Krueger Sentry Gauge Co.

420 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL ' LABOR RELATIONS BOARD KRUEGER SENTRY GAUGE CO. AND KRUEGER METAL PRODUCTS INC. and LODGE No. 1289, INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS, PETI- TIONER. Case No. 13-RC-2183. February 29, 195' Decision and Direction of Election Upon a'petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Ivan C. McLeod, hearing officer. 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 Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-mem- ber panel [Chairman Herzog and Members Murdock and Styles]. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds : 1. The Employers are engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. 2. The labor 'organization involved claims to represent employees of the Employers. 3. The Employers urge as a bar to this proceeding their contract with Federal Labor Union No. 24078, AFL, executed on July 28, 1947, covering employees in substantially the same unit sought by the Peti- tioner. This contract was to remain in effect until May 5, 1948, and from year to year thereafter, unless either party gave notice of its desire to terminate the contract 30 days before the end of any contract year. As the petition was filed before the automatic renewal date set forth in the contract, and as the contract will terminate in less than 45 days, we find that the 1947 agreement is not a bar to this petition., A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representation of employees of the Employers within the meaning of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. 4. The Petitioner seeks to represent all the production and mainte- nance employees of both Employers in a single unit. The Employers, on the other hand, contend that the employees of each Employer should constitute a separate appropriate unit. Both Employers are Wisconsin corporations. The top three execu- tive offices of each Employer are occupied by the same three individ- uals. Krueger Sentry Gauge produces floating gauges and Krueger Metal Products produces steel furniture and general metal stampings. Both companies conduct their operations in the same building., The Heeksn Can Company, 88 NLRB 726 , 727 In view of the finding that the contract is not a bar because of its approaching termination , we need not pass upon the Petitioner's contention that the contract is not a bar for the further reason that the Federal Labor Union No. 24078, the contracting union, has abandoned the contract. 98 NLRB No. 65. KRUEGER SENTRY GUAGE co. 421 Employees of each Employer ,have access to the operating areas of the other, the respective operations being separated only by a low partition with an unobstructed passageway. The two-employer unit which the Petitioner seeks to represent is substantially the same unit which the Employers in 1947 agreed was appropriate and which the Board at that time found appropriate. ' The Employers, however, urge that changed circumstances require a different unit finding. The Employers rely principally upon the change in management ownership of Krueger Sentry Gauge and the absence of interchange of employees between the two Employers. In 1948 Krueger Sentry Gauge became an incorporated enterprise. Hence, instead of being the sole proprietorship of one Winfred S* Krueger, it is now a corporation wholly owned by Winfred S. Krueger. This change in ownership is therefore solely a matter of form which, in our opinion, is not material to the issue of the continued appro- priateness of the two-employer unit. The record shows that the last instance of interchange of employees occured in the fall of 1950. There is, however, no evidence to show that frequent interchange of employees was a determinative factor in the Board's 1947 decision. Apart from employee interchange, there are ample reasons for reaffirming the two-employer unit finding of that decision. As noted above, the Employers have common corpo- rate officers, their operations are in the same building and are adjacent to each other. In addition, both Employers utilize the same office; have similar employee health and life insurance programs; and have the same overtime policies. And finally, as a result of the election held pursuant to the 1947 decision of the Board, a bargaining repre- sentative was elected and a collective bargaining contract was executed in 1947 covering the employees of both Employers. This contract, although subject to termination by the Employers annually, was con- tinued in effect for 4 years and, as already noted, is even now urged as.a bar to this proceeding by the Employers. Accordingly, we find that the production and maintenance employees of both Employers constitute a separate appropriate unit. There remains only the question of the unit placement of sheet metal workers. About June 1951, Krueger Metal Products acquired the assets and business of Contractors Supply Company, a corporation 3 owned by the principal owners of the Employers, and engaged in the installation of roofing and the fabrication and installation of sheet _ metal. Sheet metal mechanics and apprentices, roofers, and common 71 NLRB 1434. s At the time of the hearing , Contractors Supply Company was in process of dissolution in accordance with the laws of the State of Wisconsin. 998666-vol. 98-53-28 422 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD laborers employed by the Supply Company have been retained, and its operations are now located in the same building housing the operations of the Employers herein. Whereas the Employers would include all the afore-mentioned employee classifications in the unit, the Petitioner would include only roofers and common laborers, leaving representa- tion of the sheet metal mechanics and apprentices to the Sheet Metal Workers, AFL, which has represented them for more than 10 years on a craft basis. The Sheet Metal Workers' current contract, which was executed with Contractors Supply Company, but was assumed by Krueger Metal Products upon its acquisition of the former, expires April 31, 1952. Sheet Metal Workers appeared at the hearing and expressed its desire to continue as bargaining representative of the sheet metal mechanics. No one requests a separate election among the sheet metal mechanics. Accordingly, as the Petitioner does not desire to represent these employees, as it appears that they constitute a craft group which has been accorded separate representation in the past, and as their present bargaining representative desires to continue their representation on a craft basis, we shall exclude the sheet metal mechanics and their apprentices from the production and maintenance unit. We find that all production and maintenance employees of Krueger Sentry Gauge Co. and of Krueger Metal Products, Inc., Green Bay, Wisconsin, including roofers and common laborers, but excluding sheet metal mechanics and their apprentices, guards, professional employees, and supervisors as defined in the Act, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act. [Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this volume.] STIBBS TRANSPORTATION LINES, INC. an l THOMAS CROGAN AND JOHN H. LENNON, JR. Case No. 1-CA-8?9. March 4, 1952 Decision and Order On August 15, 1951, Trial Examiner Bertram G. Eadie, issued his Intermediate Report in the above-entitled proceeding, finding that the Respondent had engaged in and was engaging in certain unfair labor practices and recommending that it cease and desist therefrom and take certain affirmative action, as set forth in the copy of the Inter- mediate Report attached hereto. Thereafter, the Respondent and the General Counsel filed exceptions to parts of the Intermediate Report and supporting briefs. 98 NLRB No. 74.