Duncan Foundry and Machine Works, Inc.

298 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD DUNCAN FOUNDRY AND MACHINE WORKS, INC. and UNITED STEELWORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO, Petitioner. Case No. 14-RC-2223. December 9, 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 William E. Hartnett, hearing officer. The hearing officer' s rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. 1 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 labor organizations involved claim to represent certain employees of the Employer. 3. The Employer and the Intervenor, Employees Association o: Duncan Foundry and Machine Works, Inc., contend that their 3-year contract, effective until May 21, 1954, bars a present determination of the bargaining representative. However, we find that the contract is not a bar to this pro- ceeding.3 We find, therefore, that a question affecting com- merce 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. In accordance with the stipulation of the parties, we find that all employees of the Employer, including cast clerks, sample clerks, and messengers clerks, but excluding guards, office employees, officials, 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.] 1 The hearing officer referred to the Board the Intervenor's motion to dismiss the petition on the ground that the Petitioner had not made a sufficient showing of interest. The motion is denied, as showing of interest is an administrative matter, not litigable by the parties. Yellow Cab Company, 103 NLRB 395. 2The requests by the Employer and Intervenor for oral argument are hereby denied, as the record and the briefs, in our opinion, adequately present the issues and the positions of the parties. 3 Chairman Farmer and Member Rodgers find that the contract is not a bar. However, they express no opinion now as to what effect they would accord evidence that a substantial part of the industry involved was covered by contracts of more than 2 years' duration. Members Murdock and Peterson find the current contract to be no bar because it has been in effect for over 2 years and there is no showing that a substantial part of the ferrous foundry industry is covered by contracts of 3 years' duration. General Motors Corporation, Detroit Transmission Division, 102 NLRB 1140; Joseph Aronauer, Inc., 106 NLRB No 243. 107 NLRB No. 76.