Great Lakes Engineering Works

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 4, 1938

5 N.L.R.B. 788 (N.L.R.B. 1938)

In the Matter of GREAT LAKES ENGINEERING WORKS and WELDERS
INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION
Case No. R-548.-Decided March 4,1938
Shipbuilding and Repair Industry-Investigation of Representatives:. con-
troversy concerning representatives : rival organizations ; refusal of employer to
negotiate with petitioning union as representative of its employees-Unit Appro-
priate for Collective Bargaining : welders, burners, and their apprentices and
helpers; segregation into one department ; history of collective bargaining rela-
tions with employer ; eligibility for membership in both of rival organizations-
Election Ordered
Mr. George J. Bott, for the Board.
Hill, Hamblen, Essery cf Lewis, by Mr. John K. Worley, of Detroit,
Mich., for the Company.
Mr. Jack N. Tucker, of Detroit, Mich., for Welders International
Association.
Mr. William S. McDowell, of Detroit, Mich., for Down River Ship-
builders' Association.
Mr. Bliss Daffan, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On October 13, 1937, Local No. 31,1 Welders International Associa-
tion, herein called Local No. 31, filed with the Regional Director of
the Seventh Region, Detroit, Michigan, a petition alleging that a
question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation
of employees of the Great Lakes Engineering Works, River Rouge,
Michigan, herein called the Company, and requesting an investiga-
tion and certification of representatives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of
the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the
Act.2 On November 2, 1937, the National Labor Relations Board,
herein called the Board, acting pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the Act
IIncorrectly designated as welders International Association in the order directing
investigation.
2 The original petition alleged that the appropriate unit consisted of welders , appren-
tices and burners but it was amended at the commencement of the hearing to allege that
the appropriate unit consists of welders and their apprentices.
788
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 789
and Article III, Section 3, of National Labor Relations Board Rules,
and Regulations-Series 1, as amended, ordered an investigation and
authorized the Regional Director to conduct it and to provide for an
appropriate hearing upon due notice.
On November 24, 1937, the Regional Director issued a notice of
hearing, copies of which were duly served upon the Company, upon
Local No. 31, and upon the Down River Shipbuilders' Association,.
herein called the Down River, a labor organization claiming to rep-
resent employees directly affected by the investigation. Pursuant to,
the notice, a hearing was held on December 2 and 3, 1937, at Detroit,,
Michigan, before William R. Ringer, the Trial Examiner duly desig-
nated by the Board. The Board, the Company, Local No. 31, and'_
the Down River 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 on the issues was afforded
.all parties.' During the course of the hearing the Trial Examiner-
made several rulings on motions and on objections to the admission of
evidence. The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner-
and finds, that no prejudicial errors were committed. The rulings,
are hereby affirmed.
' Upon the'entire record in the case, the Board makes the following:.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY 3
The Company, a Michigan corporation, with its principal office-
and plant at River Rouge, Michigan, is engaged in shipbuilding and_
ship repairing. Other plants of the Company are located at Ashta-
bula, Ohio, and Detroit, Michigan. It is the second largest of the
four principal shipbuilding' and ship repairing plants of the Great
Lakes. In 1937 it completed two ships and was engaged in building-
two others which were practically completed at the time of the
hearing. The two completed ships were for the Ford Motor Com-
pany to he used in transporting automobile parts from River Ronge-
to Edgewater, New Jersey. The two ships being built are for ,the.
Pittsburgh Steamship Company to be used in transporting iron ore
from the northern ranges to the Lake Erie Docks. Approximately
50 to 60 ships engaged in transportation on the Great Lakes are
docked each year at the River Rouge plant for the purposes of -
repairs.
During 1937, $1250,000 was spent for raw inaterial, a large part
being for steal obtained from Illinois and Pennsylvania. Turbines,-
to be used in the new ships constructed were shipped from Massa-
s See Matter of Great Lakes Engineering Works and Detroit Metal T) aces Council, .
3 N L R B 825.
790 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
chusetts at a cost of $250,000 each. The monthly pay roll of the
Company is from $50;000 to $60;000.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
Local No. 31, Welders International Association, is a labor organi-
zation admitting to its membership all welders, burners, and their
apprentices, and helpers, employed,at the, River, Rouge,plant- of 'trio
Company.
Down River Shipbuilders' Association is a labor organization ad-
mitting to its membership all hourly paid or piece-work employees
of the Company, exclusive of those having authority to employ,
:discharge or discipline other employees.
III. THE QUESTION' CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The controversy herein is over the representation of the employees
in the Burning, and Welding Department of the Company. This
department is composed of welders, burners, and their apprentices
and helpers.
On ,April .23, 1937, Local No. 31 entered into a contract with the
Company as the bargaining representative of the welders, burners,
and their apprentices and helpers. This contract was for a period
,of six months. During the latter part of September negotiations took
place between Local No. 31 and the Company for a new contract to
take effect upon the' expiration of the old contract on October 23,
1937. The Company refused to enter into a contract because of the
insistence of the organization for a closed-shop provision, and also
because of the claim of membership among these employees made
by Down River. Upon such refusal, most of the welders•.in the
employment of the Company at the time engaged in a strike of
short duration.
The record' shows that on October 14, 1937, Down River, claiming
-to represent a majority of the welders, burners, and their apprentices
and helpers, employed by the Company, requested recognition as the
representative of these employees.
We find that a question has arisen concerning. representation of
,employees of the Company.
IV. THE EFFECT OF THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION UPON
COMMERCE
We, find that the question concerning representation which has
.arisen, occurring in connection with the operations of the Company
described in Section I above, has a close, intimate, and substantial
relation to trade, traffic and commerce among the several States, and
-tends to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce
and the free flow of commerce.
DECISIONS AND ORDERS
V. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
791
In its original petition filed herein Local No. 31 alleged that the
appropriate unit consisted of welders, apprentices, and burners in the
employ of the Company. However, in its amended petition it in-
cluded only welders and their apprentices in the claimed unit. Down
River claims that the appropriate unit consists of welders, burners,
and their apprentices and helpers.
In most industries welding and burning are operations performed
by skilled workmen in connection with their work in a broader field,
as for example, the craft of boiler making. Welding and burning
are performed in connection with the construction and repair of
boilers which requires, in addition, craftsmen particularly skilled in
other operations. This is also true of nearly every industry requiring
use of the burning or welding process. Consequently, ,elders and
burners, or either alone, do not constitute a distinct craft and are in
most cases necessarily merged into crafts with which their work is
associated. However, an exception to the general rule as to the
association of burning and welding with other operations exists in
this case. The record shows that the welders, burners, helpers and
apprentices employed by the Company have been segregated into one
department under one foreman for a period of 20 years. This segre-
gation of welders and burners into a separate department is peculiar
to the shipbuilding industry and is a practical separation due to the
fact that welding, or burning, in shipbuilding is a large-scale opera-
tion that is not associated with other work. A great amount of weld-
ing is required in joining steel plate in the construction of the hull of
a vessel. The burners and welders have similar and connected tasks,
the burners cutting the metals used in repairing or constructing ves-
sels, and the welders piecing it together. The welding, in most in-
stances, must be watertight and requires a high degree of skill.
Practically all the welders in the employment of the Company can
do burning, and a large percentage of the burners employed at the
time of the hearing can do welding. The men are used interchange-
ably and are frequently sent out on a job to do both types of work.
Apprentices and helpers are employed to assist both the welders
and burners alike without discrimination as to the type of work.
Evidence was introduced on behalf of Local No. 31 showing that
it takes a longer period of time to become an expert welder than to
become a burner, and that the pay rate of welders is somewhat
higher. Admittedly this is true, but the constitution of the Welders
International Association introduced in evidence shows that burners,
as well as welders, are eligible for membership in the organization.
It also appears that the apprentices learn burning as a preliminary
step in becoming expert at welding. Local No. 31 asserted the pro-
80535-38-51
792 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
priety of a unit composed of welders , burners, and their helpers and
apprentices when it entered into the contract with the Company on
April 23, 1937, as the bargaining representative for this group.
Prior to the expiration date of this contract it again attempted to
negotiate with the Company as the representative of this group as
a unit. At the time of filing the petition herein Local No. 31 again
asserted this unit to be appropriate , and only upon the first day of
the hearing amended the petition so as to exclude burners and helpers.
We find that the welders , burners, and their apprentices and
helpers, in the employ of the Company , constitute a unit appropriate
for the purposes of collective bargaining and that said unit will in-
sure these employees the full benefit of their rights to self-organi-
zation and to collective bargaining and otherwise effectuate the
policies of the Act.
VI. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
No evidence was introduced on behalf of Local No. 31 as to mem-
bership among the employees within the unit found appropriate.
There was some evidence indicating that some of these employees
had joined both organizations . Down River introduced petitions
dated November 1, 1937, authorizing that organization to act as the
exclusive bargaining representative of 34 signers . No evidence show-
ing the individual employees of the Company within the unit at or
near the time of the hearing was introduced from which the names
on the petitions could be verified as employees of the Company.
We find that the question which has arisen concerning representa-
tion can best be resolved by the holding of an election by secret ballot.
.On the basis of the above findings of fact and upon the entire record
in the case , the Board makes the following :
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. A question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the repre-
sentation of employees of Great Lakes Engineering Works, River
Rouge, Michigan, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section
2 (6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act.
2. Welders, burners , and their apprentices and helpers , employed
by the Company constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of
collective bargaining , within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the
National Labor Relations Act.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National Labor,
Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act,
and pursuant to Article III, Section 8, of National Labor Relations
Board Rules and Regulations-Series 1, as amended , it is hereby,
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 793
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation authorized by the Board
to ascertain representatives for collective bargaining with Great Lakes
Engineering Works, Chicago, Illinois, an election by secret ballot shall
be conducted within fifteen (15) days from the date of this Direction,
under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the
Seventh Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National Labor
Relations Board, and subject to Article III, Section 9, of said Rules
and Regulations, among welders, burners, and their apprentices and
helpers, employed by the Great Lakes Engineering Works at any time
during the pay-roll period next preceding the filing of the petition in
this case, excluding employees who quit or were discharged for cause
between such date and the date of election, to determine whether they
desire to be represented by Local No. 31, Welders International Asso-
ciation or by Down River Shipbuilders' Association, for the purposes.
of collective bargaining, or by neither.