American Security and Trust Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 28, 1951

95 N.L.R.B. 1423 (N.L.R.B. 1951)

AMERICAN SECURITY .AND TRUST Co. 1423
AMERICAN SECURITY AND TRUST CO., A. CORPORATION. OF WASHINGTON,
D. C., AS EXECUTOR AND TRUSTEE UNDER THE LAST WILL AND TESTA-
MENT OF JOHN R. MCLEAN, DECEASED, OPERATING THE CINCINNATI
.ENQUIRER and CINCINNATI PAPER HANDLERS UNION No. 19, OF THE
• •INTERNATIONAL PRINTING PRESSMEN AND ASSISTANTS UNION OF
NORTH AMERICA, AFL, PETITIONER. Case No. 9-RC_ 1187. August
28,1951
Decision and Order
Upon a. petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a hearing was held before Leonard. S. Kimmell; hear-
ing 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 Act, the Board
has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member
panel [Chairman Herzog and Members Houston and Reynolds].
'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 organization involved claims to represent employees
of the Employer.
3'. No question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of employees'of the Employer within the meaning of Section
0- (c)-.,(1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act, for the following rea_
sons :r=
The Petitioner requests a unit composed of all employees designated
as laborers engaged in handling paper and other newsprint material
at the Employer's Cincinnati plant and warehouse, including regular
day and night workers, and extra workers employed only on Saturday
nights, but excluding all office and clerical employees, guards, pro-
fessional employees, and all other employees and supervisors as de-
fined. in the Act. The Employer contends that the proposed- unit is
inappropriate, urging that the employees sought to be represented
constitute a heterogeneous group that may not be established as. a
:separate unit on a craft, departmental, or any other basis.
The Employer's editorial employees, typographical employees, stere-
otypers, engravers, mailers, pressmen, carriers, and truck drivers, re-
spectively, are currently represented by several labor organizations
under separate collective bargaining agreements. Among the remain-
ing employees not presently represented are a number of semiskilled
and unskilled employees such as janitors, stockroom employees,dock
workers, warehousemen, and the employees mentioned above sought
95 NLRB No. 174.
1424 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
by the Petitioner.' The Petitioner would include in its proposed unit
only those employees in the afore-mentioned. categories not embraced
by bargaining agreements who spend at least 60 or 70 percent of their
working time handling bulk newsprint, asserting that "paper han-
dlers" are "semiskilled craftsmen" generally recognized in the Cin-,
cinnati area as being entitled to separate. representation. In addition
to the reel-room employees, paper rewinding and receiving machine
operators, and dock workers who regularly handle bulk paper in the
course of their work, certain of the Employer's unskilled composing
and pressroom employees also occasionally handle bulk newsprint.
The janitors and stockroom employees, likewise, handle paper in other
forms.
As it is clear that the work of the paper handlers is of an unskilled
character; we find that they are not members of a true craft and may
not be established as a separate craft unit. The fact that similar units
may, have been established in the Cincinnati area does not alter this
finding, as it is not shown that any of such units are pursuant to
Board certification 2 Moreover, as the paper handlers do not have
common supervision, and as they perform their varied duties through-
out the several departments within the plant, we are precluded from
finding appropriate a departmental unit. Furthermore, as the Peti-
tioner has indicated its unwillingness to accept an alternative unit
that would include all the Employer's unskilled employees not pres-
ently represented who perform duties similar to those`-of the paper
handlers, we cannot establish a residual unit such as that found to be
appropriate in the earlier proceeding.3 We therefore find that-the
unit sought is inappropriate and shall dismiss the petition.
Order
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition herein be, and it hereby is,
dismissed.
'In ,Americana Security and 'Trust Co ., 78 NLRB 927; the Board directed an election
in a unit similar to that Sought herein, finding that the paper handlers who„ were the
only employees unrepresented at that time constituted a residual group concerning whore
there had been no history of collective bargaining. No bargaining representative was
selected by the employees in the election that followed.
2 Joseph T. Ryerson f Sons, Inc., 91 NLRB 1.
3 See footnote 1, supra.