The Cooper-Bessemer Corp.

'62 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD The Cooper-Bessemer Corporation and International Molders and Allied Workers Union, AFL-CIO 1 The Cooper-Bessemer Corporation and International Associa. tion of Machinists, Lodge No. 90, AFL-CIO.2 Cases Nos. VIII- R-371 and VIII-R-521. June 25, 1963 ORDER CLARIFYING CERTIFICATION On November 29, 1940, in Case No. VIII-R-371, the Regional Director for the Eighth Region issued a consent payroll check report, certifying the Molders as the collective-bargaining representative of "employees in the Foundry Department" excluding, among others, "maintenance men," at the Mount Vernon, Ohio, plant of The Cooper- Bessemer Corporation, herein called the Employer; and on July 1, 1941, in Case No. VIII-R-521, the IAM pursuant to a consent payroll check report was certified by the Regional Director for the Eighth Region as the collective-bargaining representative of "all production and maintenance employees in the Machine Shop Department" exclud- ing, among others, "foundry employees" at the Employer's Mount Vernon, Ohio, plant. Thereafter, by letter dated February 25, 1963, the Employer requested a clarification by the Board of the status of electricians working in the foundry department, hereinafter called foundry electricians, asking that it be determined whether they be- longed to the bargaining unit certified to the Molders, or to the bar- gaining unit certified to the IAM, stating that some four or five em- ployees are involved in this request for clarification. On April 18, 1963, the Board directed that a hearing be held to de- termine, in effect, the unit placement of the foundry electricians. A hearing was held before Norman R. Prusa, hearing officer, on May 14, 1963. All parties, the Employer, the Molders, and the IAM, ap- peared and participated in the hearing. 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 [Members Leedom, Fanning, and Brown]. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds : The Employer favors the inclusion of the foundry electricians in the JAM unit. The Molders take the position that they properly rep- resent the foundry electricians and that they should be included in 1 The name of the Union appears as amended at the hearing, and is referred to herein as Molders. 'The name of the Union appears as amended at the hearing, and is referred to herein as IAM 143 NLRB No. 13. THE COOPER-BESSEMER CORPORATION 63 the foundry department unit. The IAM disclaims any interest in the four employees. The history of bargaining shows that since the above certifications, the Employer has negotiated a number of collective-bargaining agree- ments with both unions. Electricians working in the foundry were first mentioned in the November 19, 1941, wage agreement between the Employer and the Molders. The Employer's and Molders' Novem- ber 19, 1942, collective-bargaining agreement's recognition clause recognized the Molders as the "exclusive representative of all em- ployees in the Foundry Department including electricians working in the foundry most of their time." All Molders contracts since that time, including the current contract, have contained this identical language in the recognition clause. The IAM does not now and has not at any time voiced an objection to the inclusion of foundry elec- tricians in the Molders unit even though it represents all the other electricians in the maintenance department. The Employer's maintenance department, headed by a superintend- ent of maintenance, is subdivided into four divisions; general mainte- nance, mechanical maintenance, millwrights, and electricians. Each has a foreman. All employees classified by Employer as electricians, except the foundry electricians, are included in the IAM unit, and are members of and represented by the IAM. The foundry electricians are represented by and are members of the Molders Union. As the Em- ployer negotiates jointly with both unions on economic issues, all the electricians enjoy the same wages, hours, fringe benefits, vacations, ,shift premiums, insurances, and retirement. Seniority on the other hand is maintained separately for each group of electricians. While the duties of the foundry electricians involve substantially the same- functions as are performed by the IAM electricians on the other plant equipment, and indeed they are un der the same supervisors, the foundry, electricians have been restricted to working in the foundry except on rare occasions when an emergency requires their assistance elsewhere in the plant. However, there is no interchange of foundry and IAbf electricians except in cases of emergencies. On the record as a whole, particularly the fact that foundry elec- tricians have been represented by the Molders and specifically included in collective agreements since 1941 without objection by the IAM and the fact that the IAM does not seek to represent the foundry elec- tricians, we find they are properly a part of and should be included in the Molders unit. Accordingly, we grant the Employer's motion, and we hereby clarify the unit by including these employees in the unit rep- resented by the International Molders and Allied Workers Union, AFL-CIO. [The Board clarified the certification in Case No. VIII-R-371 by specifically including in the description of the appropriate unit elec- tricians working in the foundry department.]