Continental Can Co., Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Feb 9, 1951

93 N.L.R.B. 184 (N.L.R.B. 1951)

184 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
It is undisputed that the section hostesses do not have authority to
hire, discipline, transfer, or discharge waitresses; but that in all cases
such authority is vested in the head hostesses. The waitresses do not
consider section hostesses supervisors, but rather coworkers. All re-
quests by the waitresses for time off, sick leave, etc., are made directly
to the head hostesses; and all employee grievances are initially dis-
cussed with the head hostesses.
We believe that the work of the section hostesses is routine in nature,
not involving the exercise of supervisory authority over subordinates.
Accordingly, we find that these employees are not supervisors within
the meaning of the Act.' The Board is of the further opinion that the
section hostesses and the door hostesses have a sufficient community of
interest with the waitresses and other restaurant employees to be ap-
propriately included in the existing unit of such employees.
As no question of representation exists at the present time in the
basic restaurant division unit, the Board shall direct an election among
the section hostesses (station supervisors) and door hostesses, exclud-
ing head hostesses and all other supervisors as defined in the Act. If a
majority of the employees voting in the election cast their ballots for
the Petitioner, they will be taken to have indicated their desire to be a
part of the present restaurant bargaining unit and the Petitioner may
bargain for such employees as part of that unit.'
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this
volume.]
6 Cf. The Baltimore Transit Company, 92 NLRB 688
6 See The Baltimore Transit Company, footnote 5, supra
CONTINENTAL CAN COMPANY, INC. and INTERNATIONAL UNION OF
OPERATING ENGINEERS, LOCAL 95, AFL, PETITIONER
CONTINENTAL CAN COMPANY, INC., and UNITED STEELWORKERS OF
AMERICA, CIO, PETITIONER
CONTINENTAL CAN COMPANY, INC. and INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION
OF MACHINISTS, LODGE 52, PETITIONER. Cases Na t. 6-RC-614,
6-RC-673, and 6-RC-700. February 9, 1951
Decision and Direction of Elections
Upon separate petitions duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the Na-
tional Labor Relations Act, a consolidated hearing was held before
Erwin Lerten, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at
the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
93 NLRB No. 26.
CONTINENTAL CAN COMPANY, INC. 185
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, the Board has
delegated its powers in connection with these cases to a three-member
panel [Members Houston, Murdock, and Styles].
Upon the entire record, 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 em-
ployees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9 (c)
(1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The Employer is engaged in the production, distribution, and
sale of containers. These proceedings are concerned solely with the
Employer's plant in West Mifflin Township, Allegheny County, Penn-
sylvania, which started production in April 1950, and which is to
absorb the functions of four other plants of the Employer. Of these
four plants, the two located in Wheeling, West Virginia, were closed
at the time of the hearing; and the functions of the other two, located
in McKees Rocks and Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, were in process of
transfer, which was scheduled to be completed by March 1951. The
Employer anticipates that the West Mifflin plant will be in full pro-
duction by the fall of 1951.
The Petitioner in Case No. 6-RC-614, International Union of Oper-
ating Engineers, Local 95, AFL, herein called the Operating Engi-
neers, seeks a unit of powerhouse employees. The Petitioner in Case
No. 6-RC-700, International Association of Machinists, Lodge 52,
herein called the Machinists, seeks a unit of machinists. The Peti-
tioner in Case No. 6-RC-673, United Steelworkers of America, CIO,
herein called the Steelworkers, seeks a unit composed of all production
and maintenance employees, and opposes the exclusions sought by the
Operating Engineer and the Machinists. The Employer and an In-
tervenor, District 50, United Mine Workers of America, herein called
District 50,1 also contend that the only appropriate unit is the over-all
production and maintenance unit. United Crown Workers Union No.
20723, AFL, also an Intervenor, herein called the Crown Workers 2
took no position with respect to the appropriate unit.
1 The hearing officer granted the motion to intervene by District 50 on the basis of a cur-
rent contract with the Employer covering the production and maintenance employees at
the Employer's McKees Rocks, Pennsylvania, plant.
2 The hearing officer granted the motion to intervene by Ci own workers on the basis of
a current contract with the Employer covering the production and maintenance employees
at the Employer's Bond Crown and Cork Division plant, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
186 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Case No. 6-RC-614
The Operating Engineers seeks a unit composed of "all engineers,
firemen and other powerhouse employees."
The powerhouse, which is included in the plant's maintenance de-
partment, is under the supervision of the plant engineer. There are
four stationary engineers and four firemen employed in the power-
house. The powerhouse is separated from the remainder of the plant.
The powerhouse employees spend the majority of their time in the
powerhouse, although the engineers make several periodic tours each
shift to check equipment throughout the plant. The engineers oper-
ate and maintain the boilers which furnish heat and steam for the
plant, the air-conditioning equipment, and the garbage disposal
equipment. The firemen act as helpers for the engineers. There is
no interchange between the powerhouse employees and other em-
ployees in the plant.
Although the Employer's plant is not located in the city of Pitts-
burgh, the Employer has required that all engineers be licensed by
that city. To obtain such a license, an engineer must have 5 years'
experience in a powerhouse and must pass a written examination.
The Employer does not require that the firemen be licensed.
Upon the entire record, we find that the powerhouse employees
comprise a distinct functional group which may constitute a separate
appropriate unit for the purpose of collective bargaining within the
meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
Case No. 6-RC-700
The Machinists seeks a unit composed of "all machinists, machinist
helpers, tool and die makers, helpers and apprentices."
The Employer employs approximately 35 machinists, 6 tool and
die makers, and 4 machinist apprentices. All these employees work
under the supervision of the machine shop foreman. The tool and
die makers and approximately 10 of the machinists spend all their
time in the machine shop making tools, dies, and parts with -the
standard machine tools customarily found in a machine shop. The
remainder of the machinists work on the production lines repairing
the machines in use there. These machinists spend in excess of 50
percent of their time on the production lines, and the remainder of
their time in the machine shop. The apprentices 3 divide their time
8 The Employer employs four formally indentured apprentices and two boys who are
assigned to the plant by the Board of Education of the city of Pittsburgh and who are
treated as apprentices by the Employer. These two boys spend alternate 2-week periods
at trade school and at the Employer's plant. The Employer considers these boys as em-
ployees and they accrue seniority, from the date of hiring, for the entire work and school
program.
CONTINENTAL CAN COMPANY, INC. 187
about equally between the machine shop and the production lines.
All the machinists, including those working in the production de-
partments, are under the supervision of the machine shop foreman
and report to the machine shop each morning for assignment. The
Employer has a 4-year apprenticeship program for machinists and
requires that all new machinists hired have either an apprenticeship
certificate or experience as a machinist for at least a 4-year period.
As the machinists herein are clearly a traditional craft group, we
find that they may, if they so desire, constitute a separate appropriate
unit.
Case No. 6-RC-673
As stated above, the Steelworkers seeks a plant-wide production
and maintenance unit, including the two groups discussed above.
The Employer likewise contends that the unit sought by the Steel-
workers is the only appropriate unit. Under all the circumstances
of this case, however, and particularly in view of the unit findings set
forth above, we find no merit in the contention that only the plant-
wide production and maintenance unit as described by the Steel-
workers is appropriate. We find that such a unit may be appropriate,
however, if the employees so desire. We shall therefore make no
present unit determinations pending the outcome of the self -determi-
nation elections hereinafter directed.
In view of the foregoing determinations, we shall direct separate
elections among the employees of the Employer at its West Mifflin
Township, Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, plant, in the voting
groups set forth below, excluding from each group office and clerical
employees, guards, professional employees, and supervisors.
(1) All engineers, firemen, and other powerhouse employees.
(2) All machinists, machinist helpers, tool and die makers, helpers,
and apprentices'
(3) All production and maintenance employees, excluding salaried
employees, technical employees, and all employees included in voting
groups (1) and (2).
If a majority of the employees in voting groups (1) and (2) vote
for the respective unions seeking to represent these groups in separate
units, they will be taken to have indicated their desire to constitute
separate bargain units.
5. District 50 urges that no election be held until operations cease
at the Employer's McKees Rocks plant, at which plant District 50
holds a current contract. The McKees Rocks plant is scheduled to
The term "apprentices" in this case shall include not only formally indentured appren-
tices but also the trade school students assigned to the Employer 's plant as part of the
educational program of the city of Pittsburgh.
188 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
be closed by March 1951. The West Mifflin plant had, at the time
of the hearing, 660 employees of a contemplated 1,200 to 1,400 em-
ployees.5 This employee complement is a substantial and representa-
tive segment of the working force which will eventually be employed.
In these circumstances, and in accord with our usual practice, we shall
direct an immediate election.
[Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication in this
volume.]
6 The powerhouse has its full complement of employees. The Employer expects to hire
approximately 20 additional machinists whenever persons with requisite skills are avail-
able.
CARPENTER & SHAER, INC., and GENERAL CONTRACTING EMPLOYERS
ASSOCIATION and GEORGE MCDONALD
INTERNATIONAL HOD CARRIERS', BUILDING & COMMON LABORERS' UNION
OF AMERICA, LOCAL 210, AFL and GEORGE MCDONALD
INTERNATIONAL HOD CARRIERS', BUILDING & COMMON LABORERS' UNION
of AMERICA, LOCAL 210, AFL and ROBERT H. FRANCISCO
H. F. STIMM, INCORPORATED and GENERAL CONTRACTING EMPLOYERS
ASSOCIATION and HAROLD ODELL
INTERNATIONAL t1OD CARRIERS', BUILDING & COMMON LABORERS UNION
OF AMERICA, LOCAL 210, AFL and HAROLD ODELL. Cases Nos.
3-CA-86,3-CB-P,1,3-CB-06,3-CA-150,3-CB--36. February 19,
1951
Supplemental Decision and Order
On September 28, 1950, Trial Examiner C. W. Whittemore issued
his Intermediate Report in the above-entitled proceeding, finding that
the Respondents had engaged in and were engaging in certain unfair
labor practices and recommending that they cease and desist therefrom
and take certain affirmative action, as set forth in the copy of the
Intermediate Report attached hereto. Thereafter, the Respondent
Union filed exceptions to the Intermediate Report and a supporting
brief.
The Board' has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner made
at the hearing and finds that no prejudicial error was committed. The
rulings are hereby affirmed. The Board has considered the Interme-
i Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (h) of the National Labor Relations Act, the
Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three - member panel
[Chairman Herzog and Members Reynolds and Murdock.]
93 NLRB No. 22.