Webb-Linn Printing Co.Download PDFNational Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsAug 30, 195195 N.L.R.B. 1488 (N.L.R.B. 1951) Copy Citation 1488 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD the extent that such right may be affected by an agreement requiring mem- bership in a labor organization as a condition of employment as authorized in Section 8 (a) (3) of the Act. LOCAL 428, UNITED ASSOCIATION OF JOURNEYMEN AND APPRENTICES OF THE PLUMBING AND PIPEFITTING INDUSTRY OF THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA, A. F. L. By --------------------------------------------------------------------- (Representative) (Title) BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION TRADES COUNCIL OF PHILADELPHIA AND VICINITY. By ------------------------------------------------------------------- (Representative) (Title) Dated -------------------- This notice must remain posted for 60 days from the date hereot, and must not be altered, defaced, or covered by any other material. WEBB-LINN PRINTING COMPANY and CHICAGO PRINTING PRESSMEN'S UNION No. 3 AND FRANKLIN UNION No. 4, SUBORDINATE TO THE IN- TERNATIONAL PRINTING PRESSMEN AND ASSISTANTS' UNION OF NORTH AMERICA, AFL, PETITIONERS.1 Case No. 13-KC-1994. August 30, 1901 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 Irving M. Friedman, hearing officer. 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 Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three- member panel [Members Houston, Reynolds, and Murdock]. 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 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. The Petitioners seek a unit of all pressmen, apprentice pressmen 2 press assistants, and ii pprentice press assistants at the Employer's printing plant in Chicago, Illinois, excluding office, professional, and all other employees, and all supervisors as defined in the Act. The Employer takes the position that the pressmen and press feeders or press assistants comprise two separate units. However, in the event I The names of the Petitioners appear as amended at the hearing. 2 The record reveals that there are no apprentice pressmen as such and that the pressmen are recruited from press feeders, assistant press feeders, and press aiflostants• 95 NLRB No. 205. WEBB-LINN PRINTING COMPANY 1489 of a Board finding - that they' constitute - one- appropriate unit, the Employer • would include therein the lockup men 3 on the ground that their work in the Employer 's plant, as contrasted with other plants in the printing industry , is intimately concerned with the printing process itself. The Board has frequently held that pressmen , press feeders, and press assistants may constitute a single appropriate unit . Such unit follows established craft lines in the printing industry .' As the rec- ord discloses no reason for deviating therefrom in the instant case, we find that the pressmen , press feeders, assistant press feeders, and press assistants may properly be. included in the same bargaining unit. There remains for disposition the Employer 's contention that the lockup men should be included in the unit. The lockup department .which consists of six men is . located in a separate area adjacent to the composing room and the job press room on the second-floor of the Em- ployer's plant .-5 The lockup men "lock up" forms secured from the composing room and assist the pressmen in placing the forms on the press. The pressmen then run a sheet through the press which is checked by the lockup men whose approval is necessary before the pressmen make the press ready and the feeders run the press. The pressmen thereupon move to another press and the lockup men, rather than the pressmen , have the obligation to check the sheets to see to it that the work is turned out properly and that the printing is of good quality. The lockup men also perform two other function-moving the forms and doing most of the registration on the press-which are in other plants ordinarily the responsibility of pressmen. It appears that the lockup men spend at least 50 percent of their time in the pressrooms and they are under the supervision of the plant superin- tendent from whom they take their instructions. As the lockup men are under the same supervision . as the pressmen, and are engaged in work which in considerable measure involves skills and duties usually associated with pressmen , we find that , under the circumstances of this case , the lockup men have a sufficient community of interest with them to warrant their inclusion in the unit .6 We find that all pressmen , press. feeders, assistant press feeders, press assistants , and lockup men at the Employer 's Chicago, Illinois, plant, excluding office, professional, .and all other employees , and all super- visors as defined in the Act, constitute a unit appropriate for the pur- poses of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act. 3 They are also referred to as lineup or O.N. men. - " Continental Can Company , 91 NLRB 500; The New Haven Pulp if Board Company, 83 NLRB 268. There is also a cylinder press room on the first floor. Cf. LaSalle- Crittenden Press, Inc., 72 NLRB 1166 ; H. L. Ruggles if Company, 50 NLRB 308. 1490 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 5. The Petitioners herein filed a joint petition. The Employer contends that it is improper for the Board to entertain- a petition Jointly filed by two unions for the reason that they do not together constitute "a labor organization" within the meaning of the Act. The Employer also maintains that the Petitioners are separate entities for the purpose of determining showing of interest. Moreover; the Em- ployer indicates that it has no effective guarantee that the Petitioners will bargain jointly. We find no merit in the Employer's objections. Board precedent has fully established the propriety of two or more labor organizations .acting jointly as bargaining representative for a single group of ,employees.7 We see no reason to depart from our past practice in .such cases. The names of the Petitioners will appear jointly on the 1)allot and in the event that they are successful in the election herein- :ufter directed, they will be certified jointly as the bargaining repre- sentative of the employees in the entire unit. The Employer may -then insist that the Petitioners bargain jointly for such employees as a single unit. [Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this volume.] ' Sullivan Chevrolet Company, 93 NLRB No. 167 International Harvester Company, West Pullman Works, 89 NLRB 413. GENERAL METALS CORPORATION , PACIFIC FITTINGS DIVISION and. METAL TRADES COUNCIL OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA AND ITS AFFILIATED LOCAL AND INTERNATIONAL UNIONS , AFL, PETITIONER . Case No. 21-RC-1964. August 30,1951 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 Irving Helbling, hearing officer. 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 Act, the Board- has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member panel [Chairman Herzog and Members Houston and 'Reynolds]. 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 Petitioner and United Steelworkers of America, Local Union 2018, CIO, the Intervenor, are labor organizations claiming to represent certain employees of the Employer. 95 NLRB No. 200. Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation