Drewry's Limited U. S. A. Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 1, 1949

85 N.L.R.B. 1 (N.L.R.B. 1949)

In the Matter of DREWRY'S LIMITED U. S. A. INC.,' EMPLOYER and
DISTRICT LODGE No. 103, INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHIN-
ISTS, PETITIONER
Case No. 13-RC-609.-Decided Jury 1, 1949
DECISION
AND
ORDER
Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before Philip Licari,
hearing officer of the National Labor Relations Board. 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 had delegated its powers in connection with
this case to a three-member panel [Chairman Herzog and Members
Houston and Gray].
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 Petitioner and the Intervenor, International Union of United
Brewery, Flour, Cereal, Soft Drink and Distillery Workers of Amer-
ica, CIO, are labor organizations claiming to represent employees of
the Employer.
3. No 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, for the following
reasons:
The Petitioner seeks to represent a unit of "all skilled maintenance
employees and grease men of the mechanical department." The
Employer and Intervenor contend that the history of collective bar-
gaining on a plant-wide basis should not be disturbed and that the unit
sought by the Petitioner is inappropriate.
The Employer operates a brewery which has two main operations,
i. e., the brewhouse and the bottle shop, located in separate buildings
about 150 feet apart. After the beer required for bottling has been
brewed in the brewhouse it is moved through a system of tanks and
piped by a pumping process to the filler tank in the bottle shop: At
85 N. L. R. B., No. 1.
1
2 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
the bottle shop, the bottles are placed in the soaker where they are
cleaned. They are then passed into the filler on a conveyor belt
and capped. From there they go to the pasteurizer, then into the la-
beling. machine. From the.labeling machine they again go on the
.conveyor belt to the packers where they are automatically placed in
cases and passed to the shipping department for loading on the trucks.
This proceeding involves 13 employees at the Employer's plant who
are engaged in the maintenance of the automatic. machinery in the
bottle shop and in the brewhouse. Of these employees, 8 are main-
tenance mechanics in the bottle shop, 2 are maintenance mechanics
in the brewhouse, and 3 are grease men. The maintenance mechanics
and grease men who work in the bottle shop are under the direction
of a working foreman, who, in turn, is under the supervision of the
bottle shop superintendent. The maintenance mechanics in the brew-
house are under the supervision of the chief engineer who also super-
vises the firemen, engineers, steamfitters, and carpenters.
The work of the maintenance mechanics in the brewhouse and
bottle shop consists of taking out broken parts and replacing them
-with parts taken from the parts room, welding a broken part in order
to keep the operation going and generally making such repairs which
are not normally made by the machine operators. themselves. The
grease men oil and grease the machinery and equipment in the bottle
shop, and at times also act as helpers to the maintenance mechanics.
The maintenance mechanics are selected on the basis of their knowl-
edge of brewery machinery, and three of the eight mechanics now
working in the bottle shop were recruited from the ranks of the bottle
shop production employees. All three grease men were formerly em-
ployed in production work. The maintenance mechanics receive an
hourly rate which is 16 cents higher than that of the bottling shop
employees but the grease men receive the same rate as the bottle
operators.
There is a history of collective bargaining at the plant in question
for a period of 13 years.. From 1936 to 1942, the Intervenor had
contracts with the Employer which covered the maintenance men and
helpers as well as all other production and maintenance employees.
As a result of a Board-directed election in 1942,1 another union was
certified as the representative of a production and maintenance unit,
and entered into contracts with the Employer - from 1942 to 1947
which also included the maintenance men, who were listed in the
contracts as being under the bottling department. In 1947, the pres-
Matter of Drewry's Limited U . S. A. Inc., 44 N. L . It. B. 1119.
DREWRY' S LIMITED U. S. A. INC.
ent Intervenor was certified as exclusive bargaining representative
following another election in a stipulated unit of production and
maintenance employees, including the employees involved in this.
case.;.
At.the hearing, the Petitioner conceded that the maintenance me-
chanics involved in the present proceeding do not constitute a skilled
craft. There is no showing that the grease men exercise craft skills.
Thus, the Petitioner's position is based solely on the claim that the
unit sought is a separate, homogeneous. department of skilled em-
ployees. However, there is no craft nucleus in the alleged department,
and the maintenance mechanics in the bottle shop work under a dif-
ferent line of supervision from the mechanics in the brewhouse. Under
all the circumstances, including the long history of collective bar-
gaining in a plant-wide unit, we find that the proposed unit is inappro-
priate.'. Accordingly, we shall dismiss the petition herein.
ORDER
Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations
Board hereby orders that the petition herein be, and it hereby is,
dismissed.
s Matter of Drewry'a Li mited U. S. A. Inc., 74 N. L. R. B. 31.
a Matter of Wilson t Co . Inc., 81 N. L. R. B. 504; Matter of Phillip Morris & Co. Ltd. Inc.,
.79 N. L. R. B. 56.
857829-50-vol. 85-2