposes of col-
lective bargaining, and the Regional Director is instructed to issue
a certification of representatives to the Petitioner for such unit. If a
majority vote for the Intervenor, they may be represented as a part
of the existing production and maintenance unit and the Regional
Director will issue a certification of results of election to such effect.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
MEMBER- BEESON took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Direction of Election.
• Hotpoint Co., Division of General Electric Company, 108 NLRB 1383.
5 National Gypsum Company, Kansas Ordnance Plant, 108 NLRB 1006.