Combustion Engineering Co., Inc.

In the Matter of COMBUSTION ENGINEERING COMPANY, INC. and LODGE 1230, AMALGAMATED ASSN. OF IRON, STEEL & TIN WORKERS OF NORTH AMERICA Case No. C-1108.-Decided February 20, 1940 . Boiler and Pipe Manufacturing Industry-Interference, Restraint , and Coer- cion-Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : all employees classified as boilermakers in former representation proceeding, and other production and maintenance employees , exclusive of supervisory and clerical employees , foundry employees, and machinists ; unit determined in prior representation proceeding, Globe election-Representatives : proof of choice : certification in prior repre- sentation proceeding, after Globe election-Collective Bargaining : charges of refusal to bargain sustained , where respondent refused to grant exclusive recog- nition on ground that inclusion,by Board of all types of boilermakers in a single unit rendered unit inappropriate , and on asserted ground that. grant of exclu- sive recognition would cause strike of dissenting minority of employees. Mr. Alexander E. Wilson, Jr., for the Board. Sizer, Chambliss d Kefaurver, by Mr. Burnet Sizer and Mr. Jac Chambliss, of Chattanooga, Tenn., for the respondent. Mr. Noel R. Beddow, of Birmingham, Ala., for the Amalgamated and the S. W. O. C. •. Miss Edna Loeb and Mr. Guy Farmer, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND ORDER • STATEMENT OF THE CASE Upon charges duly filed on July 30, 1938, by Lodge 1230, Amal- gamated Association of Iron, Steel & Tin Workers of North America, herein called the Amalgamated, the National Labor Relations Board, herein called the Board, by the Regional Director for the Tenth Region (Atlanta, Georgia), issued its complaint, dated October 8, 19381 against Combustion Engineering Company, Inc., Chattanooga, Tennessee, herein called the respondent, alleging that the respondent had engaged in and was engaging in unfair labor practices affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 8 (1) and (5) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act. Copies of the complaint and accompanying 20 N. L. R. B., No. 62. 602 COMBUSTION ENGINEERING C0AIPAN'Y, INC.'-'- - 603 notices of hearing were duly served upon the respondent- and the Amalgamated. The complaint, in substance, alleged that on or about July 1, 1938, and at all times thereafter, the respondent refused to bargain collectively with the Amalgamated 1 as the exclusive repre- sentatives of the respondent's employees in an appropriate unit con- sisting of all boilermakers and helpers, welders and welding-machine operators, welders' helpers and apprentices, galvanizers, form-press operators, form-machine operators, fit-up men' (except those working on cast iron boiler castings), layers-out and helpers, chippers, grinders, burners, .furnace ;operators, riveters and rivet-machine operators, rivet heaters, reamers, rod room men, testers, test-pit helpers, boilermakers' mechanics, tube men, inspectors and helpers, punch-shear operators, X-ray helpers, sub-foremen, flange workers, tapping-machine opera- tors and helpers, and all other production and maintenance employees, exclusive of foundry employees, supervisory employees, clerical employees, machinists, machinists'. helpers and apprentices, 'header- mill specialists, drill-press operators and helpers; milling-machine operators, drill-machine operators, bolt-machine operators, handy- men, engineers, crane operators employed in the machine shops, planer operators, repairmen, maintenance men, and tool-room helpers em- ployed at the respondent's Hedges-Walsh-Weidner division, Chatta- nooga, Tennessee, and that the. respondent by this and other conduct interfered with, restrained, and coerced its employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act. On October 14,_ 1938, the respondent filed its answer, admitting the allegations of the.complaint concerning the nature and scope of its business, denying the. refusal to bargain, but admitting that it had refused to recognize the Amalgamated as the exclusive representative of the employees in the alleged appropriate unit. Pursuant to notice, a hearing was held at Chattanooga, Tennessee, on October 17, 1938, before Earl S. Bellman, the Trial Examiner duly. , designated by , the Board. The Board, the respondent, the Amalgamated, and Steel. Workers Organizing Committee, herein called the S. W. O. C., were represented by counsel and participated in the hearing. Full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross- examine witnesses; and to introduce evidence bearing upon the issues was afforded all parties. During the course of the hearing, counsel for the respondent moved to have the record in the 'representation proceeding' hereinafter. referred to 2 made a part of the record in the present proceeding. The Trial' Examiner reserved ruling on this motion for 'his Intermediate' Report. At the close of the Board's The Board in the representation proceeding hereinafter referred to certified Amalgam- ated Association of Iron, Steel & Tin' Workers of North America which is the parent organization of the Amalgamated .. For the purposes of this proceeding we consider the Amalgamated and its parent organization as one and- the same labor organization. a See Section III below. 604 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD case counsel for the Board moved to have the pleadings .conformed to the proof. The motion was granted by the Trial Examiner. - The Board has reviewed the rulings of. the Trial Examiner at the hearing on motions and on objections to the admission of evidence and finds that no prejudicial errors were committed. The rulings are hereby affirmed. On December 27, 1938, the Trial Examiner issued his Intermediate Report, finding that the respondent had engaged. in and was en- gaging in the unfair labor practices alleged in the complaint, and recommending that the respondent cease and desist therefrom and upon request bargain collectively with the Amalgamated as the ex- clusive representative of its employees in the unit. In his Inter- mediate Report the Trial Examiner denied the motion made by the respondent at the hearing to incorporate the record in the repre- sentation case into the record of this proceeding. The Board has reviewed this ruling and finds that the Trial Examiner erred in denying the motion of the respondent. The ruling is hereby re- versed and the record in the representation case is hereby made a part of the record in the present proceeding. On January 9, 1939, the respondent filed exceptions to the Intermediate Report and, on February 9, 1939, filed a brief. Pursuant ' to notice to the respond- ent, the Amalgamated, and the S. W. O. C., a hearing was held before the Board in Washington, D. C., on April 13, 1939, for the purpose of oral argument. The respondent appeared by counsel and participated in the oral argument. The Board has considered the respondent's exceptions to the Intermediate Report and its brief in support thereof, and to the extent that they are inconsistent with the findings, conclusions, and order below, finds the exceptions to be without merit. Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT I. THE BUSINESS OF THE RESPONDENT Combustion Engineering Company, Inc., is a Delaware corpo- ration with its principal executive offices located in New York City and branch offices located in a number of States in the United States. The issues in this case are confined to the plant which the re- spondent operates at Chattanooga, Tennessee. At this plant, which is known as the Hedges-Walsh-Weidner division, the respondent is engaged in the manufacture of range boilers, power boilers, miscel- laneous pressure vessels, soil pipe, and boiler accessories. _ All the raw materials used in the operation of the Hedges-Walsh-Weidner division are procured from points outside Tennessee. Approximately COMBUSTION ENGINEERING. COMPANY, INC. 605 12,000 tons of pig iron, 6,000 tons of sheet steel, 1,000 tons of struc- tural steel plate, 500 tons of steel bars, 6,000 tons of steel boiler plate, and 345 tons of spelter (zinc), all used in the course of a year, are shipped to the plant by rail from Alabama, Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Texas. The products manufactured and sold by this division annually are valued at approximately $3,500,000, and over 90 per cent of such products are shipped to points outside Tennessee. The pay roll lists 913 employees, exclusive of supervisory and clerical employees. II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED Amalgamated Association of Iron, Steel & Tin Workers of North America is a labor organization affiliated with the Committee for Industrial Organization. Lodge 1230 is a local union chartered by that organization and admits to membership employees of the re- spondent. Steel Workers Organizing Committee is likewise a labor organization' affiliated with the Committee for Industrial Organiza- tion. It organizes workers on behalf of the Amalgamated, and forms, supervises, guides, and assists lodges thereof. International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders and Helpers,. Subordinate Lodge No. 656, is a labor organization affiliated with the Building Trades Department, the Metal Trades Department, and the Railway Employees Department of the Ameri- can Federation of Labor. It admits to membership all employees of the Hedges-Walsh-Weidner divison engaged in the construction, assembly, and erection of boilers, drums, tanks, and parts thereof. III. THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES In June 1937, the S. W. O. C„ for and in behalf of the Amalgamated, filed a petition with the Regional Director, alleging that a question affecting commerce had-arisen concerning,the representation of the respondent's employees in its Hedges-Walsh-Weidner division, and requesting an investigation and certification of representatives, pur- suant to Section 9 (c) of the Act. On February 16, 1938, after hearing upon due notice, the Board issued its Decision and Direction of Elec- tions, finding, inter alia, that the determination of the appropriate unit or units for the purposes of collective bargaining among the re- spondent's employees at its Hedges-Walsh-Weidner division would depend upon the desires of the employees within certain groups, these desires to be ascertained by elections. The Board directed the Re- gional Director to conduct elections by secret ballot among, inter alia, two groups of employees, consisting of (1) all boilermakers and help- 3 Matter of Combustion Engineering . Company, Inc. and Steel Workers Organizing Com- mittee, for and in behalf of the Amalgamated Association of Iron, Steel t Tin Workers of North America, .5 N. L.-•R."-B«8'4 606 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD ers, welders and. welding-machine operators, welders' helpers., and ap- prentices; galvanizers, form-press operators, form-machine operators, fit-up men (except those working on cast iron boiler;castings);:layers- out and helpers, chippers, grinders, burners, furnace operators, riveters and rivet-machine operators, rivet heaters, reamers, rod-room men, testers, test-pit helpers, boilermakers' mechanics, tube men, inspectors and helpers, punch-shear operators, X-ray helpers, subforemen, flange workers, and tapping-machine operators. and helpers, exclusive of those employed-in the foundry, and (2) all other production and main- tenance employees, except' supervisory employees, clerical employees, foundry employees, machinists, machinists' helpers and apprentices, header-mill specialists, drill-press operators and helpers, milling- machine operators, drill-machine operators, bolt-machine operators, handymen, engineers, crane operators employed -in-the machine shops, planer operators, repairmen, maintenance men, and toolroom helpers, to determine whether the employees in the first group, herein called the boilermakers, desired to be represented by the S. W. O. C. or by the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders and Helpers, Subordinate Lodge No. 656, herein called the Brotherhood, and whether or not the employees in the second group desired to be represented by the S. W. O. C. The Board determined that if the employees in both groups chose the S. W. O. C., both groups would to- gether constitute a single appropriate' unit. On February 28, 1938, the respondent. filed objections to the Board's Decision and Direction of Elections, and moved that, for purposes of the elections, the Direction be modified by dividing the boilermakers into three groups, namely, the power-boiler, the range-boiler, and the sheet-metal employees. The respondent contended in its objections that because, of the difference in. the character of their work and re- muneration and because of the fact that the three groups worked in separate and distinct departments, all these employees should not be grouped- together in a single unit for purposes of the elections. The respondent at no time requested leave to. argue orally before the Board with respect to these objections. The Board considered the respond ent's objections, and on March 7, 1938, issued its order denying the respondent's motion for modification of the Direction of Elections in that respect. On the same date the Board issued its Amendment to Direction of Elections, making certain alterations in its original Di= rection which were also requested by the respondent'but which are not relevant in this proceeding.4. Pursuant to the Direction of Elections, as amended, elections were conducted among the respondent's employees on, March. 21, 1938. A 'Matter of Combustion Engineering Company, Inc. and Steel Workers Organizing Comm mittee, for and in behalf of the Amalgamated *Associatiowof Iron, Steel and Tin Workers of North America, 5 N. L: R. B. 356. _COMBUWION.ENGINEERING COMPANY, INC. 607 majority of the employees in each group described above voted for the S. W: O. C. On April 7, 1938, the Board issued its Supplemental De- cision and Certification of Representatives,5 in which it found that the boilermakers, together with all other production and maintenance. em- ployees, except supervisory employees, clerical employees, foundry em- ployees, machinists, machinists' helpers and apprentices, header-mill specialists, drill-press operators and helpers, milling-machine oper- ators, drill-machine operators, bolt-machine operators, handymen, en- gineers, crane operators employed in the machine shops, planer operators, repairmen, maintenance men, and toolroom helpers con- stitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining, and certified the Amalgamated as the exclusive collective bargaining representative of the employees in such unit. Thereafter, the respondent, the Brotherhood, and a group of ap- proximately 220 employees employed in the respondent's power boiler and sheet-metal shops filed petitions requesting the Board to recon- sider its Certification of Representatives described above, and protest- ing against the inclusion in one unit of the boilermakers'employed in the power-boiler, range-boiler, and sheet-metal shops. The petition of the respondent also alleged that the employees of the power-boiler and sheet-metal shops went on strike on April *13, 1938, in protest against the Board's findings with respect to the appropriate unit. The Board considered these petitions and on May 11, 1938, issued its Order Dismissing Petitions." On or about April 22, 1938, shortly after the Certification of April 7, O. S. Baxter, an official of the S. W. O. C., and other representatives of the Amalgamated presented to A. J. Moses, gen- eral manager of the respondent's Hedges-Walsh-Weidner division, a proposed contract providing, inter alia, for the recognition of the Amalgamated as the exclusive bargaining agent of the employees in the appropriate unit found * by the Board. Thereafter, Moses -met frequently with representatives of the Amalgamated and discussed with them individual grievances and, also, the proposed contract. Throughout these conferences, however, Moses consistently refused to accept the contract granting the Amalgamated the exclusive recog- nition requested. In so doing Moses maintained that the unit estab- lished by the Board was not an appropriate one for the purposes of collective bargaining. On or about July 13, 1938, the Amalgamated -again presented to Moses a proposed agreement containing provisions similar to those. of the first proposal. Moses replied on or about 5 Matter of Combustion Engineering Company, Inc . and Steel Workers Organizing Com- mittee, for and in behalf of the Amalgamated Association of Iron, Steel & Tin Workers of North America, 6 N. L. R. B. 488. "Matter of Combustion Engineering Company, Inc. and Steel Workers Organizing Com- mittee, for and in behalf of the Amalgamated Association of'Iron, Steel & Tin Workera of North America, 7 N. L. R . B. 123. . 608 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD July 20 by offering the Amalgamated as a counterproposal an agreement providing for the recognition of the Amalgamated as the bargaining agent of its members only. The Amalgamated refused to accept the counterproposal and soon thereafter filed with the Board the charges here involved. Shortly before the hearing in this pro- ceeding Baxter had a conference with Moses in a final attempt to secure the desired exclusive recognition contract. This attempt also proved unsuccessful, however, because of Moses' refusal to recognize the Amalgamated as the exclusive representative of the employees in the unit fixed by the Board on the ground that he "didn't like the unit set down by the Board-and was going to try to get them changed." In its answer the respondent admitted, and it was stipu- lated at the hearing, that the respondent has refused to bargain with the Amalgamated as the exclusive representative of the employees in the unit determined by the Board. The respondent seeks to justify its refusal to bargain with the Amalgamated as the exclusive representative of the group of em- ployees herein called the boilermakers on the ground previously urged by it in connection with the representation proceeding, namely, that those employees classified as boilermakers should not have voted as a group to determine who should represent them but should have been separated into three units consisting, respectively, of the em- ployees in the two power-boiler shops, employees in the range-boiler shop, and employees in the sheet-metal shop. The respondent's con- tention to that effect and its reasoning in support thereof are similar in all respects to its objections set forth in the petition filed by it in the representation proceeding protesting against the unit fixed by the Board. In our Order Dismissing Petitions referred to above we considered the respondent's objections to the unit established by the Board and for the reasons set forth therein and which we shall not here. restate we overruled such objections. We have reconsidered these contentions and again find them to be without merit. In our Decision of February 16, 1938, we discussed the facts upon which we based our findings that the determination of the bargaining unit or units would depend upon the desires of certain groups of em- ployees and the facts upon which we based our Direction of Elections. The determination of the bargaining unit in the representation case followed the desires of the Brotherhood as indicated in the record of that proceeding, and the unit against which the respondent pro- tests represents the expressed desires of the majority of employees in the Brotherhood's own craft as indicated by the results of the election conducted by the Board. The respondent has introduced no evidence to persuade us that the unit heretofore found by us to be appropriate is inappropriate. We therefore find that at all times since the Board's Certification of April 7, 1938, all boilermakers and helpers, B COMBUSTION ENGINEERING COMPANY, INC. 609 welders and welding.-machine operators, welders' helpers and ap- prentices, galvanizers, form-press operators, form-machine operators, fit-up men except those working on cast iron boiler castings, layers- out and helpers, chippers, grinders, burners, furnace operators, rivet- ers and rivet-machine operators, rivet heaters, reamers, rod-room men, testers, test-pit helpers, boilermakers' mechanics, tube men, in- spectors and helpers, punch-shear operators, X-ray helpers, subfore- men, flange workers, and tapping-machine operators and helpers, and all other production and maintenance employees, except supervisory employees, clerical employees, foundry employees, machinists, machinists' helpers and apprentices, header-mill specialists, drill-press operators and helpers, milling-machine operators, drill-machine op- erators, bolt-machine operators, handymen, engineers, crane operators employed in the machine ships, planer operators, repairmen, mainte- nance men, and tool-room helpers employed in the Hedges-Walsh- Weidner division have constituted and that they now constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act. The respondent in its answer denies that a majority of the boiler- makers designated the Amalgamated as their representative for the purposes of collective bargaining in the secret balloting and contends that the Board's Certification is therefore invalid. The tabulation of the results of the balloting, as set forth in our Supplemental Decision and Certification of Representatives, shows that a majority of the eligible boilermakers cast ballots and that the Amalgamated received the votes of a majority of those voting. In certifying the Amalgam- ated upon the basis of the balloting, we followed our established practice in holding that in Section 9 (a) of the Act the phrase "des- ignated . . . by the majority of the employees" means designated by the majority of the employees voting in an election and that the organization receiving a majority of the votes cast is to be certified as the exclusive representative.7 We find therefore that at all times since the Board's Certification of April 7, 1938, the Amalgamated was and that it is the exclusive representative of all the employees in the appropriate unit here involved at the Hedges-Walsh-Weidner divi- sion for the purposes of collective bargaining in respect to rates of pay, wages, hours of employment, and other conditions of employment. We have hereinbef ore found that although the respondent met with representatives of the Amalgamated on several occasions and dis- cussed the contract submitted by it, the respondent consistently re- 7 Matter of R. C: A. Manufacturing Company, Inc. and United Electrical d Radio Workers of America, 2 N. L. R. B. 159; Matter of Cudahy Packing Company and Packing House Workers Union, Local No. 5, Amalgamated Meat Cutters and Butcher Workmen of North America, 4 N. L. R. B. 39; Matter of Schwartz-Bernard Cigar Com- pany and United Cigar Workers of America, Local No. 1, 7 N. L. R. B. 503. 610 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD fused to bargain with it except with regard to its own members only. Such refusal clearly constitutes a violation of the Act. We have repeatedly held that for an employer to meet with the duly desig- nated representatives of a majority of his employees and to offer to bargain with it for its members only, withholding recognition as the exclusive bargaining agent, does not satisfy the requirements of the Act.' It is incumbent upon the employer to recognize the union which is the exclusive representative of his employees and to negoti- ate with it as such.9 The respondent also seeks to justify its refusal to bargain on the ground that to grant the Amalgamated exclusive recognition would work a hardship on the respondent for the reason that the employees of the power-boiler shops have indicated their refusal to be repre- sented by the Amalgamated and consequently will strike if such recognition is granted. In support of this argument the respondent introduced evidence indicating that from April 13 to 16, 1938, a 3-day strike, not authorized by the Brotherhood, took place at the power-boiler shops in protest against the Board's findings with re- spect to the appropriate unit set forth in its Certification of April 7, 1938. The respondent also introduced in evidence a written state- ment subsequently presented to its superintendent on May 20, 1938, by three boilermakers, to the effect that they represented 219 employ- ees of the power-boiler shops who would "not accept the N. L. R. B. ruling making the C. I. O. the bargaining agent." The statement contained no signatures other than those of the three employees who presented it and there is no evidence to indicate that they repre- sented the number of employees claimed. On the basis of the above facts we are not convinced that the respondent's alleged fear of a strike in the event that it recognizes the Amalgamated is justified. There is no evidence that the Brotherhood has threatened any such action nor have any representations to that effect been made to the respondent since about May 1938, by the committee purporting to represent the 219 employees. In fact, H. E. Eskew, a member of that committee, admitted at the hearing that he could not recall that any employee had indicated to him during about two months prior to the hearing that he would refuse to work under an agreement negotiated by the Amalgamated. Even assuming, however, that there is some basis for- the respondent's alleged fear of a strike, to subordinate the 8 Matter of Biles-Coleman Lumber Company and Puget Sound District Council of Lumber and Sawmill Workers, 4 N. L. R. B. 679, enf'd N. L. it. B. v. Biles-Coleman Lumber Com- pany, 98 F. (2d) 18 (C. C. A 9) ; Matter of Fedder8 Manufacturing Co., Inc. and Amalgam- ated Association of Iron, Steel d Tin Workers of North America, Lodge 1753. 7 N. L. R. B. 817; Matter of Burnside Steel Foundry Co. and Amalgamated Association of Iron, Steel J Tin Workers of North America, Lodge No. 1719, 7 N. L. It. B. 714. O Matter of Acme Air Appliance Company, Inc. and Local No. 1223 of the United Elec- trical Radio and Machine Workers of America, 10 N. L. It. B. 1385. COMBUSTION ENGINEERING GOM-PAN'Y, INC. '- 611 rights of the majority of the respondent's employees within the ap- propriate unit to the wishes of a dissenting minority would both mili- tate against the policies of the Act and run counter to its express language. Potential hardship to the respondent resulting from. the action of such a minority does not justify a violation of the Act10 Upon the basis of all the above findings, and after consideration of all the contentions of the respondent, we find that in July 1938 and at all times thereafter, the respondent refused and still refuses to bargain collectively with the Amalgamated which has been certified as the exclusive representative of the employees in an appropriate bargaining unit.. We further find that the necessary effect of such refusal was to dis- courage affiliation with the Amalgamated, and the designation of it as bargaining representative and that the respondent thereby inter- fered with, restrained, and coerced its employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act. IV. THE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES UPON COMMERCE We find that the activities of the respondent set forth in Section III above, occurring in connection with. the operations of the respondent described in Section I above, have a close, intimate, and substantial relation to trade, traffic, and commerce among the several States and tend.to lead to labor disputes, burdening and obstructing commerce and the free flow of commerce. V. THE REMEDY We have found that the respondent has committed unfair labor practices. We shall order it to cease and desist from so doing. We have found that at all times since April 7, 1938, the Amalga- mated was and that it is the exclusive representative of the em- ployees in an .appropriate unit at the respondent's Hedges-Walsh- Weidner division. We have also found that in July 1938 and there- after the respondent refused to bargain with the Amalgamated as such representative. We shall, therefore, in order to effectuate the policies of the Act, order the respondent to bargain with the Amal- 10 See N. L. R. B. v. Star Publishing Company, 97 F. (2d) 465 (C. C. A. 9), enf'g- Matter of Star Publishing Company and Seattle Newspaper Guild, Local No. 82, 4 N. L. R. B. 498. In that case a contention similar to that now made by the respondent was answered by the court as follows : The respondent further contends that it was necessary to make the transfer and thus engage in the unfair labor practices , because its business would otherwise be disrupted, and therefore, under all the facts , the transfer was excusable. We think, however, the act is controlling . The act prohibits unfair labor practices in all cases. . It. permits no immunity because the employer may think that the exigencies .' of;-th,,e: moment require'. infraction of the statute . In fact, nothing in the statute permits or justifies. its violation by the employer. 612 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD gamated upon request as the execlusive.xepresentative of., its employees in the appropriate unit. Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and upon the entire record in the proceeding, the Board makes the following : CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Lodge 1230, Amalgamated Association of Iron, Steel & Tin Workers of North America, and Steel Workers Organizing Com- mittee are labor organizations, within the meaning of Section 2 (5) of the Act. 2. All boilermakers and helpers, welders and welding-machine . operators, welders' helpers and apprentices, galvanizers, form-press operators, form-machine operators, fit-up men (except those work- ing on cast iron boiler castings), layers-out and helpers, chippers, grinders, burners, furnace operators, riveters and rivet-machine operators, rivet heaters, reamers, , rod-room men, testers, test-pit helpers, boilermakers' mechanics, tube men, inspectors and helpers, punch-shear operators, X-ray helpers, subforemen, flange workers, tapping-machine operators and helpers, and all other production and maintenance employees, exclusive of foundry employees, supervisory employees, clerical employees, machinists, machinists' helpers and apprentices, header-mill specialists, drill-press operators and helpers, milling-machine operators, drill-machine operators, bolt-machine operators, handymen, engineers, crane operators" employed -in the machine shops, planer operators, repairmen, maintenance men, and tool-room helpers employed in the Hedges-Walsh-Weidner division, Chattanooga, Tennessee, of the Combustion Engineering Company, Inc., New York City, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining, within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act. 3. Lodge 1230, Amalgamated Association of Iron, Steel & Tin Workers of North America was on April 7, 1938, at all times there- after has been, and now is, the exclusive representative of the re- spondent's employees in an appropriate unit, within the meaning of Section 9 (a) of the Act. 4. By its refusal to bargain collectively with Lodge 1230, Amal- gamated Association of Iron, Steel & Tin Workers of North America, as exclusive representative of the employees in an appropriate unit, the respondent has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor' practices, within the meaning of Section 8 (5) of the Act. 5. By interfering with, restraining, and coercing its employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act, the respondent has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices, within the meaning of Section 8 (1) of the Act. COMBUSTION ENGINEERING COMPANY, INC. 613 6. The ;afaresaid.:unfair..:aabor^practices1 are unfair-labor practices affecting commerce, within the meaning of Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. ORDER Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and conclusions of law, and pursuant to Section 10 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that Combus- tion Engineering Company, Inc., Chattanooga, Tennessee, its officers, agents, successors, and assigns shall: 1. Cease and desist from : (a) Refusing to bargain collectively with Lodge 1230, Amalga- mated Association of Iron, Steel & Tin Workers of North America, as the exclusive representative of all boilermakers and helpers, weld- ers and welding-machine operators, welders' helpers and apprentices, galvanizers, form-press operators, form-machine operators, fit-up men (except those working on cast iron boiler castings), layers-out,and helpers, chippers, grinders, burners, furnace operators, riveters and rivet-machine operators, rivet heaters, reamers, rod-room men, testers, test-pit helpers, boilermakers' mechanics, tube men, inspectors and helpers, punch-shear operators, X-ray helpers, sub-foremen, flange workers, tapping-machine operators and helpers, and all other pro- duction and maintenance employees, exclusive of foundry employees, supervisory employees, clerical employees, machinists, machinists' helpers and apprentices, header-mill specialists, drill-press operators and helpers, milling-machine operators, drill-machine operators, bolt- machine operators, handymen, engineers, crane operators employed in the machine shops, planer operators, repairmen, maintenance men,, and tool-room helpers employed in the Hedges-Walsh-Weidner divi- sion, Chattanooga, Tennessee; (b) In any other manner interfering with, restraining, or coercing its employees in the exercise of their rights to self-organization, to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing, or to engage in concerted activi- ties for the purposes of collective bargaining or other mutual aid and protection, as guaranteed in Section 7 of the National Labor Relations: Act.. 2. Take the following affirmative action, which the Board finds will. effectuate the policies of the Act : (a) Upon request, bargain collectively with Lodge 1230, Amal- gamated Association of Iron, Steel & Tin Workers of North America, as the exclusive representative of all boilermakers and helpers, welders: and welding-machine operators, welders' helpers and apprentices, gal- vanizers, form-press operators, form-machine operators, fit-up men (except those working on cast iron boiler castings), layers-out and 283031-41-vol. 20-40 614 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD helpers, chippers, grinders, burners, furnace operators, riveters and rivet-machine operators, rivet heaters, reamers, rod-room men, testers, test-pit helpers, boilermakers' mechanics, tube men, inspectors and helpers, punch-shear operators, X-ray helpers, subforemen, flange workers, tapping-machine operators and helpers, and all other produc- tion and maintenance employees, exclusive of foundry employees, supervisory employees, clerical employees, machinists, machinists' helpers and apprentices, header-mill specialists, drill-press operators and helpers, milling-machine operators, drill-machine operators, bolt- machine operators, handymen, engineers, crane operators employed in the machine shops, planer operators, repairmen, maintenance men, and tool-room helpers employed in the Hedges-Walsh-Weidner division, Chattanooga, Tennessee, with respect to rates of pay, wages, hours of employment, and other conditions of employment; (b) Immediately post notices in conspicuous places throughout the Hedges-Walsh-Weidner division, Chattanooga, Tennessee, and main- tain such notices for a period of at least sixty (60) consecutive days, stating that the respondent will cease and desist in the manner set forth in paragraphs 1 (a) and (b), and that it will take the affirmative action set forth in paragraph 2 (a) of this Order; (c) Notify the Regional Director for the Tenth Region in writing, within ten (10) days from the date of this Order what steps it has taken to comply herewith. MR. WILLIAM M. LEISERSON took no part in the consideration of the above Decision and Order.