George J. Mayer Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 30, 1948

77 N.L.R.B. 425 (N.L.R.B. 1948)

In the Matter of GEORGE J. MAZER COMTPANY, EMPLOYER and METAL
POLISHERS, BUFFERS, PLATERS AND HELPERS, INTERNATIONAL UNION,
AFL, PETITIONER
Case No. 91-R-1356.-Decided April 30,194,8
Mr. Edward Raub, Jr., of Indianapolis, Ind., for the Employer.
Mr. Walter Bennett, of Kokomo, Ind., for the Petitioner.
Mr. F. J. Donner, of Washington, D. C., and Mr. Sam Macer, of
Indianapolis, Ind., for the Intervenor.
DECISION
AND
ORDER
Upon an amended petition duly filed, hearing on this case was
held at Indianapolis, Indiana, on January 16, 1948, before Martin
Sacks, hearing officer. United Steelworkers of America, C. I. 0.,
hereinafter referred to as the Intervenor, sought to intervene in the
instant proceeding. Because of the Intervenor's failure to comply
with Sections 9 (f), (g), and (h) of the Act, the hearing officer
limited the intervention solely to a showing of whether or not Inter-
venor's existing contract with the Employer is a bar to the election.
We have previously held that a non-complying union which has a
contract may intervene without limitation and may present evidence
on all relevant issues.' We note, however, that Intervenor's offers
of proof were fully covered in testimony elicited at the hearing, and
that, therefore, the hearing officer's ruling limiting the Intervenor's
participation in the hearing was not prejudicial 2
1 See Matter of American Chain and Cable Company , Case No. 4-R-2752, remanded
February 1.7, 1948.
' See Matter of Baldwin Locomotive Works, 76 N. I,. R B 922. Intervenor ' s counsel
likewise moved to intervene on behalf of an individual , Donald Blackford , an employee of
the Employer , on the ground that Blackford was a member of the unit sought herein and
had an interest in this proceeding based on the possible loss of his seniority rights if a
craft were carved out of the existing plant-wide unit The hearing officer erroneously
granted the motion, but for seasons hereinafter stated, this action does not constitute
prejudicial error. See Matter o f Baldwin Locomotive Works, supra ; Matter of Windsor
Manufacturing Co, 20 N. L . R B. 301: Matter of Shell Oil Co , Inc, 66 N L it . B. 510;
Matter of Consolidated Steel Coil) ., 67 N L R B 805
77 N. L R . B., No. 70.
425
426 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
The remainder of the hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing
are likewise free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in this case the National Labor Relations
Board 3 makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. T]IE BUSINESS OF TILE EMPLOYER
George J. Mayer Company, an Indiana corporation, is engaged at
its sole plant in Indianapolis, Indiana, in the manufacture of stamps,
seals, name plates, and badges. During the past 12 months, the Em-
ployer purchased raw materials valued in excess of $400,000, of which
approximately 50 percent represents shipments to the plant from
points outside the State of Indiana. During the same period, the
Employer sold finished products valued in excess of $1,400,000, of
which approximately 75 percent represents shipments to points out-
side the State of Indiana.
The Employer admits, and we find, that it is engaged in conlmer,^e
within the meaning of the Act.
11. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the American
Federation of Labor, claiming to represent employees of the Employer.
United Steelworkers of America, herein called the Intervenor, is it
labor organization affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organiza-
tions, claiming to represent employees of the Employer.
111. TILE ALLEGED APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Petitioner originally requested a unit composed of all metal
polishers, buffers, platers, plater's helpers, stonewell polishers, wet
grinders, inspectors, and packers,4 but excluding office, clerical and
supervisory employees. At the hearing, the Petitioner enlarged its
unit claim to include electroplaters and their helpers, sheetmetal pol-
ishers, and sheetmetal grinders. Both the Employer and the Inter-
venor contend that the unit sought is inappropriate, because it is not
3Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act, the
National Labor Relations 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 Reynolds and Houston].
4 The record discloses the existence of no packers to whom the Petitioner would make a
claim.
GEORGE J. MAYER COMPANY 427
a craft unit; and because the bargaining history of the Employer's
plant has always been upon a plant-wide basis.5
The buffers, polishers, platers, rackers, helpers, tank operators, and
inspectors, sought among others by the Petitioner for the purposes of
representation, work in a partitioned area on the first floor of the
Employer's plant. Buffers and polishers, by the use of polishing
agents, add luster to certain of the Employer's finished products.
These employees, however, do not operate under an apprenticeship
system. They are hired as helpers, and trained by the Employer for
a period of from 3 to 12 months, depending on the skill and aptitude
of the individual employee. The type of polishing and buffing per-
formed by them is limited in scope. It is also repetitive and performed
on a restricted variety of metal. Of the remaining employees in the
group sought by the Petitioner, platers operate plating tanks, main-
tain solutions and perform other tasks related thereto ; inspectors
inspect and pack work which has been buffed, polished and plated;
sheetmetal grinders and polishers are for the most part buffers' help-
ers; while the classification of tank operators covers employees who
are merely platers' helpers.
As noted above, the Employer contends that the unit sought is not
such a craft unit as may properly be accorded separate representation
in the face of a plant-wide bargaining history. While the Board has,
on occasion, held that polishers, buffers and platers may constitute
an appropriate craft unit where the unit sought contains a nucleus of
craft employees,' the unit requested in the present instance contains 34
employees of whom only 13 are within the craft classifications of
buffers, polishers anti platers. Moreover, it is apparent from the record
that not only do a large majority of the employees in the proposed
unit lack the requisite skill for craft classification but also that the
majority of the employees classified as buffers, polishers, and platers
are not required to exercise the skills generally attributable to em-
ployees in such craft classifications. We find that the employees sought
herein are not a craft group of the type which we have customarily
found might constitute a separate appropriate bargaining unit. We
perceive, therefore, no justification in the present instance for severing
6 The intervening union has represented the Employer ' s employees on a plant -wide basis
for the past 10 years. The polishers , buffers and platers during this period have never,
prior to this proceeding, asserted any group identity.
Matter of Electric Auto-Lite Company, 76 N L R B 1189, and cases cited therein.
428 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
this group of employees from the existing plant-wide unit.? Accord-
ing] y, we find the proposed unit inappropriate and we shall order that
the petition be dismissed.
ORDER
Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and the entire record
in the case, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that
the petition for investigation and certification of representatives of
employees of George J. Mayer Company, Indianapolis, Indiana, filed
by Metal Polishers, Buffers, Platers and Helpers, International Union,
AFL, be, and it hereby is, dismissed.
7Matter of American Manufacturing Company, 76 N L R B 647, Matter of Dover
Appliance Company , 76 N L. R . B 1131 ; see also Matter of General Motors Corporation,
76 N L. R. B . 879; Matter of Charles Eneu Johnson and Company , 77 N. L. R. B. 41.