W. E. Caldwell Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 2, 1949

81 N.L.R.B. 1131 (N.L.R.B. 1949)

In the Matter of W. E. CALDWELL COMPANY, EMPLOYER and LOCAL
LODGE 681, DISTRICT 27, INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS,
PETITIONER
Case No. 9-RC-270.-Decided March 2, 1949
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before a hearing officer
of the National Labor Relations Board. The hearing officer's rulings
made at the hearing 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 power in connection with
this case to a three-man panel consisting of the undersigned Board
Members.*
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 United Steel Workers of America and its
Local Union 1878, herein called the Intervenor, are labor organizations
which claim to represent employees 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 for the reasons given
below.
The Intervenor, which has represented the employees since 1939,
contends that its contract with the Employer is a bar to an election.
On December 11, 1946, the Employer and the Intervenor entered into
a contract running to October 18, 1947, with a 30-day automatic
renewal clause; this contract was renewed for 1 year on October 18,
1947. The Intervenor won a consent election on January 3, 1947, and
was designated as the collective bargaining representative for all
* Houston , Reynolds , and Murdock.
81 N. L. R. B., No. 171.
1131
1132 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
production and maintenance employees at the Employer's plant in
Louisville, Kentucky.
On September 7, 1918, the Petitioner made a request by letter for
recognition as bargaining representative of certain employees and
filed a petition for certification of representatives on September 8,
1948. The Employer acknowledged the Petitioner's letter on Septem-
ber 9, 1948, and stated that it had a contract with the Intervenor and
that it was necessary to recognize the Intervenor until the Board
designated another bargaining agent. The first amended petition,
which differed substantially from the original petition, was filed on
September 20, 1948. On October 7, 1948, the Employer and the Peti-
tioner conferred regarding the latter's claim for recognition. How-
ever, on October 12, 1948, the Employer and Intervenor, which had
terminated the prior contract by timely notice before the automatic
renewal date, executed a new contract effective October 18, 1948. On
November 9, 1948, the Petitioner filed a second amended petition in
which "machine repair" was substituted for the category of "main-
tenance mechanics" named in the first amended petition.
The second amendment of the petition was made merely to substi-
tute a more precise job title for one of the categories sought, and
did not constitute a substantial change. Consequently, the second
amended petition may not be considered to be a new petition or to
affect the timeliness of the filing of the first amended petition.' As the
first amended petition was filed prior to the execution of the contract,
we find that no contract bar exists to the present determination of
,representatives .2
4. The appropriate unit :
The Petitioner seeks a unit of all machinists, machine repairmen,
their apprentices and helpers and machine operators in the Employer's
machine shop. The Intervenor and Employer contend that the pres-
ent bargaining unit composed of all production and maintenance
employees is the appropriate unit. As stated above, the Intervenor
has been designated bargaining representative of all production and
maintenance employees and has entered into contracts with the Em-
ployer since December 1946.
There are approximately 100 employees in the plant, of which about
12 are in the categories sought by the Petitioner : 4 machinists, 3 ma-
chine operators, 2 machine repairmen, and 3 helpers.
= See Matter of Texas and Pacific Motor Transport Company, 77 N. L . It. B. 87 and
Matter of E. L. Bruce Company, 74 N L. It. B. 1354.
2In view of our finding that the petition was timely, it is not necessary for us to decide
the question raised by the Petitioner that the contract was invalid because of the check-off
provisions.
W. E. CALDWELL COMPANY 1133
The machinists face off flanges and manholes, make new parts for
machines, dismantle machines and install parts, and repair produc-
tion machinery. Machine repairmen are responsible for repairing
welding machines, air compressors, air guns, and hoists. They also
help machinists, and cut and thread pipes. The machinists and ma-
chine repairmen possess similar skills and perform comparable work,
and, accordingly, we shall include them in the voting group.
The machine operators operate drill presses and saws, and thread
rods. However, they spend approximately 95 percent of their time at
manual labor. Accordingly, we shall exclude them.
The helpers assist the machinists and machine repairmen when
needed. They, however, spend a considerable part of their time at
labor work throughout the plant. We do not believe that they have
a community of interest with the machinists and machine repairmen
sufficient to justify including them in the unit with those two cate-
gories of employees. Consequently we shall exclude them.
The tool crib attendant, although classified as a helper, is the only
helper who spends all of his time in the machine shop. Besides being
responsible for the tool room, he helps the machinists in the machine
shop and occasionally operates a drill press or saw or cuts gaskets.
We shall include him in the voting group.
We are of the opinion that the employees in the voting group set
forth hereinafter may properly constitute an appropriate craft unit.
However, they have been represented by the Intervenor for many
years as part of the more comprehensive existing unit and may equally
well be included in that unit.
The Board, therefore, will not make any unit determination until it
has first ascertained the desires of the employees involved. We shall
direct that an election be held among all machinists and machine re-
pairmen including the tool crib attendant in the machine shop of the
Employer's plant at Louisville, Kentucky, but excluding the machine
operators, helpers, carpenters, electricians, building maintenance
employees and supervisors as defined in the Acts If, in this election,
the employees select the Petitioner, they will be taken to have indicated
their desire to constitute a separate bargaining unit.
3 The Employer does not employ apprentices , listed in the petition.
1134 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
DIRECTION OF ELECTION 4
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 Ninth Region, and subject to
Sections 203.61 and 203.62 of National Labor Relations Board Rules
and Regulations-Series 5, as amended, among the employees in the
voting group described 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 bar-
gaining, by Local Lodge 681, District 27, International Association of
Machinists.5
4 As the Intervenor has not complied with the registration and filing requirements of
Section 9 (f) and (h ) of the Act, we shall not place its name on the ballot herein.
The party named as a participant in this election may have its name removed from
the ballot upon its prompt request to, and approval by, the Regional Director.