General Steel Castings Corp.

In the Matter of GENERAL STEEL CASTINGS CORPORATION, ARMOR PLANT and PATTERNMAKERS LEAGUE OF NORTH AMERICA, ST. Louis ASSOCIA- TION, AFL. Case `No. R-5752. -Decided August 04, 1943 Mr. Wesley Lueders, of Granite City, Ill., and Mr. J. L. Campbell, of University City, Mo., for the Company. Mr. Roy E. Rogers, of Hammond, Ind., and Mr. R. J. Cardwell, of St. Louis, Mo., for the Patternmakers. Mr. Walter S. Love, of Granite City, Ill., for the CIO. Mr. William C. Raisinger, Jr., of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION STATEMENT OF THE CASE Upon petition duly filed by Patternmakers League of North Amer- ica, St. Louis Association, AFL, herein called the Patternmakers, al- leging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees at the Madison, Illinois, plant of General ,Steel Castings Corporation, Eddystone, Pennsylvania, herein called the Company, the National Labor Relations Board provided for an ap- propriate hearing upon due notice before Ruth C. Hutchinson, Trial Examiner. Said hearing was held at St. Louis, Missouri, on July 27, 1943. The Company, the Patternmakers, and United Steelworkers of America, CIO, herein called the CIO, appeared; participated, and were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues. The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. All parties were afforded opportunity to file briefs with the Board. Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following : FINDINGS OF FACT 1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY General Steel Castings Corporation, a Delaware corporation, main- tains its principal offices and• operates one manufacturing plant at 52 N. L. R. B., No. 23. 143 144 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELA'MONS BOARD Eddystone, Pennsylvania. It also operates two other plants, one, known as the Commonwealth plant, located in Granite City, Illinois, and the other, known as the Armor plant, located in Madison, Illinois. This proceeding concerns only employees of the Armor plant which is owned by the Defense Plant Corporation. At this plant the Com- pany is engaged in the manufacture of cast armor for the United States Ordnance Department. Since March 1943, at which time the Armor plant first began operating, the Company has purchased raw materials, consisting of pig iron, scrap iron, lime rock, iron ore, and molding sand, valued in excess of $200,000, of which approximately 50 percent was shipped to the plant from points outside the State of Illinois. During the same period, the value of finished products manu- factured at the Armor plant exceeded $300,000, of which approxi- mately 50 percent was shipped to points outside the State of Illinois. The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the mean- ing of the National Labor Relations Act at its Armor plant. ' II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED Patternmakers-League of North America, St. Louis Association, is a labor organization, affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, admitting to membership employees of the Company. United Steelworkers of America is a labor organization, affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, admitting to member- ship employees of the Company. III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION The parties stipulated that on or about April 29,1943, the Pattern- makers requested the Company to recognize it as the exclusive bargain- ing representative of the employees in an alleged appropriate bargain- ing unit, and that the Company refuses to accord the Patternmakers such recognition because it contends that the bargaining unit sought by the Patternmakers is inappropriate. A statement of the Regional Director, introduced in evidence at the hearing, indicates that the Patternmakers and the CIO each rep- resents a substantial number of employees in the alleged appropriate unit? We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the representation of employees of the Company within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. I The report of the Regional Director states that the Patternmakers submitted 16 undated designation cards bearing apparently genuine signatures of persons whose names appear on the Company's pay roll of May 22, 1943, which contains the names of 22 persons within the alleged appropriate unit. The report further states that the CIO submitted 13 designa- tion cards bearing apparently genuine signatures of persons whose names appear on the afoiesaid pay roll of the Company and that 12 of the said cards bear dates between'March 1 and 26, 1943, while the remaining card is undated. GENERAL STEEL CASTINGS CORPORATION 145 IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT; THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES The Patternmakers contends that all employees of the Company's Armor plant who work on the production, maintenance, and repair of patterns, excluding the foreman of the pattern shop, comprise an appropriate bargaining unit. The Company and the CIO, on the other hand, contend that the employees whom the Patternmakers seek to represent do not constitute an appropriate bargaining unit but are properly a part of the production and maintenance unit pres- ently represented by the CIO. On April 30, 1943, pursuant to an agreement for consent election and an amendment 2 thereto, the Board conducted "Globe" type elec- tions by secret ballot among certain groups of the Company's Armor plant employees to determine their choice of bargaining representa- tives. The entire Armor plant, which includes the equivalent of several adjoining buildings or wings, is housed under one roof. The Foundry Department occupies one of the buildings or wings, and the Pattern Shop is,located in an offset of the Foundry Department wing. All the employees in the Pattern Shop are under the direct supervision of the Pattern Shop foreman, who has the authority to hire and discharge and is responsible only to the superintendent of the Foundry Department. The Pattern Shop employs, in addition to the foreman, 2 leadmen, 6 patternmakers,1 patternmaker apprentice, 9 wood handy- men, 3 wood handymen learners,` 8 to 10 laborers, and, 1 machine man. Since the aforementioned amendment to the agreement for consent election did not include the Pattern Shop laborers or the machine man in the group of Pattern Shop employees to be excluded from the vot- ing groups, these employees are properly a part of the production and maintenance unit presently represented by the CIO. The leadmen are patternmakrs who make templates and frequently have crews of from three to seven patternmakers, wood handymen, and wood handymen learners assisting them. The leadmen have no authority to hire, discharge or discipline employees, or to recommend such action. Patternmakers, patternmaker apprentices, wood handy- men, and wood handymen learners all work on the manufacture, main- 2 The Company, the CIO, International Association of Machinists , District No. 9, AFL, herein called the I A M., and International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Shipbuilders, Welders and Helpers of America, AFL, herein called the Boilermakers, were the parties who executed the agreement for consent election . Subsequent to the execution of said agreement but prior to the election at the request of the Patternmakers, the pasties executed an amend- ment to the agreement for consent election in which all patternmakers , patternmaker apprentices, wood handymen , and wood handymen learners , including lay-out men in the pattern department, were excluded from the voting groups The results of the consent election showed that the production and maintenance group had selected the CIO as their representative ; the craft group of machinists had selected the I . A. M as their representa- tive ; and the craft group of welders had selected the Boilermakers as their representative. 146 ^ DECTisiONS OF NiATTONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD tenance, and repair of patterns. The only differential between them is one of skill. - The petitioner classifies wood handymen and wood handymen learners as patternmaker apprentices, inasmuch as they work on patterns. The Company 'contends that wood-handymen and wood handymen learners are not and never will be skilled pattern- makers, because the' repair work available in this pattern shop does not provide the experience necessary to become a skilled pattern- maker. However, it is customary for wood handymen learners in this shop to advance to the classification of wood handymen, and thence to patternmakers. There is no specified length of time that an employee must remain in one--classification before being advanced to the next classification. The Company has no recognized appren- tice-training plan. The one employee who is now classified as a pat- ternmaker apprentice was hired after having had 2 years of school work and 6 months' experience in a job shop as a patternmaker apprentice. The Armor plant uses both production patterns, which are mostly large patterns ranging in size up to 6' x 20',,and shop patterns, which are small patterns ranging in size from 9" to 4' in length. The Pattern Shop manufactures no production patterns, but does manu- facture shop patterns. All production patterns are either manufac- tured at one of the Company's other plants or are purchased complete. The Pattern Shop at the Armor plant,is engaged in the manufacture of shop patterns and in the maintenance and repair of both shop patterns and production patterns. Less than 10 percent of the work of the Pattern Shop consists of the manufacture of shop patterns while the remaining 90 percent of its work consists 'of maintenance and repair of both shop and production patterns. In its description of an appropriate bargaining unit, the petitioner advisedly refrains from naming specific job classifications, because of the fact that the Company's present job classifications are in con- flict with the Union's classification for membership. The petitioning union customarily petitions only for patternmakers and patternmaker apprentices. At the Armor plant those employees who are classified by the Company as wood handymen and wood handymen learners qualify for membership in the Union because they work on patterns and are considered by the Union to be patternmaker apprentices. It is customary in the industry, where the Patternmakers League has employees under contract, as at the Company's Commonwealth Divi- sion in Granite City, Illinois, for wood handymen and wood handy- men learners to be ineligible for membership in the Union and there- fore to be prohibited from working on patterns. The petitioner, therefore, in the instant case seeks the same type of unit it customarily seeks, but describes the appropriate unit in different terms from those S GENERAL STEEL CASTINGS CORPORATION 147 it customarily uses, in order to cover a peculiar situation which exists in this particular pattern shop. On the other hand, the Company claims that this pattern shop is different from other pattern shops in that its work consists mostly of repair rather than the manufacture of patterns, and its Pattern Shop employees are, therefore, much less skilled than those in other pattern shops. The Company, therefore, contends that the usual Board rule of appropriateness of a craft unit of patternmakers should not apply. We are of the opinion that the Pattern Shop employees sought by the Patternmakers are a homogeneous and identifiable group engaged in work which we have frequently found to be sufficiently distin- guishable from that of other production and maintenance employees to warrant establishing them as a separate unit if they so desire. We are also of the opinion that the Pattern Shop employees may properly be included in the production and maintenance unit presently repre- sented by the CIO. We shall make no final determination of the appropriate unit at this time, but shall direct that a separate election be held among all employees of the Company at its Armor plant in Madison, Illinois, who are engaged in the production, maintenance and repair of pat- terns, excluding the foreman of the Pattern Shop, and all other super- visory employees with authority to hire, promote, discharge, discipline or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or effectively recommend such action. If these employees select the Patternmak- ers they will constitute a separate unit; if they select the CIO they will thereby have indicated their desire to be included in the produc- tion and maintenance unit presently represented by the CIO, and will be a part of such unit. We shall, accordingly, direct that the question concerning the representation which has arisen be resolved by an election by secret ballot among the aforesaid Pattern Shop em- ployees who, were employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of the Direction of Election herein, subject to the limitations and additions set forth in the Direction. The requests of the Patternmakers and the CIO that their names appear on the ballot as set forth hereinafter in the Direction of Election are hereby granted. DIRECTION OF ELECTION By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National Labor Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National, Labor Relations Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor Rela- tions Board Rules and'Regulations-Series 2, as amended, it is hereby DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa- tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with General Steel 549875-44-vol. 52-11 148 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Castings Corporation, Eddystone, Pennsylvania, 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 Director for the Fourteenth Region, act- ing in this matter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Article III; Section 10, of said Rules and Regulations, among all employees of the Company at its Armor plant in Madison, Illinois, engaged in the production, maintenance, and repair of pat- terns, who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of this Direction, including such 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 the foreman of the Pattern Shop, and all other supervisory employees with authority to hire, promote, discharge, discipline or otherwise. effect changes in the status of - employees, or effectively recommend such action, and employees who have since quit or been discharged for cause, to determine whether they desire to be represented by Patternmakers League of North America, St. Louis Association, affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, or by United Steelworkers of America, Local Union No. 2947, CIO, for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by neither. CHAIRMAN MILLIs took no part in the consideration of the above Decision and Direction of Election.