85 N.L.R.B. 761 (N.L.R.B. 1949)

W. B. Willett Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsAug 22, 1949

85 N.L.R.B. 761 (N.L.R.B. 1949)

In the Matter of W. B. WILLETT, D/B/A W. B. WILLETT COMPANY, EM- PLOYER and INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS LOCAL LODGE No. 1397, PETITIONER Case No. 20-KC-536.Decided August 02, 1949 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before Robert V. . Magor, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hear- ing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. 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 Members Houston 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 labor organizations involved claim to represent certain em- ployees of the Employer. 3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa- tion of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.' 4. International Association of Machinists, Local Lodge No. 1397, .herein called the Petitioner, seeks a unit of all machinists and mill- wrights, and their helpers and apprentices, engaged in assembling, 1 The Employer has a subcontract from C. M . Elliott and John O. Gist, a joint-venture .partnership , herein called Elliott and Gist, to install turbines and other machinery and to perform certain structural steel construction , at the Keswick Dam on the Sacramento River , a few miles from Redding , California . Elliott and Gist have a contract with the Bureau of Reclamation for the completion of the dam and power plant . The Keswick Dam is an integral part of the Central Valley project of the Bureau of Reclamation, United States Department of Interior. 2 United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners , Local 1599, AFL,- herein called the Intervenor , contends that the rejection by the hearing officer of its offer of proof of an -agreement between the Intervenor and the Employer constitutes prejudicial error. We find this contention to be without merit . The contract, which the Intervenor argues bound the Employer in this case, was between the Intervenor and Gist , one of the general contractors on the Keswick Dam project . The contract was not offered in evidence, and there is no showing that the Employer was a signatory to this contract , or that it was in any way bound by it . It therefore cannot constitute a bar to the present proceeding. 85 N. L. R. B., No. 1.37. 761 762 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD erecting, and installing turbines and other machinery at the Keswick Dam, excluding supervisors. The Intervenor urges that the ma- chinists and millwrights should not be joined in one unit, and that because work in the construction industry is sporadic in nature, the appropriate unit should be a multiple-employer unit. The Employer agrees with the Petitioner as to the appropriate unit. At the time of the hearing there were approximately 10 iron workers, 4 machinists, 2 millwrights, 3 machinists' helpers, 2 millwrights' help- ers, 1 iron worker's helper, 1 operating engineer, 1 oiler, and 2 laborers, working for the Employer at the Keswick Dam. The operating en- gineer and the iron workers are covered by contracts with other labor organizations. There is no history of collective bargaining for the employees sought by the Petitioner. The machinists and millwrights work under the separate super- vision of a machinists' foreman.3 They work together in assembling and aligning the turbines in the powerhouse on the Dam project. There is a machine shop in the powerhouse which is used by both the machinists and millwrights. Only the machinists, however, do the lathe and drill work. The machinists use all the precision instru- ments of their trade. All machinists and millwrights were hired initially by the Employer as skilled craftsmen ; all have had five or more years' experience in their particular craft work. Both the ma- chinists and millwrights receive the same pay. There is no inter- change of work between this crew and any other employees of the Employer. We find that the machinists and millwrights, and their helpers, constitute an identifiable homogeneous craft group such as we have previously found may constitute a separate appropriate unit .4 We reject the Intervenor's contention that because work in the con- struction industry is sporadic in nature,' the appropriate unit should be a multiple-employer unit. We have found appropriate a unit of machine shop employees of a single Employer engaged in the con- struction industry." As there is no evidence in the record of a col- lective bargaining history for the Employer on a multiple-employer basis, we find that the single-employer unit sought by the Petitioner is appropriate. 'Two iron workers, who place the turbines into position for the machinists and mill- wrights, take orders from the machinists ' foreman while doing this work . At other times they are under the supervision of the iron workers ' foremen . The other iron workers do not work with the machinists and millwrights. 4 Matter of Reynolds Metals Company, 85 N. L. R. B . 110; Matter of Roane-Anderson Company, 83 N. L. It. B. 30 . Cf. Matter of Ozark Dam Constructors , 77 N. L. Ti. B. 1136. 5 The Employer expects to finish work on the subcontract at the Keswick Dam about the middle of January 1950. 6 See Matter of any F. Atkinson and J. A. Jones Construction Company, 84 N. L. R. B. 88, in which the Board rejected a similar contention. W. B. WILLE'TT COMPANY 763 We find that all machinists and millwrights, and their respective helpers, employed by the Employer at the Keswick Dam project, excluding supervisors,' constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act. 5. The Intervenor argues that an election should not be directed because, after the last turbine is installed sometime in the near future, the Employer will require the services of only about four machinists and millwrights. This reduction in personnel will not involve any change in the composition of the unit or in the.craft duties of the em- ployees. We have previously held that two or more employees may constitute an appropriate unit." We therefore find no reason to deny or to defer the direction of an election. DIRECTION OF ELECTION 9 As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the purposes 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 International Association of Machinists, Local Lodge No. 1397, or by United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners, Local 1599, AFL,"' or by neither. I The machinists' foreman can effectively recommend the hiring and discharge of em- ployees working under his supervision. We find that he is a supervisor and shall exclude him from the unit. 8 Matter of National Licorice Company, 85 N. L. R. B. 140; Matter of Sunshine Broad- casting Company, 83 N. L. R. B. 1244; Matter of Tanner-Brice Company, 82 N. L. It. B. 477. 9 Either participant in the election directed herein may, upon its prompt request to and approval thereof by the Regional Director, have its name removed from the ballot. . 10 The compliance status of United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners, Local 1599, AFL, has lapsed since the hearing in this case. In the event it fails to renew its com- pliance with Section 9 (f), (g), and (h) within 2 weeks from the date of this Direction, the Regional Director is instructed not to accord it a place on the ballot in the election directed herein.