International Harvester Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Sep 25, 1950

91 N.L.R.B. 487 (N.L.R.B. 1950)

In the Matter of INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER COMPANY, CANTON WORKS
and CANTON INDUSTRIAL INDEPENDENT ASSOCIATION 1
In the Matter of INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER COMPANY, CANTON WORKS
and INTERNATIONAL DIE SINKERS' CONFERENCE
In the Mattel' Of INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER COMPANY, CANTON WORKS
a'nd INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS
In the Matter of INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER COMPANY, CANTON WORKS
and INTERNATIONAL MOLDERS AND FOUNDRY WORKERS UNION OF
NORTH AMERICA, AFL
In the Matter Of INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER COMPANY, CANTON WORKS
and INTERNATIONAL BROTI-11LR.I'IOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS,
AFL.
Cases Nos. 13-RC-2,15, 13-RC-1047, 13-RC-1050, 13-RC-1103, and
013-RC-1208.-Decided September P5,190
. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
'Upon petitions duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
.Relations Act a consolidated hearing was held before Albert Gore,
hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings niade at the hearing are
free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
The United Automobile, Aircraft and Agricultural Implement
Workers of America, CIO, hereinafter referred to as the UAW; the
United Farm Equipment and Metal Workers of America, Local 157,
hereinafter referred to as the FE; and the United Electrical Radio
and Machine Workers of America, hereinafter referred to as the UE,
were permitted to intervene. On October 28, 1949, the FE merged
with the UE. Ili referring to events subsequent to this date, the
combined union will be designated as'FE-U E.
At the hearing the FE-UE moved to dismiss the petitions for craft
severances in Cases No. 13-RC-1047, No. 13-RC-1055, No. 13-RC-1103
1 The petition was amended changing the name of the union heretofore known as
Canton Industrial Independent Union.
91 NLRB No. 74.
487
488 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
and No. 13-RC-1208, on the ground that the petitions involved in
these cases were not properly before the Board. The motion was based
on the contention that, as the petitioners had no interest in the em-
ployees involved at the time of the consent agreement , the petitions
must be dismissed under established Board practice . The hearing
officer referred this motion to the Board. The pertinent facts are as
follows :
From 1939 to 1947, the Canton Industrial Independent Association,.
herein called the Independent , was the recognized representative for
a production and maintenance unit at the Employer's Canton Works.
On July 10 , 1947, the FE was certified by the Board as the bargaining
representative for a production and maintenance unit and on August
21, 1947, the FE and the Employer executed a contract which was to
expire June 30, 1949 . On May 11, 1948 , the Independent filed its
petition (Case No. 13-RC-215 ) for a production and maintenance
unit. Subsequent thereto, on June 14, 1948 , the Employer , the Inde-
pendent, the FE and the UAW, entered into a consent election agree-
ment. On July 7, 1948 there was held an election which the FE won
by a vote of 1,307 out of 1,889 votes cast. On July 14, 1948 , the UAW
filed objections to the election on the ground that on July 6, the day
before the election , the Employer recognized the FE by executing a
contract covering the Canton plant in which contract among other
things a wage increase was granted to the employees concerned. On
August 6, 1948 , the UAW filed unfair labor practice charges against
the Employer , alleging substantially the same facts as those set forth
in the Objections . On August 13, 1948 , the Regional Director issued
his Report on Objections , concluding that the election should be set
aside, and on August 30, 1948, the election was set aside.
Pursuant to the charges filed by UAW , a complaint was issued and
a hearing held in November 1948, after which the Trial Examiner
found that the Employer had not engaged in unfair labor practices
and recommended that the complaint be dismissed . However, the
Board, in a decision 2 issued on December 20 , 1949, reversed the Trial
Examiner, finding that unfair labor practices had been committed by,
the recognition of the FE on the eve of the election . The Board or-
dered the Company to cease and desist from recognizing the FE and
to set aside the contract entered into with the FE unless the latter
was certified by the Board.3
Subsequent to the Board's decision , the following' unions filed peti-
tions for certain craft severances : The International Die Sinkers
2 87 NLRB 1123.
3 As stated above, the FE merged with the UE on October 28, 1949 , and on November 2,
1949, the,CIO revoked the affiliation of both the FE and UE.
INT'ERNATION'AL IIARVEIS'TE'R COMPANY 489
Conference, hereinafter, referred to as the Die Sinkers (No. 13-RC-
.1407) on January 16,1950; the International Association of Machin-
ists, hereinafter referred to as the IAM (No. 13-RC-1055) on January
20, 1950; the International Molders and Foundry Workers Union of
North America, AFL, hereinafter referred to as the Molders (No.
13-RC-1103) on February 13, 1950; and the International Brother-
hood of Electrical Workers of America, AFL, hereinafter referred to
as the IBEW (No. 13-RC-1208) on April 3, 1950.
On March 16, 1950, the Regional Director ordered that the Consent
Agreement of June 14, 1948, be set aside and a consolidated hearing
held on the craft petitions and the original petition of the Independent
filed May 11, 1948. His reasons for this action were as follows : (1)
The Company's unfair labor practices which the Board found violated
the Act; (2) the long lapse of time since the consent agreement and the
election based thereon; (3) the fact that one of the three participating
unions to the consent agreement had. twice changed its affiliation ; and
(4) the fact that several. craft unions had petitioned for recognition
of certain employees. The Regional Director therefore concluded that
under these circumstances it could serve no purpose to order further
proceedings under the consent agreement and that to do so would not
effectuate the policies of the act.
The FE-UE in its appeal from this order to the Board, contended
that the Regional Director should have dismissed the craft. petitions
under the principle of the United Boat 4 and Lufkin s cases and should
have ordered a second election with only the original parties partici-
pating, for the reason that the Employer has fully complied with the
Board's order in the complaint case and the FE-UE has been ready
and willing to participate in a consent election under any conditions
the Board might impose. The FE further contends that with respect
to the long delay which, due to the complaint case, has elapsed since
the date of the execution of the consent agreement, this delay was due
to the Board's own processes and was not the fault of the Intervenors.
Finally, the FE contends there is now no reason for further delay due
to the filing of petitions by craft unions as these petitioners had no
interest in the consent agreement.
We are aware of the settled rule in the United Boat case, supra, to
the effect that a labor organization, seeking to intervene after the close
of hearing for bargaining representatives must establish that, as of
the time of the hearing, it had an adequate representative interest
among the employees in question. We have also held that this rule
The United Boat Service Corporation , 55 NLRB 671 ( 1944).
Lufkin Machine and Foundry Company, 83 NLRB 768.
490 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
applies where a union, as is the case before us, seeks intervention by
means of the filing of a new petition rather than through a motion to
intervene.6 In the Lu f kin case, supra, we further held that where the
parties, as here, have dispensed with the necessity of a formal.hearing
by utilizing the consent election procedure, we would not, in a subse-
quent hearing, hermit intervention by a union which did not show an
interest antedating the consent election among the employees involved.
We are of the opinion that the United Boat rule is a salutary one
and should generally be. followed. We find, however, that the facts
herein are sufficiently distinguishable from Lufkin, to persuade us
that the rule should not be applied in the present case. In Lufkin,
the petitioner was an innocent party in no way responsible for the
delay caused by the processing of the unfair labor charges against the
Employer. The Petitioner was, therefore, entitled to an election free
from the participation of a subsequent intervening union which showed
no interest in the employees involved at the time of the consent agree-
ment. In contrast therewith, in the present case the FE was not an
innocent party because it participated in the unfair labor practices
charged to the Employer, and thus vas in part responsible for the
delay caused by the processing of these charges. Although it may be
urged that the other parties to the original consent agreement, namely,
the Independent and the UAW, are entitled to a second election free
from the intervention of the instant craft petitioners, neither the Inde-
pendent nor the UAW has urged us to dismiss the craft petition on
this ground.' We therefore find that it would serve no useful purpose,
nor will it effectuate the policies of the Act to dismiss the craft petitions
at this time; accordingly, we shall deny the FE-UE's motion herein-
.above referred to
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds:
1. The Employer is engaged in the manufacture, sale, and distribu-
tion of farm equipment, tractors, industrial power units and related
items. The Employer operates 22 plants in 8 States. The only plant
involved herein is the plant at Canton, Illinois. The Employer con-
ceded and we find that it is engaged in commerce within the meaning
of the National Labor Relations Act.
5 Consolidated Vallee Aircraft Corporation, 80 NLRB 116; LaClede Gas Light Company,
81 NLRB 462.
4 Neither of these unions filed briefs in the case. At the hearing, the UAW moved to
dismiss the craft petitions solely on the ground of the appropriateness of the unit.
I Mr. Houston concurs in the result reached in this decision. He was of the opinion,
however, that the ruling of the Board in Litchfield Manufacturing Company, 70 NLRB 900,
and the reasoning in the dissent in Lufkin, supra, should be controlling on the ground that
as more than 2 years have passed since the consent of election, it would better effectuate
the policies of the Act to give all present employees an opportunity to express their wishes
with respect to a bargaining representative.
INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER COMP'AN1 491.
2. The Petitioners and Intervenors referred to above are labor
organizations claiming to represent certain employees of the Em-
ployer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of certain employees of the Employer, within the meaning of
Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The appropriate units :
Bargaining History
Prior to 1939, the Independent was the exclusive bargaining repre-
sentative for a production and maintenance unit in the Canton plant.-
In October 1942, the Independent won a consent election for a pro-
-duction and maintenance unit, in which the AFL Metal Trades, the
United Mine Workers and the FE participated. In February 1944 and
July 1945, the Independent was again certified for a production and-
maintenance unit. In April 1946, the FE won an election for a unit,
of office and clerical workers, and in July 1947, the FE, as noted above,.
was certified as the bargaining agent fora production and maintenance
unit. On May 11, 1948, the Independent filed its petition for a pro--
duction and maintenance unit in the present case (No. 13-RC-215).
which started the proceedings herein involved.
The Unit Contentions of the Parties
At the hearing, the UAW took the position that the existing pro-
duction and maintenance unit was the only appropriate unit and that
the petitions of the TAM, the Die Sinkers and the other petitions for-
craft units herein should be dismissed. The Employer and the FE-UE,
are in substantial agreement with this position, and in support thereof
contend that the Canton Works constitute an integrated operation;.
that there is considerable transfer between the departments; and.that
all the employees enjoy the same benefits such as vacations, hospitali-
zation, insurance, and plant seniority.
The TAM, on the other hand, is seeking to represent two units : (1)
a unit consisting of employees in specific machinist and related classi-
fications working in five different departments;, and (2) a unit of
blacksmiths and blacksmith helpers working in five different depart=
ments.9 Included in the first unit sought by the TAM are the group of
B The IAM petition, seeking a separate unit for blacksmiths, was amended at the
hearing.
492 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
employees also sought by the Die Sinkers in their petition.1° (Case
No. 13-RC-1047.)
In the first of its requested units, the TAM would include: (a) the
tool and die makers, the die sinkers and machinists working in the
toolroom (Department 9), exclusive of laborers, oilers, salvage men,
and the other usual exclusions; (b) the die makers and machinists in
the die making department (Department 23) ; (c) the machinists and
related classifications in the experimental department (Department
29) ; (d) the die makers in the job shop department (Department 28) ;
and (e) the machinists in the power department (Department 13).
The departments involved are located in various buildings through-
out the plant. The toolroom (Department 9) is divided between two
buildings. Heading this department is a general foreman who reports
to the mechanical engineer. Under him are two foremen, of whom one
is in charge of machine repair, the other having charge of the re-
mainder of the toolroom. Three other foremen report to these two
individuals. This department is engaged in the manufacture and re-
pair of tools, dies, jigs, fixtures including die sinking, the engraving
of stamps, and the repair of machines.
The die making department (Department 23) has some 46 machin-
ist employees consisting of die makers, die maker learners, layout men,
lathe operators, planer operators, shaper hands, and welders. This
department, which is engaged in machinist as distinguished from die
sinking work, is headed by a general foreman, who, like the general
forenman of Department 9, reports to the mechanical engineer. Under
the general foreman are several foremen supervising the employees in
this department.
The experimental department (Department 29) is engaged in the
production of parts for newly designed machines. It is headed by a.
general foreman who reports to the chief engineer. Under the general
foremen, are two other foremen who are responsible only for the eln-
ployees of this department.
The job department (Department 28) fabricates miscellaneous
items, where the quantity produced does not require the setting up of
a major operation. This department which performs machinist as
distinguished from die sinking work, includes several die makers,
machinists, blacksmiths, layout men, and punch press operators. The
die makers therein sought by the IAM are under the supervision of
the foreman of that department.
'° These comprise the following classification from department '9 ( toolroom) die sinkers
classified as (D-13-B ) ; die sinking machine duplicating operators ( D-69-B) mill oper-
ators ( hand, plane vertical , M-18-B) ; planer operators ( P-35-C hand' metal ) ; do-all
sawyer (s-150-B). All these employees work in the west end of the toolroom, where they
are engaged in whole or in part in die sinking.
INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER COMPANY 493
The power department (Department 13) has one machinist who is
under the supervision of the foreman of that department. This depart-
.1nent employs boiler repairmen, stationary engineers, firemen, leader
engineer, and untility men.
As noted above, the Employer and the FE-UE oppose the units
sought by the IAM and the Die Sinkers respectively, on the ground
that all the employees involved are closely integrated with the produc-
tion workers in the remainder of the plant. In addition, both the
Employer and the FE-UE oppose the IAM's requested unit of machin-
ists and related classifications on the further ground that numerous
transfers have been made into the toolroom from other departments.
The IAM likewise objects to the Die Sinkers' unit on the ground that
severance of the die sinkers from the rest of the toolroom is precluded
by the high degree of integration in the operation of the toolroom
itself as evidenced by the fact that the employees sought by the Die
Sinkers are not physically separate from the rest of the toolroom and
all toolroom employees are under the same supervision.
With respect to the contention based on integration, we have re-
cently held in a decision involving the same Employer that such al-
leged integration does not preclude craft severance from the broader
unit.h1 Furthermore, although the evidence indicates that numerous
transfers of employees have been made into the toolroom, there is no
evidence to indicate whether the employees involved were laborers or
individuals with skills similar to those working in the toolroom.
On the basis of the foregoing, we find that the employees in the
machinist and related classification, together with the die sinking
employees 12 listed in the voting groups hereinafter established for
such employees are craftsmen similar in skill and duties to those whom
We have previously held entitled to elect whether or not they desire
separate representation.- Although both machinists and die sinkers
have on occasion been included in a single voting group'14 the Board
has likewise held that die sinking is one of the most highly skilled of
crafts and that employees engaged therein constitute "a homogeneous
identifiable craft group, who, apart from machinists and related
groups, may act together for purposes of collective bargaining.15 Nor
"International Harvester Company, Harvester Division, East Moline Works, .90 NLRB
No. 262.
I". Although none of the die sinkers are the product of the Employee's' apprenticeship
system, they are subject to an informal apprenticeship of from 4 to 7 years in order to
become skilled craftsmen.
13 International Harvester Company, Melrose Park Plant, 87 NLRB 1101 ; American
Seating Co.; 85 NLRB 269.
14 Ford Motor Company, Canton Forge plant, Canton, Ohio, 80 NLRB 1094.
15 Mueller Brass Co., 78 NLRB 1092 and 82 NLRB 449, International Harvester Com-
pany, Harvester Division, East Moline Works, supra.
494 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
do we find merit in the contention of the JAM that there exists such
a degree of integration of operations in the toolroom itself as to pre-
clude the severance of the die sinkers from the rest of the toolroom.'s
There remains, on this aspect of the case, the issue of the group
placements for certain employees, engaged in both machinist and die
sinking work. These include 2 mill operators hand plane vertical,.
(M-18-B) ; 4 planer operators, hand metal (P-35-C) ; 1 do-all sawyer
(S-150-B) and 2 die sinking duplicating machine operators,
(D-69-B) all of whom are employed in the toolroom.
Mill operators hand, plane vertical (M-18-B) Department 9. These
operators do the preliminary work on the dies, cutting out the break-
down pocket used for the displacement of the materials so that it will
fit over the impression of the (lie. As these men work at least 50
percent of their time on. die sinking and are apparently engaged in
die sinking as their primary work, we shall include them in the die
sinkers group.
Planer, hand metal (P-35-C) Department 9. The record shows
that these men devote from 50 to 95 percent of their time to die sinking
and the remainder to other work in the toolroom. As their principal
work is clearly that of die sinking, we shall include them in the die
sinkers voting group.
Do-all sawyer (S-150-B) Department 9. The evidence shows that
this employee spends from 10 to 25 percent of his time on die sinking
and the remainder on other machinist work in the toolroom. As this
employee is primarily a machinist, we shall include him in the group
sought by the TAM.
Die-sinking duplicating machine operations, (D-69-B) Department
9. The die sinkers wish to include these operators in their unit. As
there is no evidence in the record that these employees are performing
or are skilled in the work of the die sinkers' craft, we shall include
them with the other machinists in the toolroom."
However, the Board will not make any unit determination until it
has first ascertained the desires of these groups of craft employees..
If in the elections to be directed in the machinist and die sinkers.
groups, the majority vote for the TAM and Die Sinkers, respectively,,
they will be taken to have indicated their desire to constitute separate
bargaining units.
16 Although the evidence here shows that (lie sinkers have occasion to use the drill press
located adjacent to their area and the tool and die makers use the vertical mills in the die
sinkers' section, no other employees do die sinking work. Although the die sinkers are
under toolroom supervisors. they report mainly to one foreman, who is a die sinker by
trade. When drop forge dies are needed which cannot be supplied by the die sinkers, no
other employees are assigned to such task but the dies are obtained from other Harvester
plants or from outside shops.
17 International Harvester Company, Harvester Division , East Moline Works , supra.
IINT'EfRNATION'AL HARVESTER COMPANY 495
The Requested Unit of Blacksmiths
The TAM is also requesting a unit of some 24 employees classified as
blacksmiths and blacksmith helpers, who work in departments 1, 4, 16,
28, and 29. The last 2 departments have already been described
in connection with the other -unit sought by the TAM, the remaining
three departments being'the forging, salvage, and shear departments,
respectively. The blacksmiths are engaged in making rough fol gings
by heating the metal and hammering it into the desired size and shape.
They work from blueprints, sketches, or other specifications. The
rough forgings are then sent to the machine shop to be processed for
the use of the machinists. The blacksmiths also make and repair many
pieces or parts of machinery such as clutches, foot pedals, throwout
rods for the use of the wheel room, foundry, shear shop, and die fitting
departments, where they often go to take measurements but not -to
work. The evidence shows that the blacksmiths in the various depart-
ments do essentially the same kind of work and are interchangeable.
Although there is no apprenticeship system for blacksmiths, the evi
deuce indicates that it takes from 3 to 5 years to become a skilled
blacksmith.
We find that the blacksmiths are skilled employees who perform the
functions of the traditional blackslnith.craft and are employees of the
type which the Board has often held may comprise a separate bargain-
ing unit, if they so desire.1'
The Requested Unit of the Molders
The Molders are seeking a unit to include all employees of the
foundry, which at Canton is essentially a hand foundry, with the usual
exclusions.- The foundry comprises departments 36, 37, 38, and 39,
known respectively as the assembly room, molding room, core room,
and grinding department. The departments are located in four
buildings which are situated in the northeast section of the plant.. The
foundry employees consist mainly of cupola men, ladle men, carpenters
who make molders' flasks, molders, and core makers. All these em-
ployees are engaged in the making of grey iron castings. The foundry
is separately supervised from other departments of the plant and the
employees working there, do not work elsewhere. Although the evi-
dence shows that a considerable number of employees have been trans-
" The National Supply Company, 90 NLRB No. 65: Merck d Co., Inc., 88 NLRB 975.
Cf. International Harvester Company ( Louisville Works) , 87 NLRB 317, where we held
that forge press operators exercised only part of the blacksmith's trade and were not true
craftsmen.
"At the 'close of the hearing, the Molders amended their petition to exclude all main-
tenance employees not confined solely to the foundry. -
496 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ferred to the foundry from other operations, these transfers were per-
manent and were not intended for temporary work in the foundry.
On the basis of the-above facts, we find that the foundry employees:
are a homogeneous identifiable group who may function as a separate-
unit for purposes of collective bargaining, if they so desire.20
The Molders take no position on the inclusion of the wheel room em--
pioyees in the foundry unit, but are requesting the Board to rule on
this question. The wheel room, a separate department situated in a
building at the south end of the foundry, is connected with the foundry-
by a large door. Wheels are made in the wheel room, after which they
are moved into the foundry for the hub casting operation. The wheel
department has its own foreman who reports to the superintendent of
the foundry.
We find, on these facts, that there is no basis for including the em-
ployees of the wheel room in a foundry unit. The Molders admit
that the making of the wheels is not a foundry operation. Aside from.
the chain of operations, there appears to be no mutuality of interest
or similarity in work or skills between the two departments. We
shall, therefore, in the absence of personal contact between the foundry
and wheel room employees, exclude the latter from the voting group.
of foundry employees in the election to be directed.21
The Requested Unit of Electricians
The I. B. E. W. is seeking a unit of electricians, helpers, and ap-
prentices, with the usual exclusions. The electricians work in Depart-
ment 25, designated as the electrical department. The department
has its own tools, supplies, and materials. It also contains such ma-
chines as grinders, electric drills, a press for pressing out bearings,
a welder, and various types of testing equipment. The duties of the-
electricians are divided. into two main types, electric maintenance and
new construction. These include installing, rewiring and repairing
motors and starters, together with the installing of new lines, and
the establishing of conduits in new buildings and in connection with
new machines. Electricians work from- blueprints. The department
has its own assistant foreman and foremen who report to the assistant
plant engineer and plant engineer. Although the electricians are
assigned to tasks all over the plant, they remain under the supervision
of their own foremen.
We are satisfied, on the basis. of the. above, that the. electricians
possess and exercise the skills customarily associated with the elec-
p National Farm Machinery Cooperative, Inc., Ohio Cultivator Division, 88 , NLRB. 125,;
Fayscott Corporation, 78 NLRB 1256. .
21 See Modern Heat i Fuel Co., 89 NLRB 1345.
INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER COMPANY 497
trician's craft. Although there is no special apprenticeship for elec-
tricians, there is an informal training period for electricians who
begin as learners and are graduated first as helpers and finally as
electricians. Moreover, although it appears .that the electricians work
in many departments, there is no evidence that they do any, production
work in those departments or that they do other than the work of
their craft. We, therefore, find that the electricians may, if they so
desire, constitute a separate unit for the purposes of collective bargain-
ing apart from the existing production and maintenance unit.22
We shall direct separate elections in the following voting groups,
excluding from each group all guards, watchmen, and supervisors, as
defined in the Act :
Group 1: All production and maintenance employees in the Em-
ployer's Canton, Illinois, plant, excluding plant protection employees,
salaried employees, factory clerical and office clerical employees,
pattern makers and pattern maker apprentices, indentured appren
tices,23 student executives, and excluding the voting groups listed
below.
Group 2: (a) All employees in Department 9 (toolroom) in the
following classifications :
D-12-B Die Maker-Trimmer Dies
D-69-B Die Sinking-Duplicating Machine Operator
E-17-B Stamp Engraver
G-66-B Grinder-Hand, Tool Room
G-73 Wrk. Group Leader (Machinist)
G-88 Tool Grinder-External, Tool Room
G-90 Surface Grinder Operator (Tool Room)
L-73-A Turret Lathe Operator (Hand and semi-auto.)
L-73-B Turret Lathe Operator (Hand and semi-auto.)
L-82-A Eng. Lathe Operator (Hand all round)
L-82-B Eng. Lathe Operator (Hand all round)
M-1-C Machinist-all round
M-5 Machinist's helper
M-6-A Machinist's repair
M-6-B Machinist's repair
M-25-B 'Mill. Mach. Operator Horiz. (Hand and universal)
P-35-B Planer Operator (Hand Metal)
2' International Harvester Co., Fort Wayne , Indiana Plant, 80 NLRB 1451.
23 The Employer and the FE-UE would include and the UAW and the Independent
exclude the indentured apprentices from the production and maintenance unit. As the
record fails to identify these employees and as they have been excluded from the coverage
of the last contract , we shall also exclude them from the voting group of production and
maintenance employees.
-498 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Group ?: (a)-Continued
S-47-I3 Shaper-Hand (Metal)
S-150-B Do-All Sawyer
T-40-B Tool Crib Attendant (Departmental)
T-41-A Tool Maker
T-41-B Tool Maker
W-47 Welder (Tool. Reclamation Elec. Arc.)
W-48 Welder (Tool Reclamation Gas)
H-1-B Tool Hardener (Dies, etc.)
Tool Room Apprentices
(b) All employees in Department 23 (Die Making Department)
.in the following clissifica,tions:
D-5-B Die Maker
_L-105 Die Maker Learner
L-81 Layout Man (shop equipment)
L-82-4 Lathe Operator
P-35-B Planer Operator (hand metal)
P-35-C Planer Operator (hand metal) 24
S-47-C Shaper Hand
W-50 Welder (arc and gas)
(c) All employees in Department 29 (experimental department)
in the follo«ing classifications;
E-26-B Eng. Development
1-66-B Inspector (Layout)
L-82-A Lathe Operator (hand engine all round)
L-82-B Lathe Operator (hand engine all round)
M-70-B Exp. Eng. Meciianic
M-71-A Mechanic Setup
M-71-B Mechanic Setup
S-150-B Sawyer--Do -All P5
S-189 Sawyer-Metal cut off
T-40-B Tool Crib Attendant
W-50 Welder
24 The record indicates that although the planer operators (P-35-C) in the die making
.department do substantially the same type of work as the employees of the same classifica-
tion in Department t, the former were not sought by the Die Sinkers. As the evidence
-fails to show that the Planer men in the die making department were doing work connected
-with die sinking and as they were not sought by the Die Sinkers, we shall include them in
-the group sought by IAM.
'16 This employee is doing work substantially the same as the do-all sawyer sought by the
Die Sinkers in the toolroom. As he spends practically no time on die sinking and was not
:sought by the pie Srpkers, we than includehim in the machinists group.
INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER COMPANY 499
(d) The following employees in Department 28 (J of Shop Depart-
ment)
D-5-B Die Makers
(e) The following employees in Department 13 (Power Dept.)
M-1-C Machinist
Group 3: All employees classified as B-20-B Blacksmiths, B-20-A
Blacksmiths and B-22 Blacksmiths' Helpers in Departments 1, 4, 16,
28, and 29.
Group 4: All employees in Department 9 in the following classi-
fications :
D-13-B Die Sinker
NI-18-B Mill Operator (hand plane vertical)
P-35-C Planer Operator
Group 5: All production employees in the foundry including De-
partments 36, 37, 38, 39, excluding wheel room employees, all other
production employees, and all maintenance employees who are not
confined solely to the foundry.
Group 6: All maintenance electricians, helpers, and apprentices in
Department 25.
However, we shall make no final twit determinations for groups 2,
3, 4, 5, and 6 at this time, but shall first ascertain the desires of the
employees as expressed in the elections hereinafter directed. If a
majority in any of these craft voting groups vote for the Petitioner
for that group, they will be taken to have indicated their desire to
constitute a separate appropriate unit.
[Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication in this
volume.]
CHAIRMAN HERzoo and MEMBER MurnocK took no part in the con-
sideration of the above Decision and Direction of Elections.
917572-51-vol. 91-33