National Cash Register, Co.

486 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD We have considered the Regional Director's report, the Petitioner's exceptions, and the Employer's response to the exceptions. On the basis of the entire record it appears that Childers was terminated on June 10, 1957, and at a preelection conference on eligibility, attended by a Board agent, the Employer took the position that Childers had no expectation of reemployment. Childers' name was therefore omit- ted from the list of eligible voters. In these circumstances, and for the reasons stated in the Regional Director's report, we find no merit in the Petitioner's exceptions. Therefore we shall sustain the challenge to Childers' ballot. No exceptions were filed to the Regional Director's recommendation that the challenged ballot of Alfred Montellano be overruled. How- ever, inasmuch as Montellano's ballot is insufficient to affect the re- sults of the election, in that none of the ballot choices could receive a majority of the valid votes cast, we find, in agreement with the Regional Director, that no useful purpose would be served in open- ing and counting Montellano's ballot. Accordingly, as the Petitioner has failed to secure a majority of the valid ballots cast, we deny the Petitioner's request for a hearing and shall certify the results of the election. [The Board certified that a majority of the valid ballots was not cast for Local 639, Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America, and that said organization is not the exclusive representative of the Em- ployer's employees in the appropriate unit.] National Cash Register Co. and Local 33, Amalgamated Lithog- raphers of America, AFL-CIO, Petitioner. Case No. 9-RC- 3089. November 14,1957 DECISION AND ORDER Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before William C. Humphrey, 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 National Labor Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member panel [Chairman Leedom and Members Rodgers and Jenkins]. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds : 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. 119 NLRB No. 62. NATIONAL CASH REGISTER CO. 487 2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent certain em- ployees of the Employer.' 3. At its Dayton, Ohio, plant here involved, the Employer manu- factures cash registers and other types of business machines as well as supplies essential to the operation of those machines. The Pe- titioner seeks a unit of the lithographic production employees in the printing division of the plant. Such a unit would embrace approxi- mately 63 employees, viz, 23 platemakers and strippers, 39 offset press operators, apprentices, assistants, and helpers, and 1 cameraman .2 If found by the Board to belong in the unit, the Petitioner would also be willing to represent the operators of five multilith machines in the office services department. It is contended that existing contracts between the Employer and the Photo Engravers and the Independent bar this proceeding.' There is no merit in this contention. The record shows that on April 16, 1956, the Photo Engravers forwarded to the Employer a contract which it had negotiated with an association of photoengravers in Dayton with which the Employer was not connected.' As was its practice with respect to past contracts executed between the employers' association and the Photo Engravers, the Employer, about April 18, 1956, orally notified the Photo Engravers, in effect, that it would apply to its cameramen the sections of the contract which were not in conflict with company policies. The applicable provisions of the con- tract were then put into effect by the Employer.5 The instant petition was filed on March 29, 1957. By letter to the Photo Engravers dated April 16, 1957, the Employer confirmed its oral acceptance of the contract. As for the contract between the Employer and the Inde- pendent, which covers the multilith operators, it became effective on April 29, 1954, and provides,that it shall remain in effect until June 1, 1958. It is plain from these facts that no contract bar exists herein. The arrangement between the Employer and the Photo Engravers obtaining on the date of the filing of the petition constituted, at best, only an oral contract.' And the Employer's contract with the Inde- 1 Local 54, International Printing Pressmen and Assistants' Union of North America, AFL-CIO, International Photo Engravers Union of North America, Dayton Local #60, and NCR Employees' Independent Union, hereinafter referred to as the Printing Pressmen, Photo Engravers , and the Independent, respectively, intervened at the hearing. a While the Employer employs 2 cameramen , Petitioner requests only the 1 who spends substantially all his time in offset work. The other cameraman spends about 90 percent of his time in nonoffset work. 3 As appears hereinafter , employees whom the Photo Engravers and the Independent claim to represent under contract belong in a lithographic unit such as is requested by Petitioner. 4It is not contended that the Employer was bound by the actions of this association. 5 The provisions of the contract not accepted by the Employer relate to such matters as hours of work, holiday pay, and vacation benefits. e See Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc., 108 NLRB 1468 . The Employer's letter of April 16, 1957, clearly cannot serve to change this fact. Phelps Dodge Refining corpora- tion, 112 NLRB 1209 , upon which the Printing Pressmen relies in this connection, is a wholly distinguishable case. 488 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD pendent has already been in effect for more than 2 years and the record does not establish that a substantial part of the industry into which the Employer's business falls is covered by collective-bargaining agreements of more than 2 years' duration? While no contract bars this proceeding, we nevertheless find, for the reasons which follow, that no 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 : The Petitioner has represented the platemakers and strippers since 1953, the first complete contract covering them being executed in 1955. The other lithographic production employees whom the Petitioner would join in a single unit with the platemakers and strippers, as well. as the multilith operators, whom the Petitioner would also include in the unit if found by the Board to belong therein, are currently part of existing units represented by the intervening unions. Thus, the Printing Pressmen has been the contractual bar- gaining representative of the offset- and letter-pressmen, representing both groups in the same unit, since 1949; 8 the Photo Engravers and the Employer have maintained the arrangement described above with respect to the cameramen since 1951; and the Independent, which has been the contractual bargaining representative of the Employer's production and maintenance employees, excluding the printing crafts, since 1939, represents the multilith operators as part of the plantwide unit. The lithographic employees sought by the Petitioner utilize stand- ard lithographic equipment and perform the usual duties and exercise the customary skills involved in the traditional lithographic process.' There is no interchange of functions between the offset cameraman and platemakers and strippers and the other employees in the plant. Of the 39 employees comprising the offset press crews, about 8 em- ployees are occasionally assigned to letterpress work during the course of a year "to take care of special situations," spending about 10 per- cent of their time at such work. Letterpressmen are only rarely required to do offset printing. The multilith operators work in the office services department, physically separated from, and under different supervision from, the other employees involved herein. Unlike those employees, they pro- duce supplies for intracompany use rather than for sale. A 6-week training course is required for the job they perform. 7 Zip-O -Log Veneer, Inc., 112 NLRB 1303 ; Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc., supra. 8 Between 1.941 and 1949 , the Printing Pressmen represented the Employer 's press crew under an arrangement, similar to that existing between the Employer and Photo Engravers, whereby the Employer agreed to abide by the provisions of contracts negotiated by the Printing Pressmen for other press operators 'n the area. 9 Offset pressmen are required to serve an apprenticeship period of 4 years before becom- ing journeymen . The platemakers and strippers also serve apprenticeships. WELEX JET SERVICES, INC. 489 The Board has frequently considered the skills and techniques incident to the lithographic process and has held that all employees engaged in the lithographic process form an indivisible entity for the purposes of collective bargaining and that such employees may, if they so desire, constitute a separate appropriate unit even though previously included in a broader unit.10 Multilith operators are included by the Board in such units because the multilith operation, like the Employer's herein, is essentially lithographic in character." It accordingly follows that the lithographic employees sought by the Petitioner, together with the multilith operators, may constitute a separate appropriate unit.12 However, Board policy precludes the severance of employees in the position of the offset press employees, the multilith operators, and the cameraman, and their inclusion in a unit with other employees, without first ascertaining their desires by means of separate elections; and before directing a self-determination election, the Board must be administratively satisfied that the peti- tioning union has sufficient representative interest in the group of employees in question.13 In the instant case, the Petitioner has failed to make the necessary showing of interest among the multilith op- erators and cameraman, although it has made an adequate showing in the offset press group. No appropriate election can therefore be held among the multilith operations and cameraman. In view thereof, and because, as indicated above, a segment of the Employer's litho- graphic employees would not constitute an appropriate unit, we shall dismiss the petition. [The Board dismissed the petition.] 10 See, for example, McCall Corporation, 118 NLRB 1332; A. B. Hirschfeld Press, Inc., 96 NLRB 1068, 11 Fey Publishing Company, 1.08 NLRB 1031 ; The Standard Printing Company, Inc., 80 NLRB 338. 12 Petitioner is a union which traditionally represents lithographic employees. 13lnternation al Minerals J Chemical Corporation (Potash Division ), 113 NLRB 53: Pennsylvania Electric Company, 110 NLRB 1078; Combustion Engineering, Inc., Chatta- nooga Division, 114 NLRB 706) ; Mathieson Chemical Corporation, 100 NLRB 1028 ; New Jersey Brewers Association, 92 NLRB 1404. Welex Jet Services, Inc. and Lodge 1591 , International Associ- ation of Machinists, AFL-CIO, Petitioner. Case No. 16-BC- 2122. November 14,1957 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 H. Henkel, Jr., hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. 119 NLRB No. 61.