The Flintkote Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Sep 17, 1954

109 N.L.R.B. 1407 (N.L.R.B. 1954)

THE FLINTKOTE COMPANY 1407
THE FLINTKOTE COMPANY, PIONEER DIVISION and LOCAL UNION No.
11, INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD 'OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, AFL,
PETITIONER . Case No. 21-RC-3237. September 17, 195.4
Supplemental Decision and Second Direction of Election
On March 5, 19541 the Board issued a Decision and Direction of Elec-
tion in the above-entitled proceeding (not reported in printed volumes
of Board Decisions and Orders) in which it found that all electricians
Al B, and C, and the electrical leadman in the central maintenance de-
partment at the Employer's plant at Vernon, California, comprised a
craft group, and directed an election to determine whether they wished
to be severed from an existing production and maintenance unit
represented by the Intervenor, Local 598, International Brotherhood
of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America,
AFL. Thereafter, the Employer and the Intervenor filed motions re-
questing that the Board reconsider its decision. On March 30, 1954,
the Board granted the motions and ordered a further hearing for the
purpose of taking additional testimony with respect to the craft status
of the electricians.
On May 4, 1954, the hearing was reopened before L. A. Gordon, the
hearing officer in the previous hearing. The hearing officer's rulings
made at the reopened hearing are free from prejudicial error and are
hereby affirmed.
The Petitioner originally sought to sever from the existing produc-
tion and maintenance unit electricians, electrician-oilers, and me-
chanics who spend more than 50 percent of their time assisting elec-
tricians. The Employer and Intervenor were opposed to the sever-
ance, their principal objection being that the electricians were an in-
tegral part of the production and maintenance unit. The Board's
decision found that the electricians performed distinctive and typical
craft tasks and that the Petitioner was a labor organization which his-
torically represented this craft. It therefore directed a severance elec-
tion on the authority of American Potash d Chemical Corporation, 107
NLRB 1418. The Board excluded from the voting group the elec-
trician-oilers because they were not craftsmen, and the mechanics be-
cause they were not continuously assigned to electrical work.
The Employer and Intervenor requested reconsideration on three
grounds : (1) That the description of the appropriate unit was uncer-
tain and ambiguous in that it was not clear whether the Board intended
to include the electricians directly assigned to the production plants; 1
' The Board 's intention to include the production plant electricians is plainly expressed
in the unit finding that all electricians A, B, and C were included in the voting group.
109 NLRB No. 201.
1408 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
(2) that the Board's finding concerning some of the work duties and
skills of the electricians was unsupported by the record; 2 and (3)
that the Petitioner had failed, in accordance with the requirements of
the American Potash case, to establish that the electricians constituted
journeymen craftsmen either by apprenticeship or comparable train-
ing or by performance of specific craft skills.
The Employer's establishment at Vernon, California, includes a
paper mill, plants producing roofing, emulsion, corrugated contain-
ers, folding boxes, and asphalt tile, and a central maintenance depart-
ment servicing all production units. There are approximately 1,000
persons employed.
Electric power for the plant is furnished through 4 substations
maintained by the local public utility. There are over 40 circuit
breakers leading from the substations, each serving a distribution or
control panel. Power lines lead from the panels to all the motor start-
ers and controls for plant machinery and equipment. There are about
1,000 motors at the plant, of which more than half are rated over 5
horsepower. Each motor has its separate line which is run in conduit.
Of the 11 electricians in the voting group described in the decision,
1 is a leadman, 5 are electricians A, 2 are electricians B, and 3 are
electricians C. One electrician is permanently assigned to the roofing
plant, 1 to the folding box plant, and 3 to the paper mill. The others
are assigned to the central maintenance department and work both
at the electricians' workbench in the central maintenance building and
throughout the various production plants. All the electricians except
the one at the folding box plant are under the supervision of the chief
electrician. There is no apprenticeship or formal training program
for electricians at the plant, and no written job requirements or de-
scriptions, but no one has been hired as an electrician from the out-
side who has not had previous training in the trade. There is no stated
interval for progression within the various grades, but promotions
are based partly on length of service.
Eight of the eleven electricians at the plant were hired from the
outside with substantial electrical experience, ranging up to 30 years
in the case of the leadman. Of the 3 electricians who had no electrical
experience acquired outside the plant, 2 are electricians C, and 1 is in
2 The language in the prior decision which, it is asserted, is not supported by the record
is "all [electricians ] maintain and repair motors and other electrical equipment and, sub-
ject to variations in skill, do all electrical work required in construction and machinery
installation." The motions for reconsideration point out that the testimony at the first
hearing established that 3 electricians then permanently assigned to the production plants
performed repair and maintenance functions in connection with production machinery,
whereas 2 of the electricians from the central maintenance department spent 100 percent
of their time in construction work, and did not maintain or repair electrical equipment.
The language quoted from our previous decision clearly expresses our conclusion that the
electricians in the voting group did either construction or repair work without implying
that the performance of both was required of journeymen electricians.
THE FLINTKOTE COMPANY 1409
the A grade.' That promotion to electrician C from the helper classi-
fications is not automatic is shown by the fact that an electrician-oiler
who is presently serving as helper to an electrician A has served in his
classification for 6 years without promotion. The wage rate for the
lowest electrician grade is substantially higher than the rates of most
of the production jobs, while the A grade rate is among the highest
in the plant.
As a group, the electricians are responsible for the electrical work
in the installation and modification of production machinery, for
repairing breakdowns in the plant's electrical system, and for preven-
tive maintenance of the motors, starters, and panels which actuate the
machinery. The electricians assigned to the folding box plant, the
roofing plant, and the paper mill devote themselves to preventive
maintenance and troubleshooting. Two of the electricians assigned
to the central maintenance department, with one or more helpers, spend
a substantial portion of their time in construction work, extending and
modifying the existing electrical system to keep pace with production
changes. All the central maintenance electricians also do trouble-
shooting and preventive maintenance. Their routine day-to-day
work, regardless of grade, consists of inspecting, testing, disassem-
bling and cleaning motors, and replacing worn out parts. In this
work tools and testing devices peculiar to the electrical trade, such as
meggers, voltmeters, ammeters, and Wiggins testers are used. No
other employees in the plant customarily use such devices, nor do the
electricians perform any other type of work than that described
above.
We are satisfied that the electricians involved in this case are crafts-
men. Most of them have been hired on the basis of considerable out-
side electrical experience. They maintain an extensive and complex
electrical system. Although most of their work may involve routine,
preventive maintenance, they are also "troubleshooters" who are ex-
pected to handle unanticipated breakdowns of greater or less complex-
ity. At least two of the electricians have been doing electrical con-
struction work of the kind performed by construction electricians.
That the Employer considers the electricians to be highly skilled is
attested by the high rate of pay which has been set for the various
grades of electricians. We therefore affirm the finding of our original
Decision and Direction of Election that the electricians constitute a
unit appropriate for severance under the doctrine of the American
Potash case.'
3 This electrician A was hired as a helper in 1943, promoted in March 1945 to electrician
C, in August 1945 to the B grade , and more than 2 years later to the A grade
' See Beaunit Mills, Inc., Coosa Pines Division, 109 NLRB 651; California Fish Canners
Association, Inc, et at ., 108 NLRB 1320 ; Cladding McBean & Company, 108 NLRB 1183;
and North American Aviation, Inc., 108 NLRB 863.
1410 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
As the time for holding the election directed in our previous de-
cision has expired, we shall direct a new election in the voting group
described therein.
[Text of Second Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
MEMBERS MURDOCK and RODGERS took no part in the consideration
of the above Supplemental Decision and Second Direction of Election.
HUDSON HOSIERY COMPANY (MONROE ROAD PLANT) and AMERICAN
FEDERATION OF HOSIERY WORKERS, AFL. Cases Nos. 11-CA-553
and 11-CA-620. September 20,195.E
Decision and Order
On March 2, 1954, Trial Examiner Arthur Leff issued his Inter-
mediate Report in the above-entitled proceeding, finding that the Re-
spondent had engaged in and was engaging in certain unfair labor
practices and recommending that it cease and desist therefrom and
take certain affirmative action, as set forth in the copy of the Inter-
mediate Report attached hereto. Thereafter, the Respondent filed
exceptions and a supporting brief.
The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner made at
the hearing and finds no prejudicial error was committed. The rul-
ings are hereby affirmed. The Board has considered the Intermediate
Report, the exceptions and brief, and the entire record in the case,
and hereby adopts the findings, conclusions, and recommendations
of the Trial Examiner, with the following additions and corrections :1
Contrary to our dissenting colleagues, we agree with the Trial Ex-
aminer that the Respondent violated Section 8 (a) (1) of the Act by
the conduct of Grimm and Seifart during the knitters' strike in April
1953. John Grimm, a supervisor of knitting, taking various posi-
tions, successively, within 20 feet of each of the 2 rotating picket lines
in front of the Respondent's plant, addressed the employees as they
moved near him and simultaneously took their pictures with a motion
picture camera. The son of the Respondent's president, Kurt Seif art,
himself a management representative, was also on the scene, fully
visible to the strikers, taking their pictures from the top of the plant.
About half of the approximately 300 employees in the knitting de-
partment were on the picket line at the time of this incident. Two
employees on the picket lines testified credibly that Supervisor Grimm
told the pickets that through their "foolishness" they were "losing an
1 we correct the typographical error in the first paragraph under "I. The Business of the
Company," of the Intermediate Report in which the value of the Respondent 's goods
shipped out of the State appears as more than $5,000. The proper figure is $500,000.
109 NLRB No. 197.