International Silver Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 25, 1973

203 N.L.R.B. 221 (N.L.R.B. 1973)

INTERNATIONAL SILVER COMPANY
International Silver Company and United Steelwork-
ers of America , AFL-CIO . Case 1-UC-101
April 25, 1973
DECISION ON REVIEW
BY CHAIRMAN MILLER AND MEMBERS FANNING AND
KENNEDY
On July 14, 1972, the Acting Regional Director for
Region I issued a Decision in the above matter in
which he clarified the unit certified in Case 1-RC-11,
050 to include the employees of World Tableware
International, Inc., a subsidiary of International Sil-
ver Company and the successor to One-Way Table-
ware Company. Thereafter, in accordance with
Section 102.67 of the National Labor Relations Board
Rules and Regulations, the Employer filed a request
for review on the grounds that the Acting Regional
Director made erroneous findings of fact and depart-
ed from reported precedent in failing to conclude that
the request to include World Tableware's employees
in the certified unit raised a question concerning rep-
resentation because they were employed at the time
the certification issued.
On September 6, 1972, by telegraphic order, the
request for review was granted.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the Na-
tional Labor Relations Board has delegated its au-
thority in this proceeding to a three-member panel.
The Board has considered the entire record in this
case and makes the following findings:
The petition herein seeks clarification of a unit
which was initially certified on December 1, 1971, in
Case 1-RC-11,050, by including all the production
and maintenance employees of World Tableware In-
ternational, Inc., formerly known as One-Way Table-
ware Company.' The unit certified in the
above-mentioned representation case is as follows:
All production, maintenance and shipping em-
ployees employed at the Meriden-Wallingford,
Connecticut plants of International Silver Com-
pany, Meriden Rolling Mill, Inc., and Eyelet
i In March 1972, World Tableware International , Inc , was incorporated
as a wholly owned subsidiary of International Silver Company It is undisput-
ed that it succeeded to the operations of One-Way, produces and sells the
same products as One-Way, and has essentially the same complement of
officers and employees . At approximately the same time , World moved to a
new building approximately 2 miles from a building known as Factory L
which , throughout the pnor proceeding , One-Way shared with International
Silver. It presently employs approximately 55 to 60 production and mainte-
nance employees who, as was the case when One-Way existed , receive the
same fringe benefits, such as pensions , vacations , and hospitalization, as
other employees within the Insilco family We accordingly find , as did the
Regional Director, that World is the successor to One-Way
221
Specialty Company, subsidiaries of the Insilco
Corporation, including machinists, tool and die
makers employed in International Silver Compa-
ny, Machine Tool and Engineering section, In-
ternational Silver Company, employees classified
as foreman's clerk, clerk, timekeeper, clerk-active
pattern, shipping and receiving office clerk and
general clerk, Eyelet timekeepers and Meriden
Rolling Mill, Inc., process and finish inspectors,
but excluding all engineers, nurses, accountants,
draftsmen, IBM programmers and operators and
laboratory technicians employed by Internation-
al Silver Company and laboratory technicians
employed by Meriden Rolling Mill, Inc., office
clerical employees, guards and leadmen and
chief inspectors employed by International Silver
Company and all other supervisors as defined in
the Act.
The issue in the instant case had its genesis in the
prior proceeding, where the principal issue was the
single employer status of the three companies specifi-
cally named in the certification, which companies are
wholly owned subsidiaries of the Insilco Corporation
in the Meriden-Wallingford, Connecticut, area. In ad-
dition to the employees of these three companies,
One-Way also operated in the same area at that time
and employed approximately 70 employees. Although
the Petitioner asserted, in the prior case, that the em-
ployees of the three companies named in the certifica-
tion were properly includable in a single unit, it did
not name One-Way in its petition nor seek at the
hearing in that case to include the One-Way employ-
ees in the above-mentioned unit.
However, One-Way's employees were included on
the eligibility list by clerical error, according to the
Employer, but the Petitioner challenged approximate-
ly 30 One-Way employees when they attempted to
cast ballots in the election on the ground that One-
Way was "up for sale".' The record fails to show
whether or not the remaining 40 One-Way employees
participated in the election.
Accepting the Regional Director's finding that, had
the existence of One-Way been known at the time of
his original decision, it would have been added to the
list of operating companies constituting the Employer
in Case 1-RC-11,050, it does not follow that the re-
quested clarification is now warranted, notwithstand-
ing the fact that World Tableware is a succesor to
One-Way. The fact remains that, at the time of the
decision, the election, and the certification, One-Way
2 The tally issued after the balloting showed there were 1524 votes for and
1105 votes against the Petitioner , and 424 challenged ballots including those
of the One-Way employees . Subsequently, the Regional Director sustained
challenges to 156 ballots and left unresolved the remaining 268 challenged
ballots including those of the 30 One -Way employees who were challenged,
as those ballots could not have affected the election results.
203 NLRB No. 48
222 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
was an operating entity whose employees were not fication proceeding .' Accordingly , we shall dismiss
sought to be included in the unit . Indeed , when some the petition herein.
of them attempted to vote in the election , their ballots
were challenged by the Petitioner . In these circum- ORDER
stances and in light of the record as a whole we find
that the petition raises a question concerning the rep - It is hereby ordered that the petition herein be, and
resentation of World Tableware 's employees which , it hereby is, dismissed.
under settled precedent , cannot be resolved in a clari-
3 AMF Electra Systems Division, AMF Incorporated, 193 NLRB 1113;
Gould-National Batteries, Inc, 157 NLRB 679