Bethlehem Steel Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Oct 17, 1949

86 N.L.R.B. 577 (N.L.R.B. 1949)

In the Matter of BETHLEHEM STEEL COMPANY, SHIPBUILDING DIVISION,
EMPLOYER and METAL TRADES COUNCIL OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA,
A. F. OF L. AND ITS AFFILIATED LOCAL AND INTERNATIONAL UNIONS,1
PETITIONER and INDUSTRIAL UNION OF MARINE AND SHIPBUILDING
WORKERS OF AMERICA AND LOCAL No. 9, CIO, INTERVENOR
Case No. 21-RC-880.-Decided October 17, 1919
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before Eugene M.
Purver, 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 National Labor
Relations Act, the Board has delegated its .powers in connection with
this case to a three-member panel [Members Houston, Reynolds, and
Murdock].
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the National Labor Relations Act.
2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent certain em-
ployees 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.
At the hearing and in its brief the Intervenor moved to dismiss the
petition on the ground, among others, that its contract with the Em-
ployer is a bar to this proceeding. The Intervenor's original contract,
executed on December 24, 1947, provided that it should expire on
June 25, 1949. On August 14, 1948, however, the parties by amend-
ment extended the termination date to June 25, 1950. The petition
herein was filed on June 21, and was therefore timely with regard
to the original termination date. Inasmuch as it is clear that the 1948
amendment prematurely extended the then existing contract, we find
' The name of the Petitioner appears as amended at the hearing.
86 N. L. R. B., No. 7Q
577
578 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
no merit in the Intervenor's contention.2 The motion to dismiss is
hereby denied .3
4. The parties agree that the appropriate unit is substantially the
same unit set forth in the contract between the Intervenor and the Em-
ployer. However, the Petitioner would include and the Employer
and Intervenor would exclude timekeepers and janitors.
Timekeepers-Those employees were certified by the Board as a
separate appropriate unit in 1946. Their duties are primarily of a
clerical nature. They work under the supervision of the chief clerk
and have little contact with the production and maintenance employees.
The Intervenor has bargained for the timekeepers on a separate basis.4
We shall exclude them.5
Janitors-There are six janitors, five of whom work at night. They
are paid a weekly salary and are supervised by the chief of guards.
The record indicates that they rarely come in contact with the produc-
tion and maintenance employees, their duties are substantially differ-
ent, and they have been excluded from the production and mainte-
nance unit under the present contract. We shall exclude them.
The following employees of the Employer constitute a unit appro-
priate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of
Section 9 (b) of the Act:
All employees 6 employed at the Employer's San Pedro yard,
Terminal Island, California, excluding all salaried employees, drafts-
men, watchmen, guards, gatemen, employees of the engineering de-
partment (including technical employees in said department), jani-
tors, timekeepers, chauffeurs, office employees, clerical employees, all
technical employees who are paid on a salary basis, executives, fore-
5Matter of International Harvester Co. (Indianapolis Works ), 82 N. L. R. B. 740;
Matter of Indiana Desk Co., Inc ., 82 N. L . R. B. 103.
8 We also find no merit in other contentions of the Intervenor that the petition should
be dismissed because ( 1) the Petitioner has not asserted a valid claim to representation ;
(2) the purpose of the petition is to disturb harmonious industrial relations ; and (3) the
employees authorizing the Petitioner to represent them are not employees within the
meaning of the Intervenor 's contract . We have frequently held that a union's claim to a
representative interest is an administrative matter not subject to collateral attack. Matter
of C. D. Jennings cf Co., 68 N. L. R. B . 516; Matter of Amos Molded Plastics Division of
Amos Thompson Corporation, 79 N. L. R. B. 201 . With regard to the last contention, the
record reveals that the Employer does not distinguish among its employees and regards
all of them , whether or not entitled to rights under the contract , as regular employees.
Although the Intervenor and the Employer have included the wage scale for time-
keepers in the wage schedule annexed to the contract for production and maintenance
employees , we do not regard this circumstance as detracting from the separate character
of the timekeepers ' bargaining history.
Matter of Allis-Chalmers Manufacturing Co., 84 N . L. R. B. 30.
The parties stipulated that: "All hourly -paid employees who are classified as leader-
men and who regularly work with tools in the ordinary course of their duties and who
supervise the work of employees who are included in the bargaining unit are included in
said bargaining unit." The record does not reveal whether those employees actually are
supervisors within the meaning of the amended Act. If they are not supervisors , they are
included in the unit . However , if they are supervisors , they are excluded.
BETHLEHEM STEEL COMPANY 579
men, assistant foremen, assistants to foremen, leadermen, who do not
regularly work with tools in the ordinary course of their duties, and
all supervisors.
5. The number of employees employed at the San Pedro yard varies
considerably. It is the policy of the Employer to retain on its pay roll
for a 30-day period all temporarily laid-off employees. Moreover,
under the provisions of the Intervenor's contract with the Employer,
laid-off employees, who had been employed for more than 30 days,
may be recalled and do not lose seniority rights if rehired within 12
months of their lay-off. In view of these facts, we find that the laid-
off employees retained on the pay roll and the employees laid off for
not more than 12 months, who may be recalled under the terms of the
Intervenor's contract, have a reasonable expectation of reemployment
and are entitled to vote unless they have obtained permanent employ-
Intervenor's contract, have a reasonable expectation of reemployment
by the Employer.'
DIRECTION OF ELECTION 8
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining with the Employer, an election by
secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than
30 days from the date of this Direction, under the direction and super-
vision of the Regional Director for the Region in which this case was
heard, and subject to Sections 203.61 and 203.62 of National Labor Re-
lations Board Rules and Regulations, among the employees in the
unit found appropriate in paragraph numbered 4, above, who were
employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date
of this Direction of Election, including employees who did not work
during said pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation or
temporarily laid off, but excluding those employees who have since
quit or been discharged for cause and have not been rehired or re-
instated prior to the date of the election, and also excluding em-
ployees on strike who are not entitled to reinstatement, to determine
whether they desire to be represented, for purposes of collective bar-
gaining, by Metal Trades Council of Southern California, A. F. of L.,
and its Affiliated Local and International Unions; or by Industrial
Union of Marine and Shipbuilding Workers of America and Local
No. 9, CIO, or by neither.
I Matter of E. H. Ferree Company, 77 N. L. R. B. 283 ; Matter of Ozark Dam Constructors,
77 N. L. it. B. 1136.
8 Any participant in the election herein may upon its prompt request to, and approval
thereof by, the Regional Director, have its name removed from the ballot.