United States Time Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 23, 1954

108 N.L.R.B. 1435 (N.L.R.B. 1954)

UNITED STATES TIME CORPORATION 1435
UNITED STATES TIME CORPORATION, Petitioner and LODGE
NO. 1775, INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS,
AFL. Case-No. 32-RM-41. June 23, 1954
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before John E. Cienki,
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 this case, the Board finds:
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning
of the Act.
2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent
certain employees of the Employer.'
3. 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 Employer seeks an election in a unit composed of all
tool- and die - makers, machinists , carpenters , electricians,
maintenance mechanics , and their helpers and apprentices
employed at its plant in Little Rock, Arkansas. The Union and
the Intervenors contend that such a unit is inappropriate
because (1) it is multicraft; (2) it combines several units,
each of which has been heretofore found by the Board to
be a separate appropriate unit ; and (3 ) maintenance mechanics
are part of a unit covered by a contract which does not expire
until December 4, 1954. If an election is directed, the Union
and Intervenors urge that separate elections be directed only
in the various units heretofore certified by the Board.
The record discloses the following with respect to bargaining
at this plant:
On November 29, 1949, Lodge No. 325, IAM, was certified
as bargaining representative for the Employer ' s tool- and
die-makers.2 On September 7, 1951, Lodge No. 1775, IAM, was
certified as the bargaining representative of separate craft
units of machinists , electricians, and carpenters .' On June 1,
1952, the Employer and Lodge No. 1775 negotiated a contract
covering a single unit of tool- and die-makers , machinists,
electricians , and carpenters . On July 7, 1952, after a consent
'Lodge No. 921, International Association of Machinists, Lodge No 325, International
Association of Machinists, and the International Association of Machinists, hereinafter
referred to collectively as the Intervenors, intervened at the hearing, without objection.
2 United States Time Corporation, 88 NLRB 724. In this decision, which permitted the
severance of tool- and die-makers, the Board refused to permit the severance of a multicraft
maintenance unit in the face of a substantial history of collective bargaining on a plantwide
basis.
3United States Time Corporation, 95 NLRB 941. In this decision, which permitted the
severance of machinists, electricians, and carpenters, the Board denied craft severance
elections to maintenance mechanics and tool inspectors.
108 NLRB No. 205.
1436 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
election in Case No . 32-RC-446, the IAM (no local) was certi-
fied as the bargaining representative for all production
employees and the maintenance mechanics involved herein.
However, on August 22, 1952, Lodge No. 1775 and the Employer
added to their contract an Appendix extending the provisions of
their contract to maintenance mechanics , but stipulating that
any wage benefits applicable to the production employees would
accrue to these mechanics . At that time the Employer was in
the process of negotiating with Lodge No. 921, IAM, 4 a
contract covering the production employees , including porters,
maids, truckdrivers , etc., but excluding employees covered by
other Board certifications (tool- and die - makers, machinists,
electricians , and carpenters ). Agreement on the terms of this
contract was reached on December 4, 1952. No mention was
made of maintenance mechanics in this contract. The
Employer's contract with Lodge No. 1775 having expired on
June 1, 1953, negotiations for a new contract were terminated
on September 11, 1953, when 43 employees in the classifica-
tions listed in the Employer ' s instant petition requested the
Employer to discontinue bargaining with Lodge No. 1775. The
Employer filed the instant petition on September 16, 1953. In
the meantime , on September 1, 1953, after a strike at the
plant, the Employer and Lodge Np. 921 signed a strike settle-
ment agreement , which provided for the extension of their
contract to December 4, 1954.
The Union and Intervenors contend that maintenance
mechanics are covered by the Employer 's agreement with
Lodge No. 921, and therefore , no election may be held with
respect to them until this contract expires.' We find no merit
in this contention . As already stated, Lodge No. 921' s contract
of December 4, 1952, as extended , does not specifically refer
to maintenance mechanics either as included or excluded.
However, as they were expressly included in Lodge No. 1775's
contract of June 1, 1952, by the Appendix of August 22, 1952, we
infer and find that the omission of the maintenance mechanics
from the contract expiring on December 4, 1954, was inten-
tional, reflecting the understanding of the parties that they
were already covered by the June 1, 1952, contract. Accord-
ingly, we find that the maintenance mechanics are not covered
by the existing contract of Lodge No. 921, and that that contract
is therefore no bar to the participation of the maintenance
mechanics in any election that may be directed herein.
The Union and Intervenors further contend that the unit in
which an election is requested by the Employer is inappro-
priate because it is multicraft. However, insofar as appears
from the record , such unit comprises all the maintenance
employees of the Employer. The Board has been reluctant
4This Lodge was presumably authorized by IAM to exercise as to the production employees
IAM's rights under the certification in Case No 32-RC-446.
5 As indicated above, the Employer's contract with Lodge No 1775 expired on June 1, 1953,
and is not urged as a bar to this proceeding.
UNITED STATES TIME CORPORATION 1437
to sever such a maintenance group from an existing production
and maintenance unit, where to do so would disrupt stable
collective -bargaining relations on a broader basis.' Where,
however, there is no controlling collective -bargaining history
on a broader basis , the Board has found that the maintenance
employees , as amulticraft group, possessing separate interests
from those of production employees , constitute a separate
appropriate unit. ? In view of the absence of any recent bar-
gaining history on a broader basis, we conclude that the
earlier plantwide bargaining history does not preclude the
finding that a unit limited to the Employer ' s maintenance
employees is appropriate for bargaining purposes. B
The Union and the Intervenors contend, finally , that the
unit is inappropriate because it combines several units, each
of which has been found by the Board to be a separate appro-
priate unit . As already stated, since June 1, 1952 , the Employer
and the Union have bargained on the basis of a combined
multicraft unit of tool- and die-makers , machinists, elec-
tricians , and carpenters. On August 22, 1952, maintenance
mechanics were added to this bargaining unit. In view of this
bargaining history, we find that the separate craft units
have been merged into a single , multicraft maintenance unit,"
and that such a unit is nowappropriate for purposes of collect-
ive bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 ( b) of the Act.
Accordingly , we will direct an election in the following unit:
All maintenance employees at the Employer's Little Rock,
Arkansas , plant, including tool- and die -makers, machinists,
carpenters , electricians , maintenance mechanics , and their
helpers and apprentices , but excluding all other employees,
professional , confidential and office clerical employees , guards
and supervisors.
[ Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
Member Rodgers took no part in the consideration of the
above Decision and Direction of Election.
6Crossett Paper Mills, Division of Crossett Lumber Company. 98 NLRB 542.
7 Animal Trap Company of America, 107 NLRB No. 58; Aluminum Foils, Inc., 94 NLRB 806;
Goodyear Engineering Corporation, 100 NLRB 971; ArrnStrong Cork Company, 80 NLRB 1328.
BNational Carbon Company, 107 NLRB 1486.
9Cf. The Firestone Tire & Rubber Company, 103 NLRB 1749; Los Angeles Paper Box &
Board Mills, Inc., 101 NLRB 1026; Bigelow-Sanford Carpet Company, Inc., 100 NLRB 1021;
Basalt Rock Company, Inc., 96 NLRB 1058. Member Murdock notes that the Board in this
case, by according proper weight to the history of collective bargaining and directing an
election in the consolidated unit, has adopted the dissenting position in Bausch and Lomb
Optical Company, 107 NLRB 263, a decertification proceeding strikingly similar in facts to
facts to this case.