Irvington Varnish & Insulator Co.

In the Matter Of IRVINGTON VARNISH & INSULATOR COMPANY, EM- PLOYER and DISTRICT #47 INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHIN- ISTS, PETITIONER Case No. 2-RC-946.-Decided Jvnie 8, 1949 DECISION AND ORDER Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing in this matter 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. 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 the Intervenor, Local 1310, Paint Varnish and Allied Products Union, AFL, are labor organizations claiming to represent employees of the Employer. 3. For reasons stated hereinafter, no 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.' The Petitioner desires to represent all carpenters, sheet metal workers, and pipe fitters at the Employer's plant presently represented by the Intervenor. Petitioner would add these categories to its estab- lished 'unit of tool and die makers, machinists, millwrights, electri- cians, and their respective apprentices, or, in the alternative, it seeks a separate craft unit for each of these three categories. The Intervenor, relying on bargaining history, contends that the proposed severance from its unit is improper. The Employer does not take any position regarding the transfer of the requested categories from one bargaining unit to the other, but objects to the Petitioner's alternative request for the establishment of three separate units. ' In view of our finding with respect to the requested unit, we find It unnecessary to resolve the contract bar issue raised by the Intervenor 84 N. L. R. B., No. 5. 25 26 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD The Employer manufactures electrical insulating materials, var- nishes, coated fabric and papers, mechanical specialties, resins, and thermoplastic extrusions, with its principal office in Irvington, New Jersey, and plants at Irvington and Newark, New Jersey. These plants, though approximately 10 miles apart, are conducted as a single, unified operation. Products processed at one plant are frequently sent to the other plant for further processing. Transfer of personnel be- tween the plants, both permanent and temporary, is frequent. Super- visors at each plant have under their jurisdiction employees in the other plant. Since 1941, the Intervenor has represented on a two-plant basis the production and certain unskilled and skilled maintenance em- ployees, all under the general maintenance foreman, including, inter alia, painters, carpenters, sheet metal workers, and pipe fitters. On the other hand, since 1942, the Petitioner has represented certain mis- cellaneous skilled maintenance employees, including tool and die makers, machinists, millwrights, electricians, and their respective ap- prentices, none of whom are under the general maintenance foreman. The Petitioner now desires to expand this unit to include the employees sought in this proceeding, who constitute the remaining maintenance employees under the general maintenance foreman except painters. The record discloses that sheet metal workers, carpenters, and pipe fitters - are employed in the maintenance department at both of the Employer's plants in both "A" and "B'I' categories. The employees in the "A" category are more skilled than those in the "B" category ; the "B" category employees possess some experience in the work and normally become • "A" category workers after a year's experience. There are four employees in each of the three afore-mentioned trade categories. All these employees are under the supervision of the gen- eral maintenance foreman who also supervises such workers and jan- itors, porters, painters, guards, and watchmen. There is no inter- vening supervisor between him and the employees in question. The three categories include workers considerably more skilled than aver- age production workers, but less skilled than the machinists and die makers presently represented by the Petitioner. It also appears that the employees in question lack the requisite skills and are not required to exercise the skills appertaining to their respective craft designa- tions. We find, therefore, that these employees are not craftsmen within the traditional definition of that term. Upon the basis of the foregoing facts and upon the entire record in the case, we are of the opinion that the grouping sought by the Petitioner is neither a pure craft unit nor a departmental unit, nor does it conform to any functional division of the plant. We perceive, IRVINGTON VARNISH & INSULATOR COMPANY 27 therefore, no justification in the present instance for severing from the existing unit this heterogeneous group of employees, together or singly. Accordingly, we find the proposed unit is inappropriate and shall therefore dismiss the petition herein. ORDER IT is HEREBY ORDERED that the petition filed herein' be, 'and it hereby is, dismissed. -