Metal Products Corp.

94 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD With respect to Ezell Necaise who was offered employment on October 22, but to a job not equivalent to the one he held when he went on strike and paying 10 cents an hour less, it will be recommended that Respondent offer him immediate and full reinstatement to his former or substantially equivalent position , without prejudice to his seniority or other rights and priv- ileges, and make him whole for any loss of pay he may have suffered by reason of Respondent's discrimination against him by payment to him of a sum of money equal to that which he would normally have earned as wages from August 5, 1952, to the date of offer of reinstatement, less his net earnings during that period. All computation of back pay shall be made in accordance with the rules and methods laid down by the Board in Crossett Lumber Company, 8 NLRB 440, and F. W. Woolworth Company, 90 NLRB 289. Because of Respondent's unlawful conduct as heretofore found, and its underlying purpose, I am convinced that the unfair labor practices found are persuasively related to the other unfair labor practices proscribed by the Act and that the danger of their commission in the future is to be anticipated from the course of Respondent 's conduct in the past. The preven- tive purpose of the Act will be forwarded unless the recommendations are coextensive with the threat. In order, therefore, to make effective the interdependent guarantees of Section 7, to prevent a recurrence of unfair labor practices , and to minimize strife which burdens and obstructs commerce, and thus to effectuate the policies of the Act , it will be recommended that Respondent cease and desist from in any manner interfering with, restraining , or coercing its employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed by Section 7 of the Act. Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact, and upon the entire record in the case, I make the following: CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. By discharging Hillman Ladner, Lovander Ladner, and Tillman Ladner, on July 31. 1952, Respondent violated Section 8 (a) (1) and 8 (a) (3) of the Act. 2. The strike of, July 31, 1952, was caused and prolonged by Respondent 's unfair labor practices. 3. By refusing, on August 5, 1952, to reinstate Roy Anderson, W. L. Anderson, Edward Collins, Leroy Cuevas, Clinton Dedeaux , Ruben Descheamp , JohnW. Estapa, Paul Giadrosich, T. V. Hickman, Earnest Ladner, Everett Ladner, Ezell Necaise, Joseph Necaise, Laurence Necaise, and Clifton Saucier, Respondent violated Section 8 (a) (1) and 8 (a) (3) of the Act. 4. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. 5. Respondent has not interrogated or threatened its employees in violation of Section 8 (a) (1) of the Act. [Recommendations omitted from publication.] METAL PRODUCTS CORPORATION and UNITED STEEL WORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO, Petitioner. Case No. 10- RC-2412. November 18, 1953 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 Karl W. Filter, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. The Employer's motion to dismiss the petition on the ground that the Employer did not receive affirmative evidence of the Petitoner's compliance with Section 9 of the Act is 107 NLRB No. 33. METAL PRODUCTS CORPORATION 95 denied. We are administratively advised that the Petitioner is in compliance with the Act.' The Intervenor ' s motion to dismiss the petition on the ground that the Petitoner is "fronting" for a noncomplying local representing the employees sought is denied . So far as the record discloses , no local of the Petitioner represents these employees. 2 Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds: 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. 2. United Steelworkers of America, CIO, herein called the Petitioner, and International Association of Machinists, Lodge No. 613, AFL, herein called the Intervenor, are labor organi- zations claiming to represent certain employees of the Em- ployer. 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 Petitioner seeks to represent production and main- tenance employees at the Employer's metal products manu- facturing plants, located at Hialeah and Miami, Florida, respectively. The Intervenor agrees that the proposed two- plant unit is appropriate. The Employer urges that production and maintenance employees at each plant constitute a separate unit; and that the two-plant unit is not appropriate. The Employer, a Florida corporation, has its central offices and main plant at Miami, Florida. The 2 Florida p 1 a n t s, which are 8 to 10 miles apart, are operated under the control of a factory manager at the Miami plant. A subordiante super- visor is in direct charge of employees at each plant. The central office at the Miami plant serves both plants with respect to hiring and other personnel matters. An overall seniority list covers employees at both plants. The Miami plant manufactures certain parts for one of the finished products produced at the Hialeah plant. The Intervenor, which has represented employees at the Miami plant since 1946, presently represents the Employer's production and main- tenance employees at both plants under a 1951 contract, which expired on September 2, 1953.3 Under these circumstances, we find that the existing 2 - plant unit is appropriate for bargaining purposes.4 The Employer would exclude, as managerial employees, inspectors; timekeepers; vehicle drivers; and tool -crib attend - ants, all of whom are presently included in the contract unit 'American Service Bureau, 105 NLRB 485 2 William L. Hoge and Co , Inc., 103 NLRB 20. 3 The record does not disclose the date when the Hialeah plant was established nor the date when the Intervenor included the Hialeah employees in its contract unit. 4Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corporation, 100 NLRB 107; Underwood Corporation 101 NLRB 25. 96 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD represented by the Intervenor . The inspectors , of whom there are 57, inspect materials and workmanship to insure that the Employer' s products meet Government contract specifications and the requirements of its private customers. The one timekeeper performs the usual duties of that plant, clerical classification . Of the 2 vehicl e drivers , 1 picks up and delivers local communications ; delivers goods to local customers ; and provides transportation for visiting customers and Government officials . The other delivers raw materials to the plant and finished goods to customers. The 2 tool-crib attendants issue supplies and tools to plant employees . On the basis of the record , we find that these employees are not managerial , but have common interests with plant employees , and we therefore include inspectors, timekeepers , vehicle drivers, and tool-crib attendants in the production and maintenance unit. The Employer would exclude, -as supervisors , the assistant shipping clerk, the chief packer , and 2 leadermen, all of whom have been previously included in the contract unit. The assistant shipping clerk maintains records, makes out bills of lading , and initials his own orders in the shipping depart- ment under limited delegated authority. With the shipping clerk, he directs the work of approximately 10 shipping department employees . The chief packer and other packers perform manual work. The chief packer also keeps records and directs other packing employees . Leadermen are respon- sible to the foremen for the production and work records of particular groups of employees , whom they direct. Leadermen devote 80 percent of their time to manual operations. The assistant shipping clerk , the chief packer , and leadermen are all authorized to recommend discharge , and each of them responsibly directs other employees . We find , therefore, that they are supervisors within the meaning of the Act, and we exclude them from the unit.6 We find that all production and maintenance employees at the Employer' s Miami and Hialeah, Florida, metal products manufacturing plants, including inspectors , timekeepers, ve- hicle drivers , and tool -crib attendants , but excluding office- clerical employees , technical and professional employees, guards, watchmen , the assistant shipping clerk, the chief packer, leadermen , and all other supervisors as defined in the Act, is appropriate for the purposes of collective bar- gaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act. [Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.] 5Palmer Manufacturing Company, 103 NLRB 336 (inspectors and timekeepers); Brighton Mills, Inc., 97 NLRB 774 (vehicle drivers); Thermoid Company, 74 NLRB 524, 526; cf. D M Steward Manufacturing Company, 102 NLRB 461. 6The Wichita Water Company, 93 NLRB 895, 897; Edward Brothers, Inc., 95 NLRB 1451, 1453-1454; Miller Electric Company, 103 NLRB 1492