Crucible Steel Co. of America

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Oct 16, 1944

58 N.L.R.B. 1033 (N.L.R.B. 1944)

In the Matter Of CRUCIBLE STEEL COMPANY OF AMERICA, MIDLAND
WORKS AND NATIONAL DRAWN WORKS and DISTRICT 50, UNITED MINE
WORKERS OF AMERICA -
Cases Nos. 6-R-989 and 6-R-1090 respectively. Decided October
16, 1944
Messrs. Reed, Smith, Shaw & McClay, by Mr. Paul J. TVinschel, of
Pittsburgh, Pa., for the Company.
Mr. John J. Barnes, of Pittsburgh, Pa., for the Union.
Mr. Bernard Goldberg, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon petitions duly filed by District 50, United Mine Workers of
America, herein called the Union, alleging that questions affecting
commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of
Crucible Steel Company of America, Midland Works and National
Drawn Works, Midland, Pennsylvania, and East Liverpool, Ohio,
herein called the Company, the National Labor Relations Board con-
solidated the cases and provided for an appropriate hearing upon due
notice before Allen Sinsheimer, Jr., Trial Examiner. Said hearing
was held at Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, on September 12, 1944. The
Company and the Union appeared and participated. All parties were
afforded full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine
witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues. At the
hearing, the Trial Examiner reserved for the Board a ruling on the
Company's motion to dismiss the petitions on the ground that the
units sought were inappropriate. For reasons hereinafter stated the
said motion is hereby denied. The Trial Examiner's rulings made at
the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
All parties were afforded an opportunity to file briefs with the Board.
58 N. L. R. B., No. 195.
1033
1034 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Crucible Steel Company of America, a New Jersey Corporation,
is engaged in the manufacture of iron and steel products at a number
of plants throughout the United States, including the plants at Mid-
land, Pennsylvania, and East Liverpool, Ohio, with which this pro-
ceeding is concerned. During the past year, these two plants which
are operated as a single unit, used raw materials valued in excess of
$5,000,000, of which about 80 percent was shipped into the Common-
wealth of Pennsylvania and the State of Ohio from other States.
During the same period, the Company manufactured at these two
plants, coke, iron, and steel products valued in excess of $10,000,000,
of which approximately 70 percent was shipped to points outside the
State of Ohio and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
IT. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
District 50, United Mine Workers of America, unaffiliated, is a'
labor organization admitting to membership employees of the
Company. -
III. THE QUESTIONS CONCERNING THE REPRESENTATION
The Company has refused to grant recognition to the Union as the
exclusive bargaining representative of its militarized and non-mili-
tarized guards on the ground that the units sought are inappropriate.
A statement of a Board agent,•introduced into evidence at the hear-
ing,-indicates that the Union represents a substantial number of em-
ployees in the units hereinafter found appropriate.'
,We find that questions affecting commerce have arisen concerning
the representation of employees of the Company, within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNITS
The Union seeks two separate units, one comprising militarized
guards, and the other non-militarized guards and guardettes, exclud-
i The Field Examiner reported that in Case No 6-R-989, the Union submitted 4 authori-
zation cards in a unit consisting of 8 employees , ( non-militarized guards ), and that in
Case No 6-R-1020, the Union submitted 26 authorization cards with the unit petitioned
for containing 32 employees ( militarized guards).
CRUCIBLE STEEL COMPANY OF AMERICA , 1035
ing the superintendent of police, lieutenants, sergeants, and other
supervisory personnel, at the Midland, Pennsylvania, and East Liver-
pool, Ohio, plants. The Company, while adulitting the appropriate-
ness of a two-plant unit, contends that guards, militarized and non-
militarized, are members of the managerial hierarchy and as such
their allegiance to management should not be divided by affiliation
with any labor organization. Guards, militarized and unmilitarized,
who are hired, paid and supervised by Company officials, as in the
instant case, are employees of the Company and like other employees
are entitled to the protection of the Act. While the guards do per-
form monitorial or police duties with respect to their fellow em-
ployees, they are not thereby created members of management, as con-
tended by the Company. The Company's fear that if the guards are
accorded their rights under the Act, their allegiance to the Company
will be weakened, is also groundless. We have more than once pointed
out that there is no incompatibility between union membership and
honest, faithful discharge of duty to the employer.2
Accordingly, we find, that the following units are appropriate
for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of See-
tioh 9 (b) of the Act :
(1) All guards at the Midland, Pennsylvania, and East Liverpool,
Ohio, plants of the Company 3 who are members of the auxiliary mili-
tary police, excluding the superintendent, lieutenants, sergeants, and
all other supervisory employees with authority to hire, promote, dis-
charge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of em-
ployees, or effectively recommend such action.
(2) All guards and. guardettes at the Midland, Pennsylvania, and
East Liverpool, Ohio, plants of the Company, who are not members
of the auxiliary military police, excluding the superintendent, lieu-
tenants, sergeants, and all other supervisory employees with authority
to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in
the status of employees, or effectively recommend such action.
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
We shall direct that the questions concerning representation which
have arisen be resolved by elections by secret ballot among the em-
ployees in the appropriate units who were employed during the pay-
roll period immediately preceding the date of the Direction of
Elections herein , subject to the limitations and additions set forth in
the Direction.
2 See Matter of Dravo Corporation, 52 N. L. R. B. 322 , Matter of Co2ninonwealth Edison
Company, 55 N. L R. B. 465:
a The Midland, Pennsylvania , and East Liverpool , Ohio , plants are about 6 miles apart
and are operated as a single unit . The United steelworkers of America , C I. 0 , presently
has contracts with the Company covering employees in both plants as parts of a single unit.
1036 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National Labor
Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations
Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor Rela-
tions Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3, as amended, it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Crucible Steel
Company of America, Midland Works and National Drawn Works,
Midland, Pennsylvania, and East Liverpool, Ohio, elections by secret
ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than thirty
(30) days from the date of this Direction, under the direction and
supervision of the Regional Director for the Sixth Region, acting
in this matter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and
subject to Article III, Sections 10 and 11, of said Rules and Regula-
tions, among the employees in the units found appropriate in Section
IV, above, who were employed during the pay-roll period immedi-
ately preceding the date of this Direction, including employees who
did not work during said paiy-roll period because they were ill or on
vacation or temporarily laid off, and including employees in the armed
forces of the United States who present themselves in person at the
polls, but excluding those employees who have since quit or been
discharged for cause and have not been rehired or reinstated prior
to the date of the elections, to determine whether or not they desire
to be represented by District 50, United Mine Workers of America,
for the purposes of collective bargaining.
MR. GERARD D. REILLY took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Direction of Elections.