Knox Glass Bottle Co.

36 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD and dispatchers, plant cafeteria employees, hourly paid scalers and order fillers in the city sales department, hourly and weekly paid dock checkers, hourly and weekly paid scalers, hourly paid storeroom em- ployees, and all dressing room attendants, excluding weekly paid storeroom employees, all office and clerical employees, plant clerks, employees in the employees' store, research laboratory employees, brick masons, draftsmen, standards department employees, plant pro- tection employees (policemen, bell pullers, firemen, and watchmen), 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.] KNOx GLASS BOTTLE COMPANY and LODGE No. 1597, INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS, AFL, PETITIONER. Case No. 15-RC- 755. October 21, 1952 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 J. Mart Mitchell, 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- member panel [Members Houston, Murdock, and Styles]. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds : 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. 2. The Petitioner, and Glass Bottle Blowers Association of the United States and Canada, A. F. of L., Local No. 230, herein called the Intervenor, are labor organizations claiming to represent certain employees of the Employer. 3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa- tion of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Acts 4. The appropriate unit : i We reject as without merit the Employer's contention that the Petitioner's failure to submit a showing of interest after the filing of the instant petition constituted a fatal de- fect. An adequate and sufficiently current showing of interest was already on file with the Board in connection with a previous petition of the Petitioner (which was withdrawn) filed about 1% months before the present petition . Moreover , the question of a showing of representative interest is entirely an administrative matter not litigable by the parties at the hearing. 100 NLRB No. 14. KNOX GLASS BOTTLE COMPANY 37 The Petitioner seeks to sever from an existing production and maintenance unit "all machinists, machinist apprentices or learners, and machinist helpers or laborers regularly assigned to work with employees of machinist classifications" employed at the Employer's Jackson, Mississippi, plants, excluding all other employees and super- visors as defined in the Act. The Employer and the Intervenor con- tend that the severance of such a unit is precluded on the grounds of (a) the integration of operations in the glass container manufacturing industry, which is analogized to the basic steel industry; (b) a long history of collective bargaining on an industrial basis at the Employ- er's plants and throughout the industry; and (c) the absence of the necessary craft characteristics and functions on the part of the em- ployees sought by the Petitioner. The Employer's Operations The Employer is engaged in the manufacture of glass containers at three plants.2 One of these plants, located in Palestine, Texas, is not involved in this proceeding. The two plants in Jackson, Mis- sissippi, are adjacent to each other and are operated in effect as a single plant. At both plants virtually the same manufacturing process is used. It was testified that after the unloading and mixing of the prescribed raw ingredients, constituting the "batch," the operation is "continuous and completely automatic" until the finished prod- uct is ready to be packaged. In substance, the process consists of the automatic movement of the "batch" through successive tandem operations over a distance of approximately 200 feet, during which (a) the raw materials are melted at high temperatures in brick-lined furnaces, (b) the molted glass is refined by subjection to temperature changes, (c) the mass is fed through an orifice in the forming ma- chine which measures the weight and shape of a "gob," (d) and drops the "gob" into the forming machine where a needle and jet of air form the desired type of glass bottle, (e) the bottles are conveyed through a lehr, or cooling oven, (f) and finally arrive at the packing table where they are inspected and packed manually. The Machine Shop The Employer's machine shop, which services both Jackson plants, is located in a separate area in plant #2. The shop is under the separate supervision of Foreman Miller, concededly a supervisor under the Act, but who is not a machinist himself.3 Regularly employed 2 The Employer is in turn a subsidiary of Knox Glass Bottle Company of Pennsylvania. 3 The lines of supervision are not clearly defined in the record . It appears from the testimony that in certain circumstances Foreman Miller does exercise direction over em- ployees other than those in the machine shop. and that similarly other supervisors issue instructions to the machine shop employees when they are working outside the machine shop. 38 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD or headquartered in the machine shop are three maintenance machin- ists, two machinist apprentices or learners, and an employee classified as a laborer (Fleming). (These are the employees sought by the Peti- tioner.) All of these employees, except one machinist, Rhodes, spend the greater part of their working time in the machine shop,4 and the balance of their time repairing machines in the production areas of both plants. Rhodes, however, devotes the major part of his time in machinist maintenance work outside the machine shop. Other em- ployees occasionally use certain of the equipment located in the machine shop, and electricians come in to check and lubricate the electric motors, but only the machinists and the apprentices operate the precision metal cutting tools in the shop, e. g., the lathes, shapers, and milling machine. The machinists are required to perform work at close tolerances.5 A training period of 4 years is required by the Employer before according to learners or apprentices the full status of machinists. Employees have been transferred by the Employer to the machine shop from other departments to commence training as learners; and the Employer has also hired directly experienced machinists at the top contract wage rate. There is no effective evidence of interchange between machinists and other employees. The machinists supply their own tools; do not receive incentive pay as do operating production employees; and work only an 8-hour shift per day, as distinguished from the production employees, who are on the job 24 hours, 7 days per week. The Bargaining History The employees at the Employer's Jackson plant have been covered since about 1935 by four separate collective bargaining agreements, all entered into on a national level between certain unions and the Glass Container Manufacturers Institute : (1) The Employer's ma- chine operators and machine upkeep men were covered by agreement with Local 41 of the Intervenor. (2) The Employer's mold makers and apprentices were covered by an agreement with the Local 152 of the American Flint Glass Worker's Union of North America, A. F. L. (3) Certain of the Employer's laborers were covered by an agreement of Local 258 of the Intervenor. (4) Miscellaneous production and 4 Machinist Shivers testified that he and machinist Tanner spent about 95 percent of their time in the machine shop. 6 Machine upkeep men employed in the forming area have the function of regularly maintaining the forming machines. Machine operators operate these machines. ( As noted below, the machine upkeep men and operators are in a separate contract unit. ), In re- pairing the forming machines , machinists and upkeep men work together in the forming area. It is clear, however, that in this connection the upkeep men perform no machinist functions but confine their work essentially to assembling and disassembling the machines. There are also employed in maintenance work at the Jackson plants, e. g., electricians, carpenters , painters and welders . These employees do not operate as part of the machine shop and have different immediate supervision from that of the machinists. KNOX GLASS BOTTLE COMPANY 39 maintenance employees, including the machine shop employees here sought by the Petitioner, were covered by an agreement with Local 230 of the Intervenor. It was testified that similar contracts with these unions have been in effect in the industry for about 50 years. Conclusions On the basis of the foregoing, we are not convinced, as contended by the Employer and the Intervenor, that in the glass container manu- facturing industry, as in the basic steel and aluminum reduction indus- tries, all of the employees are so integrated in production operations as to preclude the establishment of a separate craft unit for collective bargaining purposes.6 More specifically, the record here does not sup- port a finding that the machine shop employees sought by the Peti- tioner are engaged in repetitive, routine, or prescheduled work at fixed stations along a line of production, or that their maintenance functions are otherwise so closely identified with the production operations as to be indistinct.' Nor in this context does the contention that the in- dustrial pattern of collective bargaining, long in effect at the Employ- er's plants and in the industry, and the direct participation in such bargaining by the individual machinists, lend significant weight in op- position to severance of a machinist craft unit .8 Indeed, the bargain- ing history shown in this case on the basis of four separate contract units, whether or not any of these have been erected along craft lines,' serves only to defeat the integration argument of the Employer and the Intervenor and their attempted analogy with the decisions of the Board regarding units in the basic steel industry where only a single production and maintenance unit has been held appropriate. Nor do we find merit in the further contention that the machinists and their apprentices at the Jackson plants do not, in any event, perform true craft functions. The evidence is clear, and we find, that these em- ployees, who must undergo a 4-year minimum training period, do utilize in their work the traditional skills of the machinists' trade and thus satisfy the Board's customary requirements for representation in a separate bargaining unit, if they so choose in the election to be di- rected herein. The laborer in the machine shop (Fleming) is sought to be in- cluded by the Petitioner allegedly as a machinists' helper. The rec- ord shows that Fleming is employed specifically to assist Foreman Cf, e. g, National Tube Company, 76 NLRB 1199 ; The Permanente Metals Corpora- tion, 89 NLRB 804. ° See Oregon Portland Cement Company, 92 NLRB 695. 8 See Westinghouse Electric Corporation, 75 NLRB 638; The Reliance Electric cE Engi- neering Co., 98 NLRB 488. 6 Cf. Ball Brothers Company, 85 NLRB 298, in which the Board speaks of the "tradi- tional skills of mold makers" in this industry. 40 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Miller, who is not a machinist, rather than as a helper to the ma- chinists or their apprentices. It was testified without contradic- tion that Fleming is not assigned to the machine shop as such, although it is clear that he spends about 60 percent of his time within the shop, where he devotes himself largely to threading and cutting pipe, a task not related to machinist work. In the production area of the plants, Fleming cleans up machines, detaches pipe, disassem- bles machinery to bring into the machine shop, and performs minor mechanical work. As it appears on this record that Fleming is not in fact a machinists' helper and is not a proper part of the machine shop, we shall exclude him. Accordingly, we shall direct a separate election among the follow- ing employees at the Employer's plants at Jackson, Mississippi, ex- cluding employee Fleming, the welders,' all other employees, and supervisors as defined in the Act : All machinists and apprentices or learners. If a majority of the employees indicate, by voting for the Peti- tioner, their desire to be represented in a separate unit, the Board finds such unit to be appropriate and the Regional Director conducting the election directed herein is instructed, in that event, to issue a certification of representatives to the Petitioner for such unit. If a majority of the employees vote for the Intervenor, the Board finds, in such event, that these employees are appropriately represented in the presently existing production and maintenance unit, and in- structs the Regional Director to issue a certification of results of election to that effect. [Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this volume.] 10 The Petitioner stated an alternative position at the hearing that it would accept the welders in the unit only if the Board found the unit inappropriate without them . No other party seeks their inclusion . They are not in the machine shop and do not share the same immediate supervision of the machinists. FOREMAN & CLARK, INC. and LOCAL 297, AMALGAMATED CLOTHING WORKERS OF AMERICA , CIO, PETITIONER. Case No. 21-RC-1836. October 201, 1952 Supplemental Decision, Order, and Second Direction of Election On April 4, 1952, pursuant to the Board's Supplemental Decision and Direction of Election,' an election by secret ballot was conducted, under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Twenty-first Region, among employees in the unit heretofore found 1 97 NLRB 1080. 101 NLRB No. 12.