Powhatan Brass and Iron Works

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 29, 1949

85 N.L.R.B. 950 (N.L.R.B. 1949)

In the Matter Of POWHATAN BRASS AND IRON WORKS, A CORPORATION,'
EMPLOYER and UNITED CEMENT, LIME AND GYPSUM WORKERS INTER-
NATIONAL UNION, AFL, PETITIONER
Case No. 5-RC-317.Decided August X9,1941.9
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before Harold G.
Biermann, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the
hearing are free from prejudicial, error and are hereby affirmed. At
the hearing, the Intervenor, Local No. 111, United Construction Work-
ers, affiliated with the United Mine Workers of America, moved to dis-
miss the petition on the ground that an existing collective bargaining
contract is a bar to this proceeding. For reasons discussed below, the
motion is hereby denied.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor
Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection
with this case to a three-member panel [Chairman Herzog and Mem-
bers Reynolds 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 are labor organizations claim-
ing to represent employees of the Employer.
3. The question concerning representation :
The Intervenor and the Employer contend that a contract signed
on April 1, 1948, to be effective for 1 year, and automatically renew-
able for another year unless either party served notice of a desire to re-
-open the contract at least 60 days before April 1, 1949, is a bar to
this proceeding.
On January 29, 1949, more than 60 days before April 1, 1949, the
-Intervenor notified the Employer of his desire to meet with the
Employer and negotiate certain changes in the terms of its contract.
Representatives of both parties met on February 16, 1949, and dis-
cussed the Intervenor's proposed changes in the contract, but were
i The name of the Employer appears as amended at the hearing.
85 N. L. R. B., No. 166.
950
POWHATAN BRASS AND IRON WORKS 951
unable to come to any satisfactory conclusion. Thereafter, on March
18, the Intervenor and the Employer orally agreed to extend the
existing contract for an additional year. This extension agreement
was never reduced to writing. On April 5, 1949, the Petitioner noti-
fied the Employer that it claimed to represent a majority of its employ-
ees, and on April 7, 1949, filed the present petition.
As the automatic renewal of the April 1, 1948, contract was fore-
stalled by the Intervenor's timely notice, and as the extension agree-
ment was never reduced to writing, we find that neither the contract
as originally executed, nor as amended by the extension agreement, is a
bar to this proceeding.2
We find that a question affecting commerce exists concerning the
representation of employees of the Employer within the meaning of
Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The appropriate unit:
The Petitioner seeks to represent a unit consisting of all production
and maintenance employees, including watchmen, but excluding office
and clerical employees, shipping clerks, guards, professional employ-
ees, and supervisors. The Employer and the Intervenor agree that
generally the proposed unit is appropriate. However, the Employer
would also exclude two watchmen and three working foremen; the
Intervenor is neutral as to these disputed classifications.
Each working foreman is in charge of a group of from 8 to 25
employees. Although he spends more than 50 percent of his time in
manual labor, the working foreman directs the employees in his group
and has the power effectively to recommend their discipline, assign-
ment of work, promotion, discharge, or hiring. We find that the
working foremen are supervisors within the meaning of the Act. We
shall therefore exclude them from the unit.
There are two watchmen each of whom spends about 5 minutes of
each hour in guard duties and the remainder in cleaning the plant and
tending to the firing of boilers. As the watchmen spend the greater
part of their time in doing maintenance work, we shall include them
in the unit.3
We find that all production and maintenance employees at the
Employer's Ranson, West Virginia, plant, including watchmen, but
excluding office and clerical employees, shipping clerks, professional
employees, guards, foremen, working foremen, and all other super-
visors as defined in the Act, constitute a unit appropriate for the pur-
2 Matter of Container Corporation of America, 83 N. L. R. B. 424; Matter of Stand-
ard Brands, Inc., 81 N. L. R. B. 1311.
8 See Matter of Wraight's, Inc ., 81 N. L. R. B. 65; Matter of U. S. Gypsum Company,
81 N. L . R. B. 310.
952 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
poses of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b)
of the Act.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION 4
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, among the employees in the
unit found appropriate 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 on vacation or
temporarily laid off, but excluding those employees who have since
quit or been discharged for cause and have not been rehired or rein-
stated prior to the date of the election, and also excluding employees
on strike who are not entitled to reinstatement, to determine whether
or not they desire to be represented,' for purposes of collective
bargaining, by United Cement, Lime and Gypsum Workers Inter-
national Union, AFL.
I The Intervenor will not be accorded a place on the ballot in the election herein directed
-because it is not in compliance with the filing requirements of Section 9 (f), (g), and (h)
of the Act.