The W. S. Tyler Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 8, 1947

73 N.L.R.B. 239 (N.L.R.B. 1947)

In the Matter of THE W. S. TYLER COMPANY, EMPLOYER and INTER-
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS, DISTRICT No. 54, PETITIONER
Case No. 8-R-0464.-Decided April 8,1947
Messrs. Arthur L. Dougan and Kenneth A. Zahner, of Cleveland,
Ohio', for the Employer.
Messrs. Howard Tausch, Mark Kelly, and Earl Morris, of Cleveland,
Ohio, for the Petitioner.
Mr. Jesse Gallagher, of Cleveland, Ohio, for Nos. 18267 and 23866.
Mr. Edmund J. Flynn, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at Cleve-
land, Ohio, on December 11, 1946, before Thomas E. Shroyer, hearing
officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from
prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations
Board makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
The W. S. Tyler Company, an Ohio corporation, is engaged in the
manufacture of elevator equipment and industrial wire products at
its plant in Cleveland, Ohio. The annual value of raw materials used
by the Employer is in excess of $500,000, of which approximately 10
percent is shipped to its plant from points outside the State of Ohio.
The annual value of finished products manufactured by the Employer
is in excess of $1,000,000, of which approximately 33 percent is shipped
to points outside the State.
The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
H. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
The Petitioner is a labor organization , claiming to represent em-
ployees of the Employer.
73 N. L. R. B., No. 44.
739925-47-vol. 73-17 239
240 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Federal Labor Union No. 18267, herein called No. 18267, and Fed-
eral Labor Union No. 23866, herein called No. 23866, are labor organi-
zations affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, claiming to,
represent employees of the Employer.
III. THE,QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Employer refuses to recognize the Petitioner as the exclusive
bargaining representative of employees of the Employer until the
Petitioner has been certified by the Board in an appropriate unit.
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning
the representation of employees of the Employer, within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Petitioner seeks a unit consisting of all employees of depart-
ment 6, including steam fitters, stationary engineers, electrical shop,
employees, machine shop employees, stockroom employees, 0and sweep-
ers, but excluding clerical employees, the electrical shop foreman, the
machine shop foreman, and other supervisory personnel. No. 18267
and No. 23866 contend that the employees of department 6 should not
constitute a separate unit but should be part of a larger unit together
with the employees of four wire cloth manufacturing departments.
The Employer is neutral.
As previously stated, the Employer manufactures wire products and
elevator equipment. It has organized these manufacturing operations
into two divisions. The division devoted to the manufacture of wire
products is subdivided into five departments, the Fourdrinier wire fin-
ishing department, the wire mill department, the heavy looms depart-
ment, the narrow looms department, and the wire weaving department.
The first four of these are known as wire cloth manufacturing depart-
ments. In addition to the production divisions, there is a service di-
vision designated as department 6. It is this department which the
Petitioner seeks to represent in a separate unit.
The wire cloth departments are engaged in manufacturing opera-
tions; department 6 is entirely a repair and maintenance department.
It is responsible for servicing the machinery throughout the plant, al-
though the greatest part of its actual work is devoted to the repair and
conditioning of the machinery used in the wire cloth departments. De-
partment 6 is located in a building apart from that housing the wire
cloth departments and is separately supervised. Among the employees
in the department are machinists, electricians and steam fitters. The
skills of employees in department 6 and in the wire cloth departments
are different. There is no interchange of employees between the serv-
ice and the manufacturing departments.
THE W. S. TYLER COMPANY 241
The Employer has had a long history of collective bargaining on a
craft and departmental basis with various labor organizations. For
a number of years, the Employer has recognized No. 23866 as bar-
gaining representative of the employees in the Fourdrinier wire fin-
ishing department, the wire mill department, the heavy looms depart-
ment, and the narrow looms department.' About a year ago, No. 18267
organized department 6. At the time of the hearing the Employer
had three separate collective bargaining agreements with No. 23866
covering the employees in the four wire cloth manufacturing depart-
ments and a fourth contract with No. 18267 for the employees in
department 6.2
In view of the character of the work performed by, and the skills.
of, the employees in department 6, as well as all other circumstances
of the case, including the past bargaining history, we are of the opin-
ion that the employees in department 6 may constitute a separate unit .3-
Accordingly, we find that all employees of department 6, including:
steam fitters, stationary engineers, electrical shop employees, machine
shop employees, stockroom employees, and sweepers, but excluding
clerical employees, the electrical shop foreman, the machine shop fore-
man, and all other supervisory employees with authority to hire, pro-
mote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status
of employees, or effectively recommend such action, constitute a unit
appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the mean-
ing of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION 4
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the
purposes of collective bargaining with The W. S. Tyler Company,
Cleveland, Ohio, an election by secret ballot shall be conducted as early
as possible, but not later than thirty (30) days from the date of this
Direction, under the direction and supervision of the Regional Direc-
tor for the Eighth Region, acting in this matter as agent for the Na-
1Organization of these departments was started by No. 18267 about 10 years ago on a
departmental basis As it succeeded in organizing each department , it transferred the
membership of the employees to No 23866 which thereafter conducted collective bargain-
ing negotiations in behalf of the organized employees. At the hearing No 18267 stated
it contemplated transferring the allegiance of employees in department 6 to No 23866
sometime in the future
'The contract with No 18267 is for members only. None of the parties claims that it
is a bar See Matter of The Wheland Company , 72 N. L R B. 351.
3 See Matter of Foley Lumber it Export Corporation, 70 N L. R . B. 73, Matter of Dough
nut Corporation of America, 66 N L R B 1231; Matter of Electra Metallurgical Com-
pany , 56 N. L R. B. 1464; Matter of Maryland Sanitary Manufacturing Corporation, 55.
N. L. R B 773
1 Any paiticipant in the election herein may , upon its prompt request to, and approval
thereof by , the Regional Director , have its name removed from the ballot.
242 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
tional Labor Relations Board, and subject to Sections 203.55 and
203.56, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-
Series 4, among the employees in the unit found appropriate in Sec-
tion IV, above, who were employed during the pay-roll period immedi-
ately preceding the date of this Direction, including employees who
did not work during said pay-roll period because they were ill or on
vacation or temporarily laid off, and including employees in the armed
forces of the United States who present themselves in person at the
polls, but excluding those employees who have since quit or been dis-
charged for cause and have not been rehired or reinstated prior to the
date of the election, to determine whether they desire to be represented
by International Association of Machinists, District No. 54, or by
Federal Labor Union No. 18267, A. F. L., for the purposes of collective
bargaining, of by neither.
CHAIRMAN HERZOG took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Direction of Election.