Westinghouse Electric Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Oct 29, 1951

96 N.L.R.B. 1128 (N.L.R.B. 1951)

1128 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
is persuaded that the evidence adduced by the General Counsel does not sustain
the allegations of the complaint that the Respondent has engaged in unfair labor
practices within the meaning of Section 8 (a) (1), (3), and (5) of the Act. The
undersigned will therefore recommend that the complaint be dismissed in its
entirety.
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and upon the entire record
in the case, the undersigned makes the following:
CONCLUSIONS of LAW
1. The Respondent is engaged in commerce within the meaning of Section
2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
2. Stationary Engineers, Local 707, International Union of Operating Engi-
neers. AFL, is a labor organization within the meaning of Section 2 (5) of the Act.
3. The Respondent has not engaged in unfair labor practices within the mean-
ing of the Act.
Recommendations
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact, conclusions of law, and the
entire record in the case, the undersigned hereby recommends that the complaint
herein be dismissed in its entirety.
In the event no statement of exceptions is filed as provided by the Board's
Rules and Regulations, the findings, conclusions, recommendations, and recom-
mended order herein contained shall, as provided in said Rules and Regulations,
be adopted by the Board and become its findings, conclusions, and order, and
all objections thereto shall be deemed waived for all purposes.
WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION and AMERICAN FEDERATION OF
LABOR, PETITIONER . Case No. 8-RC-i287. October 29, 1951
Decision and Order
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a hearing was held before Carroll L. Martin, 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 Act, the Board
has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-
member panel [Chairman Herzog and Members Houston and Mur-
dock].
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 organizations involved claim 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 9
(c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act, for the following reason :
The Petitioner requests a unit of all maintenance employees at the
96 NLRB No. 180.
WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION 1129
Employer's Cleveland, Ohio, plant, who are not now separately repre-
sented in craft units. The Employer and International Union of
Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers, Local 777, CIO, herein called
the IUE, contend that the proposed unit is inappropriate because the
employees involved are not skilled craftsmen and because they have
heretofore been included in a larger unit. The Pattern Makers League
of North America, Cleveland Association, AFL, intervened solely to
protect its representative status on behalf of the patternmakers and,
as none of the parties seeks to represent these employees in this pro-
ceeding, it took no position as to the appropriate unit.
At its Cleveland plant, the Employer is engaged in manufacturing
lighting equipment. The maintenance department consists of both
skilled and unskilled workmen, such as electricians, millwrights, pipe-
fitters, carpenters, powerhouse attendants, maintenance helpers, jani-
tors, and laborers.' These employees perform the usual duties of their
classifications and work generally throughout the plant repairing and
maintaining the physical properties. Since 1939, the maintenance
employees have been included in a single plant-wide bargaining unit,
together with production workers. That unit, previously represented
by Federal Westinghouse Employees Association, and then by United
Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America, CIO, is now
covered by an existing contract between the Employer and the IUE.
In 1948, the maintenance electricians were severed into a separate craft
unit, and they have since been represented by International Brother-
hood of Electrical Workers, AFL.
As set forth above, the Petitioner seeks to sever, from the existing
production and maintenance unit, all maintenance department em-
ployees except the maintenance electricians. We find it unnecessary
to pass upon the asserted craft status of a number of the maintenance
employees here involved. It suffices, for the purposes of this decision,
that the proposed unit is a miscellaneous grouping of skilled and un-
skilled workmen who have heretofore been represented as part of a
plant-wide unit. The Board has consistently refused to establish such
multicraft units in the face of a substantial history of plant-wide
bargaining.2 Accordingly, without regard to the degree of skill of
the various employees involved, we find that the proposed unit is in-
appropriate. We shall, therefore, dismiss the 'petition.3
Order
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition filed herein be, and it hereby
is, dismissed.
1 There is some indication in the record that the metal polishers may also form part
of the maintenance department. In any event , it is clear that the polishers, like the
patternmakers, constitute separate craft units, and are not involved in this proceeding.
' General Mills, Inc, Sperry Divssion, 91 NLRB 984, and cases cited therein.
2In view of this finding , we do not pass upon the IUE's contract bar contention