Pacific Car and Foundry Co.

In the Matter of PACIFIC CAR AND FOUNDRY COMPANY, EMPLOYER and BROTHERHOOD OF PAINTERS, DECORATORS, AND PAPERHANGERS OF AMERICA OF SEATTLE AND VICINITY, DISTRICT COUNCIL No. 5, A. F. L., PETITIONER Case No, 19-R-2065-Decided February 9,1948 Mr. Pendleton Miller, of Grosscup, Ambler c€ Stephan, of Seattle, Wash., for the Employer. Mr. Joseph D. Holmes, of Seattle, Wash., for the Petitioner. Mr. Guy L. Dollarhide, of Renton, Wash., for the Intervenor. DECISION AND ORDER Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at Seattle, Washington, on June 20, 26, and 30, 1947, before Patrick H. Walker, 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 1. THE BUSINESS OF TIIE EMPLOYER Pacific Car and Foundry Company, a Washington corporation, is primarily engaged at, Renton, Washington; in the construction and repair of railway freight cars. During the year 194.6, the Empibyer purchased raw materials valued in excess of $5,000,000, of which approximately 50 percent was shipped to it from points outside the State of Washington. The Employer admits, and we find; that it is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. H. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED The Petitioner is a labor organization, affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, claiming to represent employees of the Employer. 76 N. L. R. B., No. 2. 32 PACIFIC CAR AND FOUNDRY COMPANY 33 United Brotherhood of Carpenters, Carbuilders Union, Local 1368, and District Council of Carpenters, herein called the Intervenor, is a labor organization, affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, claiming to represent employees of the employer.' III. THE ALLEGED APPROPRIATE UNIT The Petitioner seeks a unit of "all production painters engaged in the painting of products manufactured by the Company, employed by the Company on its Renton, Washington, plant, excluding painters employed in the Company's motor coach division, and all other em- ployees of the Company." The Employer and the Intervenor con- tend that the unit sought is inappropriate because of a long history of collective bargaining on a more inclusive department-wide basis, and because the work of the painters is closely integrated with that of the other employees in the department involved herein. The employees sought by the Petitioner are part of the labor force employed in the Employer's car erection department. In this de- partment, the Employer has approximately 559 employees classified as carpenters, millmen, galvanizers, air brakemen, crane men, painters, painters' helpers, and laborers. These employees are engaged in the erection of railroad cars on an assembly line basis. The painters in- volved herein consist of sprayers, scalers, and brush men, whose func- tion is to paint parts of the car as it moves on the assembly line. It is, therefore, evident that the employees sought herein constitute a link in the chain of the Employer's production operations, thus distinguish- ing these employees from the usual craft maintenance employees, whose work on any particular piece of production equipment occurs only at irregular intervals. Moreover, these painters are recruited mainly from the Employer's unskilled labor force, who, after a few days of training, are engaged in the painting operations described above, thereby indicating that no great skill is necessary for the performance of the work required, of them. In addition, the sprayers, scalers, and brush men, the painters involved herein, work under conditions similar to those of the other production employees in the car erection department. In view of the foregoing, we are persuaded that the painters herein are engaged in purely production operations, which are completely 'At the hearing , the Petitioner contended that, as the American Federation of Labor has granted jurisdiction to it over the employees herein sought , the Intervenor may not now seek to represent them We do not agree. As the record reveals that the effective resolution of the jurisdictional dispute between the Petitioner and Intervenor can not be had without resort to the administrative processes of the Board , we shall proceed with the investigation See Matter of Grinnell Company of the Pacific , 71 N L R B 1379, and cases cited therein. 34 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD integrated with those of the other production employees in the car erection department, and that in the present instance their skills are not comparable to those of journeymen painters, who require a con- siderable period of apprenticeship before attaining the rank and status of craftsmen. Under all these circumstances, we are of the opinion that the policies of the Act would not be effectuated by finding appropriate the unit requested by the Petitioner, and we shall, therefore, dismiss its peti- tion upon the ground that the unit sought herein is inappropriate for the purpose of collective bargaining. ORDER Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that the petition for investigation and certification of representatives of employees of Pacific Car and Foundry Company, Renton, Washington, filed by Brotherhood of Painters, Decorators, and Paperhangers of America of Seattle and Vicinity, District Council No. 5, A. F. of L., be, and it hereby is, dismissed.