Carnegie-Illinois Steel Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 8, 1941

34 N.L.R.B. 40 (N.L.R.B. 1941)

In the Matter Of CARNEGIE-ILLINOIS STEEL CORP. ENGINEERING Div-
NAVAL ORDNANCE PLANT and LOCAL UNION 466, I. B. E. W.
In the Matter Of CHARLESTON DIVISION OF CARNEGIE-ILLINOIS STEEL
CORPORATION, OPERATING IN THE S. CHARLESTON NAVAL ORDNANCE
PLANT and INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS, ORDNANCE
LODGE No. 615
Cases Nos. R-2634 and R-26,35.-Decided August 8, 1941
Jurisdiction : steel manufacturing industry.
Practice and Procedure : petitions of unions dismissed where no appropriate
unit within the scope of the petition ; petition of employer dismissed where in
consolidated proceedings conflicting claims of petitioning unions have been re-
solved and where no union desires to represent employees in unit proposed
therein.
Mr. Alba B. Martin, for the Board.
Mr. B. L. Rawlings, Jr., and Mr. L. L. Lewis, of Pittsburgh, Pa., for
the Company.
Mr. W. H. Wilson, of Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio, and Mr. G. R. Miller, of
Charleston, W. Va., for the I. B. E. W.
Mr. Paul R. Hutchings, of Washington, D. C., and Mr. W. C. Iseley,
of Huntington, W. Va., for the I. A. M.
Mr. Joseph Kovner, of Washington, D. C., and Mr. Meyer Bernstein,
of Pittsburgh, Pa., for the S. W. O. C.
Mrs. Augusta Spaulding, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
ORDER
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On February 12, 1941, Local Union 466, I. B. E. W., herein called the
I. B. E. W., filed with the Regional Director for the Ninth Region (Cin-
cinnati, Ohio) a petition alleging that a question affecting commerce
had arisen concerning the representation of employees of Carnegie-
Illinois Steel Corporation, South Charleston, West Virginia, herein
called the Company,. and requesting an investigation and certification
of representatives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
34 N. L. R. B., No. 5.
40
11
CARNEGIE-ILLINOIS STEEL CORP. 41
Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act. On April 14, 1941,
International Association of Machinists, Ordnance Lodge No. 615,
herein called the I. A. M., filed a similar petition. On April 30, 1941,
,the National Labor Relations Board, herein called the Board, acting
pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the Act, and Article III, Sections 3 and
10 (c) (2), of the National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regula-
tions-Series 2, as amended, consolidated the two cases, ordered an
investigation, and authorized the Regional Director to conduct it and
to provide for an appropriate hearing upon due notice.
On May 17, 1941, the Regional Director issued a notice of hearing,
copies of which were duly served upon the Company, the I. B. E. W.,
the I. A. M., and Steel Workers Organizing Committee, herein called
the S. W. O. C., a labor organization claiming to represent employees
directly affected by the investigation. Pursuant to notice, a hearing
was held on June 9 and 10, 1941, at Charleston, West Virginia, before
Charles E. Persons, the Trial Examiner duly designated by the Chief
Trial Examiner. The Board, the Company, and the S. W. O. C. were
represented by counsel, and the I. B. E. W. and the I. A. M. by their
respective representatives. All parties participated in the hearing.
Full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses,
and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues was afforded all par-
ties. The Company, at the hearing, filed an "Answer and Cross
Petition," in which it averred that it was confronted with conflicting
claims by labor organizations at its Charleston Division and in which
it requested an investigation and certification of representatives. The
S. W. O. C. moved to dismiss both the petitions and the cross-petition
on the ground that the units respectively proposed by the three peti-
tioning parties were inappropriate for bargaining and the Company's
cross-petition on the further ground that no union desired certification
in the unit proposed therein. The Trial Examiner reserved ruling
on these motions for the Board. For reasons which appear in Section
III, below, the motions are granted. During the course of the hearing,
the Trial Examiner made several rulings oii other motions and on
objections to the admission of evidence. The Board has reviewed the
rulings of the Trial Examiner and finds that no prejudicial errors
were committed. The rulings are hereby affirmed.
On June 16, 1941, the S. W. O. C., and on June 18, 1941, the I. A. M.
filed requests for oral argument before the Board at Washington,
D. C. On June 19, 1941, the Board denied the requests for oral argu-
ment and granted permission to all parties to file briefs with the Board
in support of their respective contentions.
On July 10, 1941, the I. A. M. filed a motion to make certain cor-
rections in the official transcripts in these proceedings. All parties
consented to the granting of this motion. The motion is granted.
42 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
On June 17, 1941, the Board attorney filed with the Board at Wash-
ington, D. C., a statement, and on July 12, 1941, a supplemental state-
ment, concerning union claims of authorization.' The Board hereby
orders that these statements be, and they hereby are, made part of
the official record in these proceedings.
On July 15, 1941, the Company, the S. W. O. C., and the I. A. M.
filed briefs which the Board has considered.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the follow-
ing :
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Carnegie-Illinois Steel Corporation is engaged in the manufacture
and sale of steel and steel products. It operates plants in Pennsyl-
vania, Ohio, Illinois, Indiana, and West Virginia. The Company
has its principal office in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and maintains
sales offices in the principal cities of the United States. The voting
stock of the Company is wholly owned by United States Steel
Corporation.
The Company designates as the Homestead Steel Works the fol-
lowing six plants: Carrie Furnaces at Rankin, Pennsylvania; Shoen
Steel Wheel Works at McKees Rocks, Pennsylvania; Howard Axle
Works and 100" Plate Mill at West Homestead, Pennsylvania; Home-
stead Steel Works, herein called the Munhall plant, at Munhall, Penn-
sylvania; and a portion of the United States Naval Ordnance Plant,
herein called the Charleston Division, at South Charleston, West
Virginia.
During the year 1940, 35 per cent of the raw materials used by
the six plants, consisting principally of iron ore, scrap, alloys, coal, and
limestone, came to the plants from outside Pennsylvania. During
the same year 55 per cent of the finished products were shipped out-
side the State of Pennsylvania, including export. A considerable
tonnage of semi-finished products was shipped to other plants of the
Company.
The Charleston Division, which is the plant directly involved in
these proceedings, is considered by the Company an operating sub-
division of the Munhall plant and is engaged in the processing of heavy
and light armor plate and shafts. The portion of United States
Naval Ordnance Plant operated by the Company is leased to the
' During the course of the hearing , the Board attorney was unable to complete his
check of the evidence of membership filed by the unions to support their respective claims
to represent employees of the Company . The parties agreed that the Board attorney should
complete his statement after adjournment of the hearing and file it with the Board at
Washington , D. C., and that such statement should become a part of the official record in
these proceedings.
CARNEGIE-ILLINOIS STEEL CORP. 43
Company by the United States Government, which owns the entire
plant and its facilities. The principal materials used by the Com-
pany in its processing operations at the Charleston Division are an-
nealed semi-forged ingots, semi-forged shafts, semi-forged slabs, and
semi-finished rolled armor plate, all of which comes to the plant from
the Munhall plant. During the year 1940, all of the material processed
and completed at the Charleston Division was shipped to points out-
side West Virginia. All such products were sold to the United States
Navy Department.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
Local Union 466, I. B. E. W., is a labor organization affiliated with
the American Federation of Labor.
International Association of Machinists, Ordnance Lodge No. 615, is
a labor organization affiliated with the American Federation of Labor.
Steel Workers Organizing Committee is a labor organization
affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations.
These organizations admit to membership employees of the
Company.
III. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The I. B. E. W. contends that maintenance and repair electricians
and substation operators at the Charleston Division constitute an ap-
propriate bargaining Unit .2 The I. A. M. contends that employees
working in, out of, or from the machine shop, on the machine-shop pay
roll of the Charleston Division, including machinists, millwrights, ma-
chine operators, bench hands, test cutters, burners, welders, machine-
shop crane operators, and helpers, learners, apprentices, and machine-
shop workers, constitute an appropriate unit. The Company contends
that production and maintenance employees at the six plants which
comprise its Homestead Steel Works constitute an appropriate unit.
The S. W. O. C. contends that the three units proposed by the I. B.
E. W., the I. A. M., and the Company, respecti-ely, are inappropriate
units. The S. W. O. C. contends that production and maintenance em-
ployees at all steel manufacturing and byproduct coke plants of the
Company constitute an appropriate unit, but it does not seek certifi-
cation as bargaining agent for such employees in these proceedings.
At its six plants comprising the Homestead Steel Works described
in Section I, above, the Company manufactures, respectively, the fol-
lowing products : pig iron at Carrie Blast Furnaces, axles and forgings
for railway equipment at Howard Axle Works, finished and semi-fin-
ished plates at 100" Plate Mill, wheels, beams, plates, flooring, and
. ysy' ,Wav%%v0N0mRv%d
2 All parties agree that foremen, assistant foremen, supervisors in charge of any classes
of labor, watchmen, guards, and clerical and salaried employees should be excluded from
the bargaining unit.
44 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
forgings at Shoen Steel Wheel Works, a wide variety of steel products
at the Munhall plant, including propeller shafts and armor plate,
and propeller shafts and armor plate at the Charleston Division.
Products are sent from one plant to another. One superintendent
handles industrial relations at these six plants. The Company's
policies concerning them emanate from Pittsburgh. Grievance ap-
peals from plant managers' decisions are made to Pittsburgh officials.
In 1939 the Company found its facilities at the Munhall plant in-
adequate for its Navy contracts.-3 It leased government-owned prop-
erty and facilities at the United States Naval Ordnance Plant 4 at
Charleston, West Virginia, 230 miles distant. All materials for pro-
cessing come ,to the Charleston Division from the Munhall plant, di-
rectly or by way of the Gary plant, and instructions for such work
are forwarded from the Munhall plant. Propeller shafts, which con-
stitute less than 5 per cent of the work of the Charleston Division by
man-hours, leave the plant for the Navy Yard without further proc-
essing by the Company. In 1940 over 80 per cent of the armor plate
was returned to the Munhall plant for further processing. Coor-
dinating supervisory and technical employees work at both plants,
traveling from one plant to the other. The Company considers the
Charleston Division an integral part of the Munhall plant. The Com-
pany anticipates that the Charleston Division will increase in size, but
does not expect to make it an independent operating unit b
In the spring of 1940 the machine-shop department at the Charles-
ton plant began its operations. At the time of the hearing the fol-
lowing departments were operating : heat treating, forge, press, ship-
ping, machine-shop, powerhouse, and substation.6 All these depart-
ments are interrelated and interdependent.
The machine-shop department is a production department for ma-
chine work on propeller shafts and armor plate. At the time of the
hearing it included about 360 production and maintenance employees,
consisting of machine-tool operators and their helpers, toolroom help-
ers, cranemen, hookers, learners and helpers, burners, test-cutter oper-
8 The Federal Government passes upon the citizenship of workmen employed to fill
Federal contracts . Navy inspectors approve work made to government specifications.
In all other respects the Company's plants operate as privately owned concerns.
4 This plant , operated by the government for the manufacture of shells, guns, and recoil
cylinders from 1919 to 1921, was closed from 1921 to 1939. The greater part of the
facilities at the plant is owned by the United States . Some tools , reconditioned , date from
the government 's operations in 1921. At least 8 or 10 employees at the plant worked
there in 1919-1921 under Civil Service. The Company has installed and owns a few
tools. Five per cent of the facilities at the Munhall plant are also owned by the
government.
5 Operations began at the Charleston Division with 22 employees , all of whom were
transferred from the Munhall plant. In 1937 there were 137 wage earners , in July 1940,
384, in December 1940, 579, and in May 1941, 960 at the Charleston Division. The
Company expects to double its present pay roll within a year.
6 New extensions , the nature of which is not disclosed in the record, are in process of
building.
CARNEGIE-ILLINOIS STEEL CORP. 45
ators, layer-outs and their helpers, a grinder, and an instructor. The
Company has no apprentice system. Due to labor shortage the Com-
pany generally employs unskilled men and specially trains them for a
short period to operate a machine tool. Such operation is confined to
rough work and a wide tolerance is allowed. These machines are
preset and are operated mechanically by buttons. The specially
trained operator does not rely on touch and feel as a skilled mechanic
does. About 200 such specially trained machine operators and their
helpers perform the greater part of the machine work of the depart-
ment. To give instruction for such special training, to preset ma-
chines, and to operate the most complicated machines, the Company
employs 29 journeymen machinists.
Test cutters check in and out of the machine shop. The record is
not entirely clear where their work is performed, but it appears that
they work in several buildings. The I. A. M. claims jurisdiction over
millwrights, but the Company employs no millwrights as such. A
maintenance crew of 8 men performs such work and also electrical
maintenance work as needed. A representative of the Company
testified that the maintenance crew divided its time about evenly be-
tween electrical and mechanical maintenance. The maintenance crew
works in all departments of the plant. The Company employs 26
crane men in the machine-shop department and 36 other crane men at
the plant. The work that they perform in the several departments is
not dissimilar. All crane men are assigned to supplement the gen-
eral maintenance crew when their services are not required on the
cranes. Hookers, learners, and helpers do similar work in the several
departments of the plant where cranes are operated.
The I. A. M. began organizing employees in the machine-shop de-
partment in the fall of 1940. In support of its claim to represent the
360 employees in the department, the I. A. M. submitted 38 cards of
employees whose names appear on the plant pay roll of June 7, 1941.7
In the fall of 1940 the I. B. E. W. began its organization among
employees of the Company doing electrical work. Including the 8
maintenance employees, who regularly devote at least half of their
time to electrical work, there are 27 such employees. In support of
its claim to represent them the I. B. E. W. submitted 18 authorization
cards of employees whose names appear on the plant pay roll of June
7, 1941.
The Company employs 5 substation men, who are electrical employ-
ees assigned to keep machines functioning. In addition, it employs
9 wiremen , 10 electrical repairmen, and the general maintenance crew
7 At the hearing a representative of the I. A. M. testified that there were at that time
100 members of the I. A. M. working in the department and that most of these were
transferees from other lodges . The S. W. 0. C. contends that the I . A. M. has not disclosed
a sufficient membership among employees in its proposed unit. We find it unnecessary to
make a determination upon this matter.
46 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
of 8 employees, described above, who divide their time between elec-
trical and other maintenance work. Some of these employees were
experienced in electrical work when hired, others were trained by the
Company. The maintenance crew, as we have found above, is from
time to time supplemented by crane operators not needed for crane
work. The record does not disclose that the work assigned to them is
limited to a particular kind of maintenance work. The I. B. E. W.
desires to include in its bargaining unit all employees doing electrical
work. At least 8 such employees spending half their time doing the
work of millwrights fall also within the unit proposed by the I. A. M.
On March 17,1937, the Company and the S. W. O. C. entered into a
contract, and on February 9, 1938, a renewal contract, covering mem-
bers of the S. W. O. C. employed at the Company's steel manufactur-
ing and byproducts coke plants.8 In July 1940 the S. W. O. C. estab-
lished a local union at Charleston. On April 1, 1941, with knowledge
of the petitions filed by the unions in these proceedings, the Company
and the S. W. O. C. entered into a new contract covering the same
employees e Delegates represented the Charleston division in the
negotiations for this contract. The Company, in turn, has extended
the benefits of these three contracts to all employees at such plants.
At the time of the hearing the S. W. O. C. had presented to the Com-
pany grievances from the heat-treating, forge, and service depart-
ments at the Charleston Division and suggestions for improving gen-
eral plant conditions 10
All plants of the Company in the Homestead Steel District are
closely related and interdependent. The Charleston division is func-
tionally dependent upon the Munhall plant. The several departments
at the Charleston Division are also interrelated and interdependent.
The S. W. O. C. has bargained successfully with the Company for its
members on an even wider industrial basis. The iron, steel, and tin
manufacturing plants of the Company's affiliates and competitors are
8 The Company and the S. W . O. C. Interpreted th jr contract of 1937, and the renewal
contract of 1938, to apply not only to existing plants of the Company , but also to such
similar plants as the Company might open during the life of the contract . Employees at
the Irwin plant, which opened subsequent to the making of this contract , were deemed
by the Company and the S. W. O. C. within its terms . When the Charleston Division
was opened , the S. W. O. C. and the Company likewise deemed it within the terms of their
contract.
s Neither the Company nor the S. W . O. C. alleges that these contracts are a bar to this
proceeding.
On May 21, 1941 , the Company and the S. W. O. C. entered into a supplemental
agreement pertaining to grievance machinery for the Charleston plant.
11 The S. W. O. C. claims to represent a majority of production and maintenance em-
ployees at all steel manufacturing and byproduct coke plants of the Company . In support
of its contention to represent such employees at the Charleston Division , the S. W. O. C.
submitted 448 cards of employees on the plant pay roll of June 7, 1941 . The S. W. O. C.
does not contend , however, that such employees constitute an appropriate bargaining
unit. A representative of the S. W. O . C. testified that the S . W. O. C. had 523 members
at the plant at the time of the hearing . There were , at that time, 967 production and
maintenance employees at the plant.
CARNEGIE-ILLINOIS STEEL CORP. 47
organized on an industrial basis. It does not appear that employees
in the machine-shop department at the Charleston Division constitute
either a craft or a homogenous group or that they have bargained with
the Company as a unit. Employees engaged in electrical work are
not a separable group and they have never bargained with the Com-
pany as a unit. Moreover, as we have found above, the units for
which the I. A. M. and the I. B. E. W. contend overlap. For these
reasons and upon the entire record, we find that the units proposed
by the petitioning unions are not appropriate for the purposes of col-
lective bargaining.
The Company, in its cross-petition, has requested an affirmative
determination that production and maintenance employees in the six
plants comprising its Homestead Steel Works constitute an appropri-
ate unit. Under Article III, Section 2 (b) of the Board's Rules and
Regulations-Series 2, as amended, an employer is' permitted to file
a petition for investigation and certification where two labor organiza-
tions present conflicting claims to representation. In view of the
fact that the conflict among the labor organizations with respect to
the Company's employees concerned the appropriateness of units,
which conflict has been resolved by our determination herein, and
since no labor organization desires to represent employees on the basis
requested by the Company, we find that the Company has not raised
a question concerning representation within the purview of the Act
and said Rules and Regulations at this time.-
IV. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
Since the bargaining units sought to be established by the petition-
ing unions are not appropriate, as stated in Section III, above, we
find that no question has arisen concerning the representation of em-
ployees of the Company in an appropriate unit at this time.
Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and upon the entire
record in the case, the Board makes the following:
CONCLUSION OF LAW
No question concerning representation of employees of Carnegie-
Illinois Steel Corporation, South Charleston, West Virginia, has
arisen in a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining
within the meaning of Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations
Act.
n It may be noted that while Article III, Section 2 (b), of the Rules and Regulations
provides that an employer may file a petition stating the claims of the conflicting labor
organizations relative to the appropriate unit, it has no provision permitting him to
request certification within the unit which he may claim to be appropriate . Cf. Matter of
The National Tube Company, subsidiary of United States Steel Corporation and Local 1640,
International Longshoremen 's Association (A. F. of L.) 33 N. L. R. B. 1248.
48 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ORDER
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and conclusion of
law, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that the peti-
tions for investigation and certification filed by Local Union No. 466,
I. B. E. W., International Association of Machinists, Ordnance Lodge
No. 615, and Carnegie-Illinois Steel Corporation, South Charleston,
West Virginia, be, and they hereby are, dismissed.