Gabriel Steel Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Dec 20, 1948

80 N.L.R.B. 1361 (N.L.R.B. 1948)

In the Matter of GABRIEL STEEL COMPANY, EMPLOYER and THOMAS J.
SASKI, ET AL., EMPLOYEES, PETITIONERS and UNITED CONSTRUCTION
WORKERS, LOCAL UNION #301, AFFILIATED WITH UNITED MINE
WORKERS OF AMERICA, UNION
Case No. 7-RD-17.-Decided December 20, 194.8
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition for decertification duly filed, a hearing was held
before a 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.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board finds: 1
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the
National Labor Relations Act.
2. The Petitioners, employees of -the Employer, assert that the
Union is no longer the representative of the Employer's employees
designated in the petition.
The Union is recognized by the Employer as the exclusive bargain-
ing representative of the employees designated in the petition, among
others.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of these employees of the Employer, within the meaning of Sec-
tion 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the amended Act.
4. The appropriate unit :
The Union has not been certified by the Board, but since 1941 it
has represented, under a series of collective bargaining agreements, all
the employees in the Employer's plant, except engineering, erection,
office, clerical, and supervisory employees.
The Petitioners request that a decertification election be held only
among are and acetylene welders and machine burners, contending that
'Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act, as
amended, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-man
panel consisting of the undersigned Board Members [ Chairman Herzog and Members
Houston and Murdock].
80 N. L. R. B., No. 210.
1361
1362 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
these employees constitute a true craft and together constitute an
appropriate unit separate from the established contract unit. Al-
though the Petitioners did not request the spot welder, they do not
oppose his inclusion. The Petitioners did not request the welder
set-up men and oppose their inclusion. The Employer takes no posi-
tion. The Union did not appear.2
We have recently held that we will apply the same principles of
severance to decertification cases as to certification cases and permit,
in a decertification proceeding, the severance of employees constituting
an appropriate unit, as defined by Section 9 (b), from an established
contract unit.3 The question is what disposition would be made of
this group in a certification case. The record indicates the following
factors in support of the contention that the welders and the closely
related machine burners 4 may be severed from the existing plant-wide
unit: 5 separate and common supervision; higher pay than other hourly
paid workers; specialized work to which they devote their entire
working time whereas other workers are shifted from task to task; 6
an apprentice period; 7 recognized technical standard of skill main-
tained by the American Welding Society; common dangers unique to
their particular employment. In addition the Employer treats the
group in question as a department, although they are not segregated
from the other workers. On the other hand, two factors here present
militate against their separation from the plant-wide unit: the length
of the history of plant-wide collective bargaining and the high degree
of integration between welding and other production processes in
the Employer's plant .8 In these circumstances we would find that
the employees in question may be separately represented or may con-
tinue to be represented as part of the plant-wide unit, and we would
order a Globe election for the unit were the question raised in a
certification cases Under our policy noted above the unit contended
2 The Union was served with notice of the hearing. The record contains no explanation
for the failure to appear. We do not construe the failure to appear, standing alone, as a
disclaimer of the Union's interest in the representation of the employees involved herein.
See Matter of California Knitting Mills d/b/a Hollyvogue Sportswear, 77 N. L. R. B. 574;
cf. Matter of Federal Shipbuilding and Drydock Company, 77 N. L. It. B. 463; Matter of
Riggs Optical Co., 77 N. L. It. B. 265.
8 Matter of Illinois Bell Telephone Co., 77 N. L. It. B. 1073; Matter of American Smelt-
ing and Refining Co., 80 N. L. R. B. 68; Matter of Cutter Laboratories , 80 N. L. It. B. 213.
, Burners , although paid at a lower rate and less skilled, are customarily included as a
subsidiary group with welders with whom their activities are closely integrated. See
Matter of The Smiths Bluff Refinery of The Pure Oil Co., 79 N. L. It. B. 51.
See Matter of U. S. Pipe & Manufacturing Co., 78 N. L. R. B. 15.
See Matter of Cupples -Hess Corp ., 80 N. L. It. B. 14.
7 See Matter of Corn Products Refining Co ., 80 N. L. It. B. 362.
s See Matter of National Tube Company, 76 N. L. R. B. 1199.
Matter of Consolidated Pipe Co., 72 N. L. R. B . 1236; ef. Matter of Westinghouse
Electric Corp., 80 N. L. It. B. 121.
GABRIEL STEEL COMPANY 1363
for by the Petitioners is, therefore, appropriate for a decertification
election.
There remain for consideration the spot welder and the welder
set-up men. The spot welder does work which requires less skill than
the other welders and works on different products in a different sec-
tion of the factory. However, he possesses definite craft skills and
is subject to the same supervision and dangers as the other welders.
Although the unit as requested by the Petitioners did not include this
category, at the hearing they indicated their willingness to have the
spot welder included. We find that the community of interest between
the spot welder and the other welders is sufficient to warrant his
inclusion. The welder set-up men are under the supervision of the
welder supervisor but their tasks are confined to merely placing mate-
rial in position for welding, a job requiring no special skills. They do
not constitute a well-defined group and are frequently interchanged
with other production workers.10 As such, their interests are closer
to the interests of the other plant workers than to those of the welding
group. We therefore find that they are properly excluded.
On the basis of the entire record in this case, we therefore find that
the following employees of the Employer may constitute a unit appro-
priate for purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of
Section 9 (b) of the Act: are and acetylene welders, spot welders, and
machine burners, but excluding welder set-up men and all other pro-
duction employees, executives, foremen, guards, office and clerical
employees, professional employees, and supervisors as defined in the
Act, and we shall direct an election among these employees.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
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
Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 5, as amended, among
the employees in the voting group described 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
10 See Matter of Cupples -Hess Corp ., 80 N L . R. B. 14. Nor may these employees be
viewed as apprentices to the welders . See Matter of Standard Oil Company of California,
79 N. L. R. B. 1466.
817319-49-vol. 80-87
1364 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
on vacation or temporarily laid off, but excluding those employees who
have since quit or been discharged for cause and have not been re-
hired or reinstated prior to the date of the election, and also excluding
employees on strike who are not entitled to reinstatement, to deter-
mine whether or not they desire to be represented, for purposes of
collective bargaining, by United Construction Workers, Local Union
#301, affiliated with UMW."
JThe Union has not complied with Section 9 (f), (g), and ( h) of the Act. Accordingly,
if the Union wins the election, and it has not then complied with such requirements, the
Board will certify only the arithmetical results of the election . See Matter of Harris
Foundry & Machine Co ., 76 N. L. R. B. 118.