American Can Co.

In the Matter of AMERICAN CAN COMPANY, EMPLOYER and LOCAL No. 3, INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, A. F. OF L., PETITIONER Case No. 2-EC-557.-Decided Mardi 22, 1949 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before Daniel J. Sullivan, 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 powers in connection with this case to a three-man panel.* 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 named below claim to represent em- ployees of the Employer. 3. The question concerning representation : The Employer and the Intervenor 2 have been parties to collective bargaining agreements since 1937. Since that time the Intervenor has been the exclusive bargaining representative of all production and maintenance employees of the Employer, excluding lithographers,3 truckmen, executives, salaried clerical employees, and supervisors. The Employer and the Intervenor contend that a contract executed on June 29, 1948, is a bar to this proceeding. The contract claimed as a bar, is supplement to an agreement which was executed by the I At the hearing Local 2067, United Steel Workers of America, Congress of Industrial Organizations , herein called the Intervenor, was permitted to intervene because of con- tractual interest. *Reynolds, Murdock, and Gray. 2 And its predecessor, Steel Workers Organizing Committee, Lodge No. 2067, which was certified pursuant to a consent election conducted on July 15, 1937. 8 For many years the lithographers have been represented separately and apart from other employees in the plant by the Amalgamated Lithographers of America. 82 N L. R. B., No. 31. 257 258 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Employer and Intervenor on June 12, 1947, with a termination date of March 2, 1949. The original contract contained a provision for automatic renewal in the absence of notice given by either party dur- ing the period beginning 60 days and ending 30 days prior to the termination date. It also contained a reopening provision with re- spect to wage negotiations. Pursuant to the provisions of the wage reopening clause, negotiations began in March 1948, and on June 29, 1948, the parties executed the supplemental agreement referred to above. Subsequently, on July 15, 1948, the Petitioner filed its petition. It appears that the supplemental agreement, prematurely extended the terms of the original contract from March 2, 1949, to March 2, 1950. We have held that a contract prematurely extending an exist- ing contract does not bar a rival union's claim to representation made known to the Employer before the Mill "B" date of the old contract and followed by a petition in due course.4 This is true despite the fact that the petition was filed subsequent to the execution of the new contract.' Under these circumstances, we find that the contract is not a bar to this proceeding.6 We find that a question affecting commerce exists concerning the representation of employees of the Employer, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. 4. The appropriate Unit: The Petitioner seeks to represent a unit composed of all electricians and helpers employed at the Brooklyn plant, excluding all other production, maintenance, and professional employees, office and cleri- cal workers, guards, watchmen, and all supervisors. The Employer and the Intervenor contend (1) that, in view of the past history of collective bargaining on a plant-wide basis, the existing contract unit is the only appropriate unit; and (2) that the severance of the elec- tricians from the remainder of the plant production and maintenance employees will disrupt existing harmonious relations within the plant. The Employer and the Intervenor concede that in order to qualify as an electrician within the plant, an apprenticeship of from 4 to 6 years' experience is the minimum qualifying standard. Both con- cede that the work of electricians requires a high degree of skill, and in all instances none of the electricians now employed at the plant 4 Matter of Radiant Lamp Corporation, 74 N. L. R. B. 1338 ; Matter of Atlas Pon der Company, 71 N. L. R. B. 723. 5 See Matter of Radio Corporation of America, RCA Victor Division, Lancaster Plant, ,81 N. L. R. B 643. 4 Since we find that the contract is a premature extension of the original agreement, we have no occasion to consider whether or not such contract would be a bar in view of the fact that it contains an unauthorized "maintenance of membership " provision . Cf Matter of C. Hager & Sons Hinge Manufacturing Company, 80 N. L R B 163; Matter of General ,Electric Company, 80 N. L. R. B. 169. AMERICAN CAN COMPANY 259 have served apprenticeships of less than the minimum qualifying standards. However, because of the high degree of integration of its operations, the Employer and Intervenor relying on recent Board decisions denying severance to craft employees engaged in produc- tion line operations contend that the electricians herein concerned should not be severed from the existing over-all plant unit.7 The Employer is engaged in the manufacture and fabrication of metal and fiber containers. In furtherance of its operations, it utilizes the usual high-speed production processing automatic machinery which is electrically controlled and operated. It has a number of production lines on 5 floors of its plant. At the plant there are approximately 1400 employees, of whom 275 are craftsmen, including approximately 16 electricians. All electricians are under the over-all supervision of the chief elec- trician. At present, six electricians have roving assignments through- out the plant; two work full time in an area on the fifth floor where most electrical material and equipment is kept; 8 and eight are assigned to various production departments.9 The six electricians on roving assigumeiit5 are on call and may be summoned to any part of the plant to service, maintain, and repair such equipment as electrical panels, switchboard, lighting (both inside and outside the building), air con- ditioning, kitchen (in the employees' cafeteria), and fuse boxes. The panels and switchboards frequently control an entire production line of machinery. These six electricians normally report to the fifth floor area known as the "Electrical Maintenance Department." The two electricians assigned to this department spend the greater portion of their time winding armatures for electrical motors which power pro- duction machinery. The eight electricians assigned to the various production departments service, maintain, and repair the electrical equipment contained therein; and are instructed to give the production lines in these departments their first attention, but in the event that their services are not needed in the departments they may be summoned to other parts of the plant to repair other electrical equipment19 There has been virtually no interchange of employees between the elec- tricians and the production department; there is also no interchange of duties between electricians and other plant employees. Therefore, 7 Matter of Ford Motor Company (Maywood Plant ), 78 N. L R. B. 867 ; Matter of General Motors Corporation , 79 N. L. R. B. 341 ; Matter of Dodge an Leandro Plant, 80 N L. R. B. 1031; and Matter of National Tube Company, 76 N. L. R. B. 1199. " Hereinafter designated as the electrical maintenance department. Fiber milk departments , beer can and coffee can department , and the maintenance of electric tractors 10 Approximately 25 percent of the time of all the electricians is spent in such production line machine repairs and approximately 75 percent of their time is spent on other tasks such as electrical construction , maintenance, and repair work on electric motors. 260 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD we are of the opinion that the work of the craft electricians is not so integrated with the production line processes of the Employer that they may not constitute a separate appropriate unit." We find that all electricians and helpers employed at the Employer's Brooklyn, New York, plant, excluding all other production, mainte- nance, and professional employees, office and clerical workers, guards, warehousemen, the chief electrician, and all other supervisors may constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act. However, we shall make no final determination at this time but shall be guided in part by the desires of these employees as expressed in the election herein directed. If the majority vote for the Petitioner, they will be taken to have indicated their desire to constitute a separate appropriate unit. DIRECTION OF ELECTION 12 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-Series 5, as amended, among the employees described in paragraph numbered 4, above, who were em- ployed 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 tem- porarily 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, 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 Local No. 3, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, A. F. of L. 11 Matter of United States Gypsum Company, 79 N. L. R. B. 1282 and cases cited therein ; also see Matter of International Harvester Company (Fort Wayne, Indiana, Plant), 80 N. L. R. B. 1451 . We also find no merit in the Employer's and Intervenor 's contention that a severance of the employees herein will disrupt harmonious relations within the plant, anymore than is ordinarily the case where a craft group is severed from an existing plant-wide unit. 12 As the Intervenor is not in compliance with Section 9 (f), (g), and (h) of the Act, we will not permit its name to appear on the ballot.