89 N.L.R.B. 243 (N.L.R.B. 1950)

Bunker Hill

National Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsApr 7, 1950

89 N.L.R.B. 243 (N.L.R.B. 1950)

In the Matter of BUNKER HILL AND SULLIVAN MINING AND CONCEN- TRATING COMPANY, ET AL.,1 EMPLOYERS and LOCAL UNION No. 73, INTERNATIONAL BROTIIERI-lOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORIKERS, AFL, PE- TITIONER III the Matter of BUNKER HILL AND SULLIVAN MINING AND CONCEN- TRATING COMPANY, SULLIVAN MINING COMPANY (ZINC PLANT), SUNSI-IINE MINING COMPANY , FEDERAL MINING AND SMELTING COM- PANY, DAY MINES, INC., COEUR D'ALENE MINES CORPORATION, GOLD HUNTER MINES, INC.,2 SIDNEY MINING COMPANY, NABOB SILVER- LEAD MINING COMPANY, ZANETTI MINING AND MILLING COMPANY, EMPLOYERS and LOCAL UNION No. 73 , INTERNATIONAL BROTIIERI-IOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, AFL, PETITIONER Cases Nos. 19-RC-320, 19-RC-419, 19-RC-.l40, 19-RC-421, 19-RC- 422, 19-110-423, 19-RC-424, 19-RC-425, 19-RC-426, 19-RC-427, and 19-RC-428.-Decided April 7,1950 DECISION DIRECTION OF ELECTION AND ORDER Upon separate petitions duly filed , a consolidated hearing was held before Melton Boyd, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the . hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby, affirmed .3 1 The following Employers are included in the petition in case No. 19-RC-320 : Bunker Hill and Sullivan Mining and Concentrating Company ; Sullivan Mining Company (Zinc Plant ) ; Sunshine Mining Company ; - Federal Mining and Smelting Company ; American Smelting and Refining Company- ; Day Mines , Inc.; Coeur d'Alene Mines Corporation ; Small Leasing Company ; Spokane-Idaho Mining Company ; Sunset Minerals , Inc. ; John George Lease ; Golconda Lead Mines ; I-lull Lease ; Gold Hunter Mines, Inc. ; Sidney Mining Com- pany ; Highland - Surprise Consolidated Mining Company ; Denver Development Company; Nabob Silver -Lead Mining Company; Sunset Lease ; Hecla Mining Company- ; Zanetti Mining and Milling Company ; Silver Dollar Mining Company ; and Lucky Friday Silver- Lead Mines Company. 2 This Employer's name appears as amended at the hearing. 3 The hearing officer reserved ' for the Board the Employers ' several motions to dismiss the petition in Case No. 19-RC-320 ' and for separate representation proceedings. For the reasons stated herein these motions are denied. 89 NLRB No. 8. 243 889227-51-vol. 89-17 244 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Upon the entire record in the case, the Board finds : 1. All the Employers in Case No . 19-RC-320 are engaged in the mining of lead, zinc, or silver ores and the processing of such ores into concentrates. However, the only operation of the Sullivan Min- ing Company which is involved in this proceeding is its zinc plant at which it is engaged in the reduction of zinc concentrates to metallic zinc by means of an electrolytic process. Also , Bunker .. Hill and Sullivan Mining and Concentrating Company, in addition to its other activities , has a smelter at which it processes lead, zinc, and silver con- centrates into metals . The Employers ' mines, mills , and plants are lo- cated in a well-defined area commonly called the Coeur d'Alene Min- ing District in Shoshone County, Idaho. As more fully discussed in paragraph numbered 4, infra, 21 of the Employers in Case No. 19-RC-320, not including Small Leasing Com- parry and Lucky Friday Silver-Lead (Mines Company, are engaged in joint bargaining and comprise an appropriate multiple -employer bar- gaining unit. The Employers ' operations are similar in essential aspects, except for the dollar volume of their purchases and out-of -State sales, and the fact that some of the Employers, instead of shipping concentrates directly outside the State , sell them to Bunker Hill where they are com- mingled with other concentrates , further processed at Bunker Hill's smelter, and then shipped outside the State. Twenty of the twenty- three Employers in Case No. 19-RC-320 stipulated, and we find upon the basis of the record herein, that their operations affect commerce within the meaning of the Act. With respect to Small Leasing Com- pany, one of the three Employers which did not so stipulate , evidence introduced at the hearing shows that Small had been a partnership consisting of two men now deceased whose estates and partnership business were almost completely liquidated without prospect of any further production operations . The Petitioner , Intervenor, and this Employer concurred in a motion for dismissal of the petition in Case No. 19-RC-320 in relation to Small . Under the circumstances, we shall dismiss the petition insofar as it concerns the operations of Small Leasing Company. The two other Employers , namely, Coeur d'Alene Mines Corporation and Hecla Mining Company , contest the Board's jurisdiction. An examination of the record discloses that the totality of all the Employers ' operations clearly has an impact on interstate commerce. Without determining whether or not the Board would assert jurisdic- tion as to Coeur d'Alene Mines Corporation and Hecla Mining Com- pany were they before the Board separately, we find, contrary to their contentions, that, under the circumstances of this case, they as well as BUNKER HILL AND SULLIVAN MINING AND CONCENTRATING CO. 245 the other 20 Employers are engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.4 Nor is our finding affected by .the fact that the products of some of the Employers are sold to Bunker Hill, commingled with others, and are not identifiable as their products before being shipped outside the State. The arrangement between each of these Employers and Bunker Hill as to the title and the inci- dents of ownership does not change the essential fact that the transac- tions between each Employer and Bunker Hill together constitute a direct and continuous flow of commerce across State lines.5 2. The Petitioner and the joint Intervenor, International Union of Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers, its Wallace Miners Union Local No. 14, and its Kellogg Smeltermen's Union, Local No. 18, are labor or- ganizations claiming to represent employees of the Employers. 3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa- tion of employees of the Employers, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.e 4. The Petitioner seeks a multiple-employer unit of electrical work- ers at all the properties of 22 of the Employers in Case No. 19-RC-320, except that it limits its request as regards the Sullivan Mining Com- pany to that company's zinc plant. In the petition the proposed unit. is described as follows: All maintenance electricians, first, second, and .third class, helpers, apprentices, motor repairmen, armature repair- men, electrical inspectors, leadmen, and any other men coming within the electrical department. As an alternative position, if the Board. should find the nmultiple-employer unit inappropriate, the Petitioner requests that separate elections be directed among the electrical em- ployees of the 10 Employers named in the petitions filed in Cases Nos.. 19-RC-419 through 19-RC-428. The 22 Employers and International Union of Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers which, with its constituent. locals, has been representing all employees since approximately 1942,. asserts that both types of units requested by the Petitioner are inappro- priate because the electrical workers are not craftsmen and no multi- ple-employer bargaining unit has been established. We shall consider first the craft character of the electrical employ- ees..In view of the similarity of all the Employers' operations in the Coeur d'Alene Mining District, the following discussion is equally applicable to the employees in all the various mines, mills, and plants, Epp Furniture Company, of al ., 86 NLRB 120: Wirts Distributing Co. at al., 82 NLRB- 669 ; Air Conditioning Company of Southern California, at al., 81 NLRB 946. 6 Sunshine Mining Company , 7 NLR1; 1252, enforced 110 F. 2d 780 (C. A. 9). 6 Federal 'Mining and Smelting Company urges that its contract with Mullan Local No. 9, International Union of Mine, Mill and Smelter Woruers , executed August 23 , 1949, for employees of'its Morning Mine . constitutes a bar to this proceeding with respect to that operation . We do not agree. This contract cannot he a bar to a present determination, of representatives becau58 it was executed after the filing of the original petition herein.. Forney Engineering Company , 88 NLRB 204. 246 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD unless otherwise specifically indicated. The Employers' and the In= tervenor's opposition to the establishment of a unit or units of elec- tricians is grounded primarily on the following contentions : No apprentice training programs are maintained; the electricians are not highly skilled and perform routine electrical work; electricians do con- siderable amounts of nonelectrical work and nonelectrical workers do some electrical work; electricians are sometimes supervised by produc- tion supervisors and the highly integrated character of mining opera- tions with the natural interdependence between all workers belies the functional distinction essential to justify a severance of electrical employees; and the bargaining history between the Employers and the Intervenor on a broader basis precludes the finding of a separate unit or units of electricians. One of the elements to be considered in determining whether or not a particular group is craft in character is the existence of an apprenticeship training program or its equivalent by means of which employees may acquire skills ordinarily associated with their partic- ular craft. The record here discloses that the Employers have no formal apprenticeship programs as such. A few of the electricians have been hired as journeymen, although most have progressed on the job. The normal advancement is from helper to second class and from there to first class electrician. Progression from one class to another is based primarily on a man's ability and the celerity with which he develops the essential skills. Although the Employers do not provide any program of study, they encourage the electricians to take outside courses. It was estimated that it generally takes a period of 2 years to advance from Helper to second class and another 2 years to progress to first class. Although, as stated above, the Employers ddo'not have formal apprenticeship plans, the record shows that the employees involved herein nevertheless receive the necessary on-the-job training equipping them for the performance of their duties. We believe that the Employers' on-the-job training programs constitute acceptable substitutes for more formalized apprenticeship plans 7 Operation of the mines is dependent upon electrical power. The principal duties of the electricians are: Installing and maintaining electrical equipment and making immediate repairs in case of break- downs, anticipating possible trouble by regularly checking and inspecting electrical lines and repairing and maintaining such lines, motor winding, making small mush wound coils, installing and test- ing motors, doing all electrical maintenance for underground loco- 'Mueller Brass Company, 88 NLRB 431; Westclox Division, General Time Corpora- tion, 87. NLRB 406, Ryan Aeronautical Company, 85 NLRB 1189; Eagle Pencil Com- pany, 82 NLRB 263; United States Rubber Company, 81 NLRB 17. BUNKER HILL AND SULLIVAN MINING AND CONCENTRATING CO. 247 motives, handling battery charging equipment for miners' head lamps, maintaining telephone and signal equipment and systems, working with "hot" wires, maintaining substations and transformers, main- taining motor generator sets, doing house wiring in company-owned houses, installing switches, repairing magnetic controls, and splicing cables. The electricians use various types of instruments peculiar to the electrical trade such as ohmmeters, voltmeters, ammeters, neon tube testers, hydrometers, and measuring devices. An examination of the electricians' duties does not bear out the conclusion of the Employers and the Intervenor that their work is relatively unskilled or of a routine nature. While it is true that some of the duties of the electricians, such as the maintenance of fixtures used for illu- mination, may be routine in character, a substantial portion of their work apparently requires the exercise of the high degree of skill and training traditionally associated with the electrical craft. We have found electrical work similar to that performed by the electricians herein to be of a skilled craft character." The Employers and the Intervenor contend that the electricians do a considerable amount of work which might be described as nonelec- trical.0 On the other hand, it is alleged that nonelectrical workers do a certain amount of work which the Employers and the Intervenor contend might be called electrical.10 Although the record discloses that the electricians do some work which might be called nonelectrical,, this work, for the most part, appears to be incidental to the particular electrical job being performed. Also, while nonelectrical workers do a certain amount of work that might be called electrical, it ap- ° See Westclox Division , General Time Corporation , footnote 7, supra; Boeing Airplane Company, 86 NLRB 368; The Dayton Steel Foundry Company, 85 NLRB 1499; National Carbide Corporation, 85 NLRB 103 ; Indiana Limestone Corporation, 83 NLRB 1124; Celanese Corporation , 80 NLRB 61. ' Thus the electricians clean motors and generators , lubricate small fan motors, and oil transformers ; on a fan installation order , the electricians install and move the motor generator sets and fans from one level to another ; they erect steel frameworks and supports for installation of substations which are concerned with the distribution of primary power and transformation of power down to other voltages . Furthermore, electricians install blocks which are made in the electrical department and which sup- port cables in the shafts. Likewise , they drill holes for supports when running power cables in a drift ; they place lagging in position to protect electrical equipment from loose rock which might fall upon it ; they build wood stagings in order to run elec- trical cables around the underground workings ; they drill holes in panel boxes, over- haul generator sets, do all work on locomotives including removal of wheels, replace- ment of bearings, cleaning with wire brushes ; and they paint substations for protec- tive maintenance and signs to be placed near electrical hazards. 10 The Employers gave the following examples of such work : Miners in doing stope mining sometimes use a galvanometer , which is an electrical instrument , to test the continuity of electrical current before blasting ; hoistmen operate motor generator sets In connection with the hoists ; compressors are operated by nonelectrical workers and small adjustments on field rheostats are made by them ; motormen change batteries, disconnect them , install them, and put discharged batteries on charge ; and machinists and mechanics use electric welders which are maintained by them. 248 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD parently is of a relatively minor nature. We do not believe that the types of interchange of dutes revealed herein are sufficient to destroy the identity and craft status of the employees involved.- The electricians are generally divided into four classifications ;according to skill and experience : Leadmen, first class, second class, and helpers. They are usually under the direct supervision of elec- trical foremen 12 Electricians who work underground sometimes take -orders from shift bosses or supervisors in charge of production and other maintenance men. However, on such occasions they are appar- ently told what to do by these supervisors, but are responsible to the electrical foremen as to how they do their work.13 The electri- cians have their own electrical shops which are physically separated from those of the other maintenance employees. They work with the usual tools of the electrical craft, some of which they are required to supply themselves. Ordinarily electricians are not interchanged with other maintenance employees. In case of a breakdown or major installation, electricians may work as a team with other nonelectrical workers. However, in such instances, all electrical work is done by the electricians. In our opinion, it is apparent that the electricians, contrary to the contention of the Employers and the Intervenor, are a readily identifiable craft group '14 such as we have permitted to sever in the mining industry.15 We find that, despite the bargaining history on a more comprehen- sive basis, the electrical employees may, if they so desire, constitute either a separate bargaining unit or units, depending upon our subse- quent determination as to whether the appropriate unit should be multiple-employer or separate-employer in scope 16 Blowerhouse and powerhouse employees: Bunker Hill and Sullivan Mining and Concentrating Company, which is by far the largest min- 11 Boeing Airplane Corporation , footnote 8, supra; The Dayton Steel Foundry Com- pany, footnote 8, supra; Todd Shipyards Corporation , 80 NLRB 382. n The electricians at the Sidney Mining Company are under the shop foreman who is not an electrician. However , the record reveals that an electrical leadman responsibly directs them. "The Board has indicated that where electricians take orders from their own fore- man as to how they shall perform their duties, they retain their craft status, notwith- standing the fact that they may be directed by production supervisors with respect to other aspects of their work . General Tire and Rubber Company , 79 NLRB 580. 11 Calumet and Hecla Consolidated Copper Company ( Wolverine Tube Division), 86 NLRB 126 ; Kennecott Copper Corporation , Ray Mines Division, Hayden Operations, 84 NLRB 836. 15 Kaiser Steel Corporation , 87 NLRB 643 ; Kennecott Copper Corporation , Ray Mines Division . Hayden Operations , footnote 14, supra; Phelps Dodge Corporation , 60 NLRB 1431 ; cf. National Tube Company, 76 NLRB 1199 ; Ford Motor Company ( Maywood Plant ), 78 NLRB 887. 15 The cases of Schlumberger Well Surveying Corporation , 83 NLRB 375 ; National Distillers Products Corporation , 84 NLRB 818 ; and E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Com- pany, Inc., 85 NLRB 1301 , cited by the Employers to support their position that the electrical employees should not be granted craft severance , are not authority to the con- trary. They are all distinguishable on their facts from the instant case. BUNKER HILL AND SULLIVAN MINING AND CONCENTRATING CO. 249 ing operator involved herein, has two groups of employees desig- nated as blowerhouse and powerhouse operators. The blowerhouse ,operators are located at Bunker Hill's smelter and are considered part of the electrical department. They are supervised by the same 'men who supervise the electricians at the smelter. The powerhouse operators are located at the mine and are considered by Bunker Hill as part of its mechanical department. They are supervised by the shop foreman. The Petitioner and the Intervenor desire that both powerhouse and blowerhouse operators be included in any electri- cians' unit or units found appropriate. The Employer would include the blowerhouse operators and exclude the powerhouse operators. The duties of both these groups of employees are substantially the same. They take care of the rotating equipment, continually watch the flow of cooling water through the compressors, watch every air compressor to cut in or cut out compressor units, blow whistles, and attend to the fire alarm system by setting and checking it, and keep an hourly record of all ammeter readings. In the blowerhouse and powerhouse rooms, there is a long series of electric panels, each of which has an oil circuit breaker and contains switches which it is the duty of these employees to open and close, an operation that is fre- quently performed because these switches control the electric power, and as the power is paid for on the basis of a peak demand, it is the obligation of these employees to see that the power load does not ex- ceed the peak demand. The Employer stated at the hearing that prev- ious electrical training is not particularly desirable for this type of work as it is largely routine in nature and requires only about a month's training to qualify a new man in this operation. In view of the duties of these employees, the difference in the work they do from that of the electricians, and the small amount of training required, we believe that both powerhouse and blowerhouse operators should be excluded from any voting groups of electricians hereinafter established 17 Generator men, "strippers," and cell repairmen: The Sullivan Min- ing Company has in its operations three classifications of employees which apparently none of the other Employers has, namely, generator men, "strippers," and cell repairmen. We find, in accordance with the agreement of all the parties, that the generator men should be in- cluded in, and the "strippers" and cell repairmen excluded from, any voting groups of electricians hereinafter established. We turn now to the question as to whether severance of these em- ployees should be on a multiple-employer or single-employer basis. 17 United States Potash Company ( N. S. L.), 63 NLRB 1379, 1383. 250 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD . "Bargaining history: Twenty-two of the Employers, not including Lucky Friday Silver-Lead Mines Company, in Case No. 19-RC-320, have recognized and bargained since 1942 with International Union of Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers and its locals Wallace Miners Union, Local No. 14, Kellogg. Mine and Smeltermen's Union, Local No. 18, and Mullan Local No. 9, as bargaining agent for all the em- ployees of the Employers. As previously indicated, the first 'three labor organizations intervened jointly in this proceeding and are referred to collectively as the Intervenor."' Before 1942, the various Employers had been bargaining individually with the Intervenor. In 1942, the parties decided to conduct what they describe as "concur- rent" negotiations rather than have separate negotiations going oli throughout the District in the offices of the respective Employers.19 The parties have continued to bargain on this basis until the present hearing.20 Character of negotiations : There is no Employer association as such. Representatives of the Employers and the Intervenor meet at one place and one time. Each Employer has its own representative and asserts that it reserves the right to insist on different provisions during the course of negotiations and to determine whether it will sign any agreement which is reached. No Employer authorizes anyone to bind it, except a person who is an officer of the particular Employer or. its legal counsel. Sometimes the smaller mine owners, called the Pine Creek operators'21 in the interest of limiting the number of Employers participating, have selected one person to represent them as a group. Occasionally, a small group is established by the Employers and the Intervenor in order to work out details to be later proposed'to the parties engaging in the negotiations. Since 1942 one H. J. Hull, who is an Employer and also counsel for' several of the other Employers involved herein, has acted as spokesman, chairman, and moderator of the Employer group. The Intervenor has a negotiating committee 1 1 However , references to the Intervenor in the discussion infra of the subject of bargain- ing history , negotiations , and results of negotiations should he understood to include the activities of Local No. 9 which did not appear in the proceeding and is not in compliance with Section 9 (f), (g), and (h) of the Act. n The parties were unable to resolve certain matters which arose during negotiations that year and finally went to the War Labor Board for determination of those issues. The War Labor Board held a consolidated hearing . Each party had its own representative at that hearing . The Petitioner suggests the fact that the Employers in that proceeding were collectively dealt with by the War Labor Board and that the decision rendered referred to the Coeur d 'Alene District Mining Companies is some evidence that a multiple -employer unit was then in existence. 20 Except for the August 23, 1949 , contract between Federal Mining and Smelting Com- pany and Local No. 9 referred to in footnote 6, supra . Also, Federal continued to partici- pate in "concurrent" bargaining for all its other operations. 21 The Pine Creek operations are : Highland-Surprise Mining Company , Sidney Mining Company, Denver Development Company, Nabob .' Silver-Lead Mining Company, Coeur d'Alene Mines, and Golconda Lead Mines. BUNKER HILL AND SULLIVAN MINING AND CONCENTRATING CO. 251 made up of representatives of the International and its locals. Like the Employers, each asserts that it votes on issues independently of the others. There is a representative of the Intervenor who acts as chairman of that group. In sessions with the Intervenor's committee, if Employers have specific proposals to present to the union committee, they,submit the proposals through Hull. But in the general discus- sions, they are all at liberty to participate and many of them do. Hull stated that he has no power or authority to bind any one of the partici- pants and that he is only their chairman and their spokesman when they want some specific proposition submitted to the Intervenor. Result of negotiations: Since 1942 the parties have had standard and uniform contracts. A single wage scale is provided for persons in each classification regardless of the mine in which they are em- ployed. The contracts always expire on or about June 30 of each year. After the terms of a contract have been reached in negotiations, sufficient copies are ordinarily mimeographed for the various Em- ployers to sign, leaving appropriate blanks for filling in the particular Employer's name and for identifying the local. Then the contracts are generally printed in order that the Intervenor can pass copies out to its members and the Employers can have them on display in their hiring offices.22 Each Employer signs a separate contract, and where it has more than one operation, It signs an individual contract for each. Employees do not carry over seniority or holiday benefits when they move from one operator to another. However, at least one of the terms embodied in the contract executed in 1947 has an effect when an employee leaves one Employer and goes to another.23 All grievances are handled on an individual-employer rather than a multiple-em- ployer basis. Matters for arbitration are similarly handled, except that they are usually collected and processed in one proceeding when- ever possible. Notices for negotiations of a new contract are served on the Employers individually. The Board has held that the essential element for establishing a multiple-employer unit is participation by a group of employers, whether members or nonmembers of an association, either personally or through an authorized representative, in joint bargaining negotia- 22 The Petitioner refers to the fact that the 1947 contract which was jointly issued and circulated by the Employers and the Intervenor identifies the Employers on the cover page as the Shoshone County Operators. It contends that this is some evidence that the Em- ployers considered themselves part of a multiple-employer bargaining group. z3 Article III d reads : "If a member of the Union employed by another company, a signatory of the Coeur d'Alene District contract, transfers to the employ of the undersigned company and as a result of such transfer the Union loses a month's dues from said ern, ployce, the undersigned company, upon proper certification by the Union and upon written assignment by the employee, will deduct 2 month's dues from the wages of such employee upon his first check -off date with the undersigned." 252 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD tions.24 We have found such units appropriate althougkthe particular employers involved did not belong to a formal employer association. 25 each employer had its own representative present during negotia- tions,26 and the negotiations resulted in the execution of separate, but identical, contracts.27 The Employers in the instant case apparently admit to the practice, since 1942, of acting in concert in bargaining with the Intervenor, but characterize the negotiations as "concurrent" rather than joint. It is their position that, primarily, in the interest of convenience and, secondarily, to achieve some measure of uniform- ity in bargaining in the District, they have arranged to meet together with the Intervenor. They apparently distinguish "concurrent" from "joint" bargaining negotiations upon the ground that in the former each employer has its own representative present, retains its independ- ence and is not bound by the acts or decisions of the others and, in effect, separately negotiates the terms of its own contract, whereas in the latter an individual or group of individuals is authorized to act for and bind the employers as their agent and the employers assume an obligation to adhere to the results of the bargaining conducted by their representatives. Upon the facts in this record, we are unable to perceive any merit to the distinction which the Employers here raise with regard to "concurrent" and "joint" bargaining. The Board has held that, in determining the propriety or impropriety of a multiple-employer unit, the fact that the employers do not designate any representative or central authority to bind them is not controlling.2$ Without deciding whether upon a different record we would find that there is a substan- tial difference between "concurrent" and "joint" negotiations, we find upon the facts here presented that the. 22 Employers involved herein have engaged in joint bargaining of the type required for the estab- lishment of a multiple-employer unit. In reaching this conclusion, we are persuaded by the following facts : That the Employers have regu- larly met and bargained with the Intervenor at the same time and place for approximately 7 years; that each Employer has a representative and that one of their number, designated as chairman for the group, presents their specific proposals; that the Intervenor has a negotiating committee and a chairman who apparently performs the same func- 24 Associated Shoe Industries of Southeastern Massachusetts. Inc., et at., 81 NLRB 224. 25 Johnson Optical Company , at at ., 85 NLRB 895 ; Ward Baking Company, 78 NLRB 781. 26 Epp Furniture Company, et at ., footnote 4, supra; Baking Industry Council, 80 NLRB 1590 ; Ward Baking Company, footnote 25, supra. 27 Balaban d Katz ( Princess Theatre ), 87 NLRB 1071 : Furniture Firms of Duluth, 81 NLRB 1318 ; The Everett Automotive Jobbers Association, et at ., 81 NLRB 304; Ward Baking Company , footnote 25, supra. 29 Epp Furniture Company, et at., footnote 4, supra ; Air Conditioning Company of Southern California , et at., footnote 4, supra; Everett Automotive Jobbers Association , at at, footnote 27, supra. BUNKER HILL AND SULLIVAN MINING AND CONCENTRATING CO . 253 tion; and that as a consequence of such negotiations, the Employers have had standard and uniform, although separately signed, contracts since 1942. Under these circumstances, we believe that the participat- ing Employers have manifested a desire to be bound in collective bar- gaining by group rather than by individual action. Furthermore, although all the Employers have contended that a multiple-employer unit is not appropriate, none of the 22 Employers in Case No. 19- RC-320 has by its statements or conduct clearly and unequivocally evinced an intention to pursue an individual course of action apart from that of the multiple-employer group.29 In our opinion, 21 of the 22 Employers 30 have, without combining themselves into a formal association, conducted negotiations with the Intervenor on a joint basis. Accordingly, their employees can be, as, they have been, represented in a multiple-employer unit. We find. therefore that there exists an established pattern of multiple-employer bargaining which controls the type of unit appropriate for the elec- trical employees of 21 of the Employers in Case No. 19-RC-320.31 The twenty-third Employer in Case No. 19-RC-320, namely, Lucky Friday Silver-Lead Mines Company, in 1949 adopted and became signatory to the standard contract resulting from the joint negotia- tions of the other Employers and the Intervenor. Lucky Friday signed its contract with Mullan Local No. 9. However, the record shows that Lucky Friday has never participated with the other Em- ployers in the joint negotiations with the Intervenor, or delegated to any of the Employers authority to conduct negotiations on its behalf. Under these circumstances, the fact that Lucky Friday adopted the standard contract does not in itself provide a sufficient basis for the inclusion of its employees in a unit with those of the other Employers.32 We shall, therefore, dismiss the petition in Case No. 19-RC-320 with respect to Lucky Friday's operations, in view of the fact that the Pe- titioner did not request a separate election among the employees of this Employer. We have found that all the electrical employees of 21 Employers in Case No. 19-RC-320 may constitute a separate appropriate unit, not- withstanding their previous inclusion in a broader unit. However, we shall make no final unit determination at this time, but shall first as- certain the desires of the employees as expressed in the election here- 29 See Epp Furniture Company et al., footnote 4, supra; Johnson Optical Company, et al., footnote 25, supra ; Furniture Firms of Duluth , footnote 27, supra. 30 For the reasons previously indicated, we shall dismiss the petition in Case No. 19-RC-320 with respect to the twenty-second Employer, Small Leasing Company. 31 Columbia Pictures Corporation, 84 NLRB 647. 32 Association of Motion Picture Producers , Inc., et al ., 85 NLRB 902 ; Morley Manu- facturing Company, 83 NLRB 404; E. A. Murray, d/b/a Murray Motor Transport, 81 NLRB 93; Hummel Furniture Manufacturing Company, 72 NLRB 301. 254 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD inafter directed. If, in this election, the employees in the voting :group described below select the Petitioner, they will be taken to have indicated their desire to constitute a separate collective bargain- ing unit. We shall dismiss the petitions in Cases Nos. 19-RC-419 .through 19-RC-428 which were filed for separate-employer units. 5. The record reveals that the union party in interest ill this pro- ceeding consists of not only International Union of Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers, its Wallace Miners Union, Local No. 14, and its Kellogg Smeltermen's Union, Local No. 18 which is the named joint Intervenor, but includes the chartered and apparently functioning Mullan Local No. 9 which has not complied with the filing require- ments of Section 9 (f), (g), and (h) of the Act. While Local No. 9 is not a formal party to this proceeding, the record indicates that, if the joint Intervenor should win in the election hereinafter directed, any contract with the Employers may be jointly executed by the joint Intervenor and Local No. 9 or partially administered by the latter local, Because of the interest of Local No. 9 which is not incompliance with the Act, we shall place the joint Intervenor on the ballot in the election hereinafter directed, conditioned upon Local No. 9 achieving a status of compliance. Accordingly, if within 2 weeks from the is- suance of this Decision and Direction of Election, Local No. 9 is not in compliance with Section 9 (f), (g), and (h) of the Act, the Regional Director is herewith instructed to delete the name of the joint Inter- venor from the ballot.33 The compliance status of Local No. 14 has lapsed since the hearing n this matter. The Regional Director is herewith instructed to delete International Union of Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers, and its Locals Nos. 14 and 18 from the ballot in the election directed herein if Local No. 14 has not, within 2 weeks from the date of this Decision and Direction of Election, renewed its compliance with Section 9 (f), (g), and (h). We shall direct an election among the following employees at all the properties of 21 of the Employers named below and at the zinc plant of the Sullivan Mining Company : All maintenailce electricians, first, second, and third class, helpers, apprentices, leadmen,34 and all other electrical employees of Bunker 1Iill and Sullivan Mining and Concentrating Company; Sullivan Mining Company (Zinc Plant) ; Sunshine Mining Company; Federal -3The Prudential Insurance Company of America, Si NLRB 295; United States Gypsum Company, Si NLRB 292 ; Lane Wells Company, 79 NLRB 252. 31 The record shows that the leadman at Sidney Mining Company and the leadman in Bunker Hill and Sullivan Mining and Concentrating Company's underground electrical crew responsibly direct the men. Accordingly, they are excluded from the unit au supervisors. BUNKER HILL AND SULLIVAN MINING AND CONCENTRATING CO. 255 Mining and Smelting Company; American Smelting and Refining: Company ; Day Mines,. Inc. ; Coeur d'Alene Mines Corporation ; Spokane Idaho Mining Company ; Sunset Minerals, Inc., John, George Lease; Golconda Lead Mines; Hull Lease, Gold Hunter Mines,. Inc. ; Sidney Mining Company ; Highland-Surprise Consolidated- Mining Company; Denver Development Company; Nabob Silver- Lead Mining Company; Sunset Lease; Hecla Mining Company;. Zanetti Mining and Milling Company; and Silver Dollar Mining Com- pany, at their properties in the Coeur d'Alene Mining District in Shoshone County, Idaho, including generator men, but excluding- powerhouse and blowerhouse operators, "strippers," and cell repair- men, guards, professional employees, and supervisors as defined in. the Act. DIRECTION OF ELECTION 35 As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the. purposes of collective bargaining with the Employers, 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 Relations Board Rules and Regulations, among the employees in the voting group described in paragraph numbered 5, above, who were employed during the payroll period immediately preceding the date. of this Direction of Election, including employees who did not work during said payroll 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 rein- stated prior to the date of the election, alid also excluding employees on strike who are not entitled to reinstatement, to determine whether- they desire to be represented, for purposes of collective bargaining, by Local Union No. 73, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL, or by International Union of Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers, its Wallace Miners Union, Local No. 14, its Kellogg Smelter-- men's Union, Local No. 18, and its Mullan Local No. 9, or by neither.. ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition in Case No. 19-RC-320, Only insofar as it concerns the operations of Small Leasing Company and_ Lucky Friday Silver-Lead Mines Company, be, and it hereby is,. dismissed. Any participant in the election directed herein may , upon its prompt request to, and approval thereof by, the Regional Director, have its name removed from the ballot. 256 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD;,j ; IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the separate petitions filed in Cases -Nos. 19-RC-419, 19-RC=420, 19-RC-421, 19-RC-.422, 19-R,C-423, 19-RC- 424, ^ 19-RC-425; 19-RC-426, 19-RC-427, 19-RC-428, be; and they. hereby are, dismissed. MEMBER STYLES took no part in the consideration of the above Decision, Direction of Election, and Order.