Clay & Bailey Manufacturing Co.

21 0 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD the meaning of the Act.3 We therefore find that Civilian Cafeteria Board is not an employer within the meaning of Sec- tion 2A2) of the Act, and we shall therefore dismiss the instant petition. [The Board dismissed the petition] s National Food Corporation, 88 NLRB 1500. CLAY & BAILEY MANUFACTURING COMPANY and MORGAN FOUNDRY COMPANY and INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS, DISTRICT LODGE NO. 71, AFL, Petitioner. Case No. 17-RC-1590. July 17, 1953 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Cyrus A. Slater, 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 Peterson]. 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 organizations involved claim to represent certain employees of the Employers. 3. 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 main issue in this case goes to the scope of the unit. The Petitioner requests a multiemployer unit of the production and maintenance employees of the Clay & Bailey Manufacturing Company, herein called Clay & Bailey, and of the Morgan Foundry Company, herein called Morgan Foundry. International Molders and Foundry Workers Union of North America, AFL, herein called the Molders , seeks to represent only the Morgan Foundry employees. The two Employers, in agreement with the Molders, contend that only separate units for each company are appropriate. Clay & Bailey is a machine shop engaged in the manufacture and sale of plumbing specialties, oil equipment, and special equipment for the storage, transportation , and marketing of petroleum products . Morgan Foundry is a foundry engaged in the manufacture and sale of gray iron castings made from customers' patterns. Each company is a separate Missouri corporation. Clay & Bailey purchases approximately 10 to 15 106 NLRB No 40. CLAY & BAILEY MANUFACTURING COMPANY 211 percent of its required castings from Morgan Foundry. These purchases constitute about 25 percent of the latter company's sales. The record shows factors supporting the appropriateness of the multiemployer unit sought by the Petitioner. Thus, control and management of both corporations are vested in three members of the Clay family and in Henry Bailey, who together are the principal officers and members of the board of directors of the two companies. Their plants are adjacent, separated only by an alleyway. Both companies have the same mailing address and telephone listing. One office building is used by both companies, and, for a fixed weekly reimburse- ment, clerical employees employed by Clay & Bailey do the office work for Morgan Foundry, including maintenance of personnel records and preparation of paychecks. The treasurer of Morgan Foundry is carried on the payroll of Clay & Bailey and does the accounting work for that company. The record indicates that because of these facts, the employees of Morgan Foundry generally consider themselves to be employees of Clay & Bailey. On the other hand, certain other factors support the appro- priateness of a separate unit confined to the employees of Morgan Foundry, as desired by the Molders. There is no integration of the operations of the two companies; their products are entirely different; and the skills required and exercised by the two. groups of employees fall in unrelated categories. There is no employee interchange or transfer between plants. The employees are separately supervised, have different working hours, and receive different rates of pay and vacation benefits. From 1937 until 1940 the employees of the two companies were represented under separate bargain- ing agreements by the United Steelworkers of America, CIO. From 1940 until approximately 1946 the employees of Morgan Foundry were represented by the Molders. It does not appear that any of the employees here involved have been represented in collective bargaining since. While this bargaining history is somewhat remote and, therefore, not controlling now, it tends to give additional weight to the Molders' assertion of the appropriateness of a separate unit for the Morgan Company employees. In view of the foregoing and on the entire record we are of the opinion that the production and maintenance employees of the 2 companies may together constitute an appropriate unit; 1 they may also, if they so desire, constitute 2 separate units, 1 for each plant.' Accordingly, we shall make no final unit determination at this time, but shall direct that the questions concerning representation which exist be resolved by separate elections by secret ballot among the employees in the following voting groups: 'Lloyd A Fry Roofing Co., et al, 92 NLRB 1170. 2 Silverstein Brothers Inc , 93 NLRB 1047; Southern Industry Co , 78 NLRB 425. 322615 0 - 54 - 15 2 12 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 1. All production and maintenance employees employed at the Clay & Bailey Manufacturing Company's Kansas City, Missouri, plant, excluding truckdrivers, office clerical em- ployees , professional employees , guards, and all supervisors as defined in the Act. 2. All production and maintenance employees employed at the Morgan Foundry Company's Kansas City, Missouri, plant, excluding truckdrivers , office clerical employees , professional employees , guards, and all supervisors as defined in the Act. Upon the results of these elections will depend, in part, our final unit determination . If the employees in group 2 select a bargaining representative different from that selected by the employees in group 1, the Board finds that the group 2 employees constitute a separate appropriate unit; and in these circumstances if the employees in group 1 also select a bargaining representative the Board finds that the employees in group 1 also constitute an appropriate bargaining unit. If the employees in the two groups select the same bargaining representative , the Board finds that together they constitute an appropriate unit. The Regional Director conducting the elections directed herein is instructed to issue a certification of representatives to the union or unions in the unit or units which may result from the elections. [Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication.] LEE BROTHERS FOUNDRY, INC. and INTERNATIONAL AS- SOCIATION OF MACHINISTS, DISTRICT LODGE NO. 178, A.F.L., Petitioner. Cases Nos . 10-RC-2305, 10-RC-2306, and 10 -RC-2307. July 17, 1953 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS Upon petitions duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Gilbert Cohen, 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 these cases to a three -member panel [ Members Houston, Styles, and Peterson]. Upon the entire record in these cases, the Board finds: 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. 2. The labor organization involved claims to represent cer- tain employees of the Employer. 3. A 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. 4. The appropriate units: In Case No . 10-RC -2306, the Petitioner seeks a separate unit of all toolroom and machine shops' employees at the 106 NLRB No. 42.