Foundry Manufacturers Negotiating Committee

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 23, 1952

98 N.L.R.B. 1256 (N.L.R.B. 1952)

1256 DECISIONS..OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
the Board, under such circumstances, finds to be appropriate for pur-
poses of collective bargaining. In the event a majority in either group
vote for the Intervenor, the Intervenor may continue to bargain for
such group as part of the existing unit and the Regional Director Will
issue a certificate of results of election to such effect.
[Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication in this
volume.]
FOUNDRY MANUFACTURERS NEGOTIATING COMMITTEE and METAL &
MACHINERY WORKERS OF AMERICA, INDEPENDENT , PETITIONER
CRUCIBLE STEEL CASTINGS COMPANY and METAL & MACHINERY WORK-
ERS OF AMERICA, INDEPENDENT , PETITIONER
FULTON FOUNDRY & MACHINE COMPANY, INC. and METAL & MACHIN-
ERY WORKERS OF AMERICA , INDEPENDENT , PETITIONER
STANDARD ALLOY COMPANY , INC. and METAL & MACHINERY WORKERS
OF AMERICA, INDEPENDENT , PETITIONER
MADISON FOUNDRY COMPANY and METAL & MACHINERY WORKERS OF
AMERICA, INDEPENDENT , PETITIONER . C a s e s Nos. 8-RC-1388,
8-RC^4399, 8-RC-1400, 8-RC-1401, and 8-RC-1479. Ap'ril 23,
1952
Decision , Order, and Direction of Election
Upon separate petitions duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the Na-
tional Labor Relations Act, a consolidated 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 these cases to a three-mem-
ber panel [Chairman Herzog and Members Houston and Murdock].'
Upon the entire record in these cases, the Board finds :
1. The Employers are engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the Act.
2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent certain em-
ployees of the Employers.2
' The motions of the Employers and International Molders & Foundry Workers Union
of North America , Local 218 , A. F. L, herein called the Molders, to dismiss the petition
in Case No 8-RC-1388 on various grounds, are denied for reasons stated hereinafter.
Similar motions to dismiss the petitions in Cases Nos . 8-RC-1399 , 8-RC-1400, 8-RC-1401,
and 8-RC-1479 are granted for the reasons stated in paragraph 4
2 The Employers contend that the Petitioner is not a labor organization within the mean-
ing of the Act We find no merit In this contention The record clearly shows that the
Petitioner exists for the purpose of bargaining collectively with employers with respect
to wages, hours , and conditions of work R . J. Reynolds Tobacco Comnpany, 88 NLRB 600,
and cases cited therein
98 NLRB No. 187.
FOUNDRY MANUFACTURERS NEGOTIATING COMMITTEE 1257
- 3. Foundry Manufacturers Negotiating Committee, herein called
the Committee, and the Molders contend that a master contract be-
tween them embracing all the employees involved in this consolidated
proceeding and effective from May 1, 1951, to April 30, 1952, is a bar.
The Petitioner asserts that a schism within the contracting union pre-
vents-the contract from operating as a bar.
We find it unnecessary to resolve the schism issue. The contract
is automatically renewable unless notice of termination is given within
60 days of the expiration date. Because the operative date of the auto-
matic renewal clause, or Mill B date," has passed and the petition was
filed before that date, we find the contract no bar to a present deter-
mination of representatives.4
A question affecting commerce exists in Case No. 8-RC-1388 con-
cerning the representation of employees of the Employers within the
meaning of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.5
However, for the reasons set forth in paragraph 4 below, we find that
no questions affecting commerce exist in Cases - Nos. 8-RC-1399,
8-RC-1400, 8-RC-1401, and 8-RC-1479, within the meaning of Sec-
tion 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. In Case No. 8-RC-1388, the Petitioner filed a petition seeking to
represent a multiemployer unit composed of all employees of the 10
employer-members of the Committee covered by the current contract
between the Committee and the Molders.6 However, the Petitioner
at the hearing and in its brief, contends that only single employer units
are appropriate. In -Cases Nos. 8-RC-1399, 8-RC-1400, and
8-RC-1401, respectively, the Petitioner seeks to represent single em-
ployer units at the plants of three members of the Committee, composed
of all production and maintenance employees of the Crucible Steel
Castings Company, and all foundry employees of Fulton Foundry &
Machine Co., Inc., and Standard Alloy Co., Inc. In Case No.
8-RC-1479, it requests a unit limited to the employees performing
molding and core-making work at the Madison Foundry Company,
Mill B . Inc., 40 NLRB 346.
• Efco Manufacturing, Inc , 97 NLRB 263, and case cited therein.
s The Employers and the Molders contend , in effect , that the Petitioner is not the real
party in interest but actually is fronting for its several shop committees that have not
complied with the filing requirements of Section 9 (f), (g), and (h) of the Act. The
record discloses that the shop committees are not in existence as functioning labor organ-
izations , have no officers , and are patently incapable of complying with the filing require-
ments of Section 9 In these circumstances , and as there is no affirmative showing of
subterfuge on the part of the Petitioner or that the Petitioner will not adequately represent
the employees involved , we find no merit in this contention Cribben & Sexton Company,
S2 NLRB 1409.
This unit specifically includes all employees performing molding and coremaking work
at the Madison Foundry Company ; all production and maintenance employees at the
Crucible Steel Castings Company , including truck drivers , janitors , yardmen , expediters,
and pattern chasers ; and all foundry employees employed at the Bowler Foundry Company,
The Cleveland Punch & Shear Works Co., City Foundry Division, The Cuyahoga Foundry
Company , Fulton Foundry & Machine Co. Inc, The Hill Acme Company , International
Foundry Company , Meech Foundry , Inc., and Standard Alloy Company, Inc.
1258 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
another employer-member of the Committee.' Although the Em-
ployers and the Molders agree with the specific internal composition
of the various units proposed by the Petitioner, they disagree as to
their scope, asserting that only the multiemployer, contractual unit
is appropriate. The International Union, United Automobile, Air-
craft & Agricultural Implement Workers of America, CIO, herem-
called the UAW-CIO, agrees with the Petitioner's unit contentions."
The Foundry Manufacturers Negotiating Committee, a voluntary
association composed of the 10 Employers involved in this proceed-
ing, is organized solely for the purpose of conducting bargaining
negotiations with the Molders relating to the foundry operations of
its members in the Cleveland Ohio, area. The Committee, after
group-bargaining policy is determined, inter alia, effectuates such
policy through the negotiation of a master collective bargaining agree-
ment that is binding upon all its members.
For a period of about 50 years, the Molders has bargained on a.
multiemployer basis with a group of Cleveland, Ohio, foundry oper-
ators, including several of the Employers involved in this proceeding,
through the Committee, or the latter's predecessors, as their repre-
sentative. During most of that period, only the employees classified
as molders, coremakers, and their apprentices, were covered by the
bargaining negotiations, and all agreements covering them were oral.
Beginning in 1941, the Molders executed separate, identical written
agreements with each employer-member of the Committee, which,
except in the case of the Madison Foundry Company, covered both
journeymen and nonj ourneymen, employees. From 1943 until 1947,
the Committee, on behalf of all its members, executed successive col-
lective bargaining contracts with the Molders embracing all employees
of its employer-members who were members of the Molders. On
June 9, 1950, the Committee and the Molders executed an agreement
covering all members of the Committee involved in this proceeding,
with the exception of the Crucible Steel Castings Company, in which
the Molders was granted recognition as exclusive bargaining repre-
sentative of all employees engaged in molding and coremaking work
at the Madison Foundry Company, and all foundry employees of the
other eight members. At that time a representation proceeding in-
volving the Crucible Steel Castings Company was pending before the
Board. On October 2, 1950, after the Molders was certified by the
a As an alternative position with respect to all five petitions, the Petitioner is willing
to represent any unit, or combination of units, that the Board might find to be appropriate.
8 UAW-AFL, Amalgamated Local Union 754, International Union, United Automobile
Workers of America, AFL, also intervened at the hearing but was permitted to withdraw
its intervention after the Petitioner amended its unit request in Case No. 8-RC-1479,
involving the Madison Foundry Company, so as to exclude all employees presently
represented at that plant by the UAW-AFL.
a See footnote 8 The agreement with this Employer covered only employees classified
,Ls journeymen Another labor organization represented the nonjourneymen employees.
FOUNDRY MANUFACTURERS NEGOTIATING COMMITTEE, 1259
Board as the bargaining representative of the Crucible Steel Castings
Company's employees following a Board-directed election,1° that Em-
ployer adopted the June 9, 1950, contract and applied its provisions to
its employees. Thereafter, on October 24, 1950, pursuant to a union
authorization certificate issued by the Board,1' the Committee and
the Molders amended the June 1950 agreement, incorporating therein
a new union shop clause. On May 1, 1951, the Committee and the
Molders executed their current contract covering.a multiemployer
unit that is substantially the same as that requested in Case No,
8.C-1388.
In support of its contention that only single employer units are
,,ppropriate, the Petitioner urges that our decision in the Crucible
Steel Castings case, cited above, should be followed. The Board in
that case found that the multiemployer bargaining history on a "mem-
bers-only" contract basis was not controlling, and directed an election
in a single employer unit composed of employees of one of the mem-
bers of the Committee. The Petitioner also asserts that the with-
drawal of several members of the Committee from group bargaining
in the past, and the present bargaining on an individual basis by an-
other member with respect to its nonj ourneymen foundry employees,
militate against our finding that only a multiemployer unit is appro-
priate. We find no merit in these contentions.
It is clear from all the foregoing that the Employers have delegated
to the Committee authority to represent them in collective bargaining,
ta1d by their past participation through the Committee in joint bar-
gaining, have evidenced an intent to be bound by group rather than
individual action in collective bargaining. Moreover, we believe that
where there has been a substantial history of collective bargaining
based upon contracts granting exclusive recognition, such as the multi-
employer contracts disclosed by the present record as having been in
effect since June 1950, this bargaining history is entitled to controlling
weight,12 despite the failure of the previous history to establish any-
thing more than bargaining on a members-only basis. Likewise, the
withdrawal of members. from employer associations does not, per se,
preclude a determination that a multiemployer unit comprising the
employees of the remaining members is appropriate 13 Nor does the
fact that the Madison Foundry Company's past participation in mul-
tiemployer bargaining on a more limited group basis for its foundry
10 90 NLRB 1843.
" Case No. 8-UA-2061. The union-authorization election In that case was held by
agreement in a multiemployer unit including the Crucible Steel Castings Company and all
the other employer-members who bargain through the Committee.
'a See , Pacific Veneer & Plywood Corporation, 94 NLRB 1726, and cases cited therein.
Cf International Paper Company , Tonawanda Hill, 97 NLRB 764; and International
Paper Company , Southern Kraft Division , 94 NLRB 483
'9 Furniture Employers ' Council of Southern California , Inc, and Member Employers,
96 NLRB 1002.
1260 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
employees than that of the other members militate against the appro-
priateness of the association-wide unit.14 Under all the circumstances,
we find that only the multiemployer unit is appropriate in this case.
We shall therefore dismiss the petitions requesting single employer
units in Cases Nos. 8-RC-1399, 8-RC-1400, 8-RC-1401, and
8-RC-1479. As the Petitioner has requested an association-wide,
multiemployer unit in Case No. 8-RC-1388, and has expressed a will-
ingness to represent the employees in such unit in the event that the
Board deems the same to be the only appropriate unit, we shall direct
an election in the multiemployer unit hereinafter described.
We find that the following employees of the Employers at Cleve-
land, Ohio, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collec-
tive bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (a) of the Act :
All employees working at molding and coremaking at the Madison
Foundry Company, excluding all other employees and all supervisors
as defined in the Act; all production and maintenance employees at
the Crucible Steel Castings Company, including truck drivers, jani-
tors, yardmen, expediters, and pattern chasers, but excluding all office
clerical. employees, chemists, metallurgists, engineering trainees,
clerks in pattern storage, pattern makers, professional employees,
watchmen, guards, assistant foremen, foremen, and all other super-
visors as defined in the Act; and all employees employed in the
foundry at Bowler Foundry Company, The Cleveland Punch & Shear
Works Co., City Foundry Division, the Cuyahoga Foundry Company,
Fulton Foundry & Machine Co., Inc., The Hill Acme Company, In-
ternational Foundry Company, Meech Foundry, Inc., and Standard
Alloy Company, Inc., excluding office and clerical employees, pro-
duction clerks,' chemists, engineering trainees, metallurgists, all em-
ployees not working at foundry work who are covered by collective
bargaining agreements with other labor organizations, watchmen,
guards, professional employees, assistant foremen, foremen, and all
other supervisors as defined in the Act.
Order
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petitions filed in Cases Nos. 8-RC-1399,
8-RC-1400, 8-RC-1401, and 8-RC-1479 be, and they hereby are,
dismissed.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this
volume.]
u Avondale Dairy Co., at al ., 92 NLRB 89.