Scullin Steel Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 25, 1951

95 N.L.R.B. 530 (N.L.R.B. 1951)

530 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
manner interfering with, restraining, or coercing its employees in the exercise of
the rights guaranteed by the Act.
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and upon the entire record
in the case, the Examiner makes the following :
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. Lodge 264 of District 38 of International Association of Machinists, and
International Ladies Garment Workers Union, are labor organizations admit-
ting to membership employees of the Respondent.
2. By discriminating in regard to the hire and tenure of employment of Martin
Moore, Stanley Barnette, Lester Stevens, Donald Blair, Frank Karavetsos,
Stanley Doyle, Edward d'Entremont, and Lois Blair, the Respondent has engaged
in and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section
8 (a) (3) of the Act.
3. By the above unfair labor practices and by otherwise 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 (a) (1) of the Act.
4. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair labor practices affecting
commerce within the meaning of Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
5. Respondent has not engaged in unfair labor practices in violation of Section
8 (a) (4) of the Act.
[Recommended Order omitted from publication in this volume.]
SCULLIN STEEL CO' and INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL.
WORKERS, LOCAL No. 1, AFL, PETITIONER
SCULLIN STEEL CO. and UNITED STEELWORKERS OF AMERICA , CIO, PE-
TITIONER . Cases Nos. 14-RC-1361 and 14-RC-1387. July 25,1951
Decision , Order, and Direction of Election
Upon petitions duly filed, a consolidated hearing was held before
Glenn L. Moller, hearing 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 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].
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds:
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the National Labor Relations Act.
I The name of the Employer appears as amended at the hearing
95 NLRB No. 60.
SCULLIN STEEL CO. 531
2. The labor organizations 2 involved claim to represent employees
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 .1
4. The United Steelworkers of America, CIO, hereinafter termed
the Steelworkers, requests in Case No. 14-RC-1387, certification as
bargaining representative of all production and maintenance em-
ployees at the Employer's St. Louis, Missouri, plant, excluding brick-
layers'' their helpers and apprentices, office and clerical employees,
guards, professional employees, and supervisors as defined in the Act .6
The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local No. 1,
AFL, hereinafter called the IBEW, seeks to represent in Case No.
14-RC-1361, a unit of all maintenance electricians at the Employer's
plant. The IBEW contends that these employees constitute a group
which appropriately may be severed from the existing unit of pro-
duction and maintenance employees represented by the Intervenor.
The Employer, Intervenor, and Steelworkers all oppose the sev-
erance of the maintenance electricians from the existing unit of pro-
duction and maintenance employees, on the ground that these
employees do not comprise a group doing solely craft-type work, and
further, that the Employer is part of the basic steel industry.
The record discloses that the Employer's plant occupies an area of
approximately 100 acres, situated between two railroads. There are
several buildings on this property, one of which is a new building
known as the South Plant, which, although operated by the Employer,
is owned by the Federal Government.. The Employer, using its own
facilities known as the North Plant, produces ingot stee17 and steel
2 Independent Steelworkers Organization , hereinafter termed the intervenor , was granted
Intervention.
The Employer moved to dismiss both petitions on the ground that neither Petitioner
produced any evidence of interest at the hearing . The motion is hereby denied.
We have frequently held that the showing of interest is an administrative matter for
determination by the Board and not subject to collateral attack. Central Bus Lines, Inc.,
88 NLRB 1223 ; West Coast Trailways, 88 NLRB 1227.
4 Inasmuch as both petitions were timely filed , we find no merit to the contention in
their briefs by the Employer and Intervenor that the contract between them , which expired
June 1, 1951; operates as a bar to the within proceedings.
5 Although the Steelworkers ' petition did not exclude the bricklayers , its petition was
amended at the hearing to exclude them from the unit. The record discloses that the
Bricklayers International Union , Local No. 1 , has represented for over 40 years all brick-
layers and apprentice bricklayers as a separate unit at the Employer ' s plant.
6 The unit sought by the Steelworkers is substantially the same as the existing unit
represented by the Intervenor which , since May 1942 , has represented all the production
and maintenance employees at the Employer ' s plant on a plant-wide basis with the excep-
tion of the bricklayers and their apprentices as previously noted.
' The record discloses that about 75 percent of the Employer 's production is ingot steel
which it produces in open hearth furnaces. The Employer ships the ingot steel directly
to rolling mills to be rolled into sheet steel.
961974-52-vol. 95-35
532 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
castings principally for railroad cars. In addition thereto, the Em-
ployer is about to begin the production of armor plate in the South
Plant which it began to operate for the Federal Government on
January 1, 1951.8 Both the North Plant and the South Plant are
conducted as a single integrated enterprise.°
The IBEW's 'contention that the electricians at the Employer's
plant constitute an appropriate unit is based on craft considerations.
We find it unnecessary to determine whether the employees whom the
IBEW seeks to represent constitute a recognized craft group, because
the record clearly indicates that the Employer's operations place it
within the basic steel industry, where the Board has declined to sever
craft employees from an industrial unit.'' We shall, therefore, order
that the petition of the IBEW be dismissed and shall find appropriate
the plant-wide unit sought by the Steelworkers.
We find that all production and maintenance employees at the
Employer's St. Louis, Missouri, plant, including lead men," but ex-
cluding bricklayers, their helpers and apprentices, office and clerical
employees, guards, professional employees, and supervisors as defined
in the Act, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective
bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
Order
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition filed in Case No. 14-RC-1361
be, and it hereby is, dismissed.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this
volume.]
8 The record discloses that the South Plant was previously operated by the Employer for
the Federal Government from August 1943 to August 1945 and from October 1948 to
August 1949.
6 The term , Employer 's plant , is used throughout to indicate both the North Plant and the
South Plant.
10 National Tube Company, 76 NLRB 1199; Baldwin Locomotive Work8, 78 NLRB 803.
11 Lead men are included in accordance with the stipulation of the parties.
PLAINFIELD COURIER-NEWS Co. and ELIZABETH NEWSPAPER GUILD,
AFFILIATED WITH AMERICAN NEWSPAPER GUILD, CIO , PETITIONER,
Case No. 2-RC-92911 . July 05,1951
Decision and Direction of Election
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a hearing was held before Jerome A. Reiner, hearing
95 NLRB No. 65.