The Buckeye Steel Castings Co.

In the Matter of THE BUCKEYE STEEL CASTINGS COMPANY, EMPLOYER and PATTERN MAKERS LEAGUE OF NORTH AMERICA, DISTRICT NO. 1, AFL, PETITIONER Case No. 9-R-2117.Decided January 01, 1948 Mr. James, J. T'Vest, of Columbus, Ohio, for the Employer. Mr. C.'D. Madigan, of Cleveland, Ohio, for the Petitioner Mr. Howard N. Porter, of Columbus, Ohio, for the Intervenor. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at Colum- bus, Ohio, on January 8, 1947, before Allen Sinsheimer, Jr., 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 the case, the National Labor Relations Board makes the following: ` FINDINGS OF FACT I. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER The Buckeye Steel Castings Company, an Ohio corporation with its principal office and place of business in Columbus, Ohio, is engaged in the manufacture of open hearth steel castings. In 1946, the Em- ployer used raw materials valued in excess of $500,000, of which more than 35 percent represented shipments from sources outside the State .of Ohio. During the same period, the Employer distributed finished products valued, in excess of $500,000; of which more than 50 percent represented shipments to points outside the States. The Employer admits, for the purposes of this proceeding, and we find, that it is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. II. TIIE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, claiming to represent employees of the Em- ployer. 75 N. L. R. B., No. 117. '982 THE BUCKEYE STEEL CASTINGS COMPANY 983 United Steelworkers of America, herein called the Intervenor, is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organi- zations, claiming to represent employees of the Employer. III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION On October 28, 1942, following a Board-directed election,' the Intervenor was certified as the exclusive bargaining representative of the Employer's employees in a unit embracing, inter alia, the indi- viduals involved herein. Since shortly thereafter, the Employer and the Intervenor' have entered into a number of collective bargaining agreements covering the employees in that unit. The most recent contract and supplements thereto expired on April 30, 1947. At the hearing, conducted on January 8, 1947, the Intervenor claimed a contractual bar to this proceeding. However, inasmuch as the contract asserted as a bar has already expired, it clearly cannot operate to prevent an election at this time. The Intervenor further contended, in effect, that no question con- cerning representation exists because the Petitioner, before filing its petition herein, failed "officially" to demand recognition by the Em- ployer. We find no merit in this contention. Inasmuch as the Em- ployer stated, at the hearing, that it refuses to recognize the Petitioner as the representative of its employees until the Petitioner has been certified by the Board-conduct which, in and of itself, served to maintain this proceeding-we are of the opinion that a question con- cerning representation exists. Accordingly, we find that 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. IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES The Petitioner seeks a unit composed of all wood and metal pattern makers and their apprentices at the Employer's Columbus, Ohio, plant. In terms of the Employer's job classifications, the Petitioner would include the following pattern,department employees : produc- tion wood and metal pattern makers and their apprentices, gauge makers, machinists-pattern shop (Classes A & B), and five employees designated as pattern mounters, maintenance men (Class A). The Intervenor contends that only a broad unit of all production and maintenance employees is appropriate. However, in the event the Board rejects this contention by the Intervenor, both the Employer and the Intervenor urge that the unit embrace all pattern department 1 Matter of Buckeye Steel Casting Company, 44 N L. R. B 771. 9$4 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABQR RELATIONS BOARD employees, including, in addition to those listed by the Petitioner, individuals in the following classifications : pattern shop maintenance men (Classes A & B), moulder (pattern department), pattern storage men, and the remaining 10 pattern mounters, maintenance men (Classes A & B). The Employer, at the plant involved herein, employs approximately 1,200 production and maintenance workers. Of these, about 51 are assigned to the pattern department. This department, which is com- posed principally of pattern makers and their apprentices, is situated in separate buildings and is under separate supervision. All patterns made in the department are ultimately used in the Emloyer's produc- tion and maintenance operations. As already indicated, bargaining at this plant has been conducted on a plant-wide basis since October 1942 when, following a Board- directed election, the Intervenor was certified as the exclusive bargain- ing representative of all the Employer's non-supervisory production and maintenance employees.2 No request was made at that time by any labor organization for a self-determination election among the (employees involved in the instant case. It appears that, since the Intervenor's certification, the pattern department employees have 'enjoyed benefits, such as increased wages and vacations, under the collective bargaining agreements executed by the Intervenor and the Employer; that the Intervenor has maintained a shop steward for the employees in this department; that some grievances have been proc- cssed by these employees through the shop steward; and that a number of workers whom the Intervenor and the Employer would include in, and the Petitioner would exclude from, the craft unit have joined in contract negotiations between the Intervenor and the Employer and have held official positions in the Intervenor. However, it is clear that the Employer's pattern makers and their apprentices constitute a well-recognized, apprenticeable craft group. Furthermore, the record indicates that bargaining in the industry involved has been conducted through similar craft groups.' Under all the circumstances and upon the entire record in the case, we are of the opinion that, notwithstanding the Board's prior more comprehensive unit determination, the Employer's wood and metal pattern makers and their apprentices may, if they so desire, constitute a separate unit.' However, we shall not make any unit determination 2 See Section III, supra 3See, e g, Matter of The Symrngtoa-Coale Corporation, 53 N L R B 552 and 73 N. L. R B 371: of Matter of American Steel Foundries, 69 N. L R B. 1262. " Section 9 ( b) (2) of the amended Act provides that the Board shall not "decide that any craft unit is inappropriate * * * on the ground that a different unit has been established by a prior Board determination , unless a majority of the employees in the pro- posed craft unit vote against separate representation * * *." THE BUCKEYE STEEL CASTINGS COMPANY 985 until we have first ascertained the desires of the employees concerned. We shall direct that a separate election be held among the employees in the voting group set forth below and shall place only the Petitioner on the ballot. The Intervenor is excluded from the ballot because of its failure to comply with Section 9 (f) and (h) of the Act, as amended.5 If the employees participating in this election select the Petitioner, they will be taken to have indicated their desire to consti- tute a separate unit. We turn next to a discussion of the pattern department employees concerning whose inclusion in the voting group the parties are in disagreement : Pattern shop maintenance men (Classes A t B) : The two indi- viduals in these classifications are engaged in the repairing and main- taining of pattern shop machinery. They do not perform any work on patterns, and their duties are apparently comparable to those usually performed by millwrights. Inasmuch as they are not members of the pattern makers' craft, we shall exclude the pattern shop maintenance nien (Classes A & B) from the voting group. ii[oulder (pattern department) : This employee prepares moulds and operates a small melting furnace in the pattern shop. It appears that the moulder's duties are essentially those of a foundry employee, and we shall, therefore, exclude him from the craft group. Pattern storage men: The two pattern storage men, one of whom formerly served as a pattern maker, merely handle the storage of pat- terns and the clerical work in connection therewith. In view of the nature of their duties, we shall exclude the pattern storage men.e Pattern mounters, maintenance men (Classes A c i B) : There are approximately 15 workers employed in the capacity of pattern moun-' this. The record indicates, in general, that these employees are en- gaged in various pattern-mounting functions, including mounting pat- terns on moulding machines and on stripping plates, and that, in per- forming their duties, the pattern mounters utilize the skills and tools normally employed by foundry workers. Although these employees are considered by the Employer as "prospective" pattern makers or apprentices, some pattern mounters admittedly never attain the craft status. While contending that 10 of the pattern mounters, maintenance men (Classes A & B) should be excluded from the voting group as foundry 5Maitea of Wilson Tian.c,t Company, 75 N L R B 181, and Matter of Sigmund Cohit d Co. 75 N. L R B 177. of Matter of Rate-Form Corset Company, 75 N. L. R B 174. For the reasons stated in the last cited case, the Intervenor 's contentions in its document, filed herein with the Board, entitled "Objection of Intervenor to Proposed Denial of 'Status as Party in Interest and Request for Oral Argument ," are hereby rejected, and its request for oral argument is hereby denied. 8 Matter of The Babcock & Wilcox Company, 72 N L. R. B. 1256. 986 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD workers, the Petitioner would include 5 pattern mounters, maintenance men (Class A),' on the ground that the latter spend a portion of their time performing duties more closely related to those of the pattern makers or their apprentices. However, it appears that the wages of the 5 employees in question are similar to those of the other employees in the same classification, and that they perform comparable functions. We are not persuaded, therefore, that these 5 employees have interests diverse from those of the remaining pattern mounters. And, inasmuch as the pattern mounters, maintenance men (Classes A & B) are essen- tially foundry workers, we shall exclude all the' employees in these classifications from the craft group. Accordingly, we shall direct an election by secret ballot among all production wood and metal pattern makers and their apprentices, gauge makers, and machinists-pattern shop (Classes A & B), at the Employer's Columbus, Ohio, plant, excluding the moulder (pattern department, pattern shop maintenance men (Classes A & B), pattern storage men, pattern mounters, maintenance men (Classes A & B), and all supervisors, subject to the limitations and additions set forth in the Direction. DIRECTION OF ELECTION As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the pur- poses of collective bargaining with The Buckeye Steel Castings Com- pany, Columbus, Ohio, 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 Ninth Region, and subject to Sections 203.61 and 203.62 of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations- Series 5, among the employees in the voting group found appropriate in Section IV, above, who were employed during the pay-roll period im- mediately preceding the date of this Direction, 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 reinstated prior to the date of the election, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented by Pattern Makers League of North America, District No. 1, AFL, for the purposes of collective bargaining. 7 Employees Tharp, Reece , Hawkins, Bezold and Camp.