Hall-Scott, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 10, 1958

120 N.L.R.B. 1364 (N.L.R.B. 1958)

1364 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
the formula approved in the American Potash, case.-' On the con-
trary, the work of the litho-layout men is part of the lithographic
production process and litho-layout men are normally included in
units of lithographic production employees. As the litho-layout men
are not a craft or the type of employees to whom the Board accords
'separate representation, we find that a unit limited to such employees
is not appropriate for collective bargaining. Accordingly, we
shall also dismiss the petition in Case No. 20-RC-3420'.
[The Board dismissed the petitions.]
3 American Potash cE Chemical Corporation, 107 NLRB 1418.
Hall-Scott, Inc. and Wayne Milbradt , Petitioner. Case No. 21-UD-
40. June 10,1958
DECISION AND ORDER
Upon a union-shop deauthorization petition duly filed under Sec-
tion 9 (e) of the National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held
before Fred W. Davis, 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 Leedom and Members Bean and Fanning].
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. The Petitioner seeks to rescind the authority of Sheet Metal
Workers International Association, Local 170 AFL-CIO, hereinafter
called Sheet Metal Workers, and Local 986, Western Conference of
Teamsters, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs,
Warehousemen and Helpers of America, hereinafter called Teamsters,
to make a union-security agreement in behalf of an alleged bargaining
unit of the Employer's production and maintenance employees, exclud-
ing those in the machine shop, the general assembly department, the
electronics department, and studio light department No. 22. All the
Employer's production and maintenance employees are currently
covered by a 3-year contract, containing a union-security provision,
executed on October 17, 1955, by the Employer and Local Lodge 728
and Lodge 1185, International Association of Machinists, hereinafter
120 NLRB No. 181.
HALL-SCOTT, INC. 1365
called Machinists, as well as by Teamsters and Sheet Metal Workers.'
The Employer, Teamsters and Sheet Metal Workers, contend that the
petition should be dismissed because the unit as to which deauthoriza-
tion is sought by Petitioner is not coextensive with the contract unit.
Machinists took no position with respect to the unit alleged by
Petitioner.
The Employer is engaged in the manufacture of various electronic
products. Since at least 1952, Lodge 1185, Machinists, was recognized
by the Employer's predecessor 2 as the representative of the employees
in the machine shop and general assembly department. On November
28, 1952 (in Case No. 21-RC-2785, not published) Local Lodge 728,
Machinists, was certified as representative of the electronic depart-
ment employees,3 _and on March 22, 1955 (in Case No. 21-RC-3809,
not published) Sheet Metal Workers and Teamsters were certified
jointly by the Board as the representative of the remaining employees
in the instant plant. It is only among the last-named group of em-
ployees that the Petitioner seeks a union-shop deauthorization election.
In 1955, after the certification of the Sheet Metal Workers and
Teamsters, the Employer entered into negotiations with all 4 unions,
and on October 17, 1955, the Employer executed a contract with the
4 unions covering all of its employees, effective until October 17, 1958,
with provision for annual reopening on wages. In negotiating this
contract, although the 4 unions bargained jointly as to the overall
provisions of the contract, and all 4 signed the contract, each union
bargained separately on wage rates within its area of jurisdiction. The
same pattern of separate bargaining was followed in the wage
negotiations held in' 1956 and 1957, pursuant to the reopening clause
of the 1955 contract. In addition, in 1957, Sheet Metal Workers and
Teamsters agreed to allow Machinists to negotiate separately with
the Employer with respect to the establishment of a job-training
program for the employees represented by Machinists alone. How-
ever, as to the foregoing wage negotiations conducted by each union
separately, the record discloses that any agreement so negotiated was
ratified by all employees of the Employer and approved by represent-
atives of all four unions. Moreover, the 1955 contract denominates
the four unions as the "Union"; recognizes the "Union" as exclusive
bargaining representative of all the Employer's employees; contains
a union-security provision, and provides that union dues will be
checked off and remitted to the "Union." In separate appendixes, the
contract specifies the wage rates for the various classifications of
1 Both Machinists' locals were permitted to intervene at the hearing on the basis of their
interest in the contract.
' The Employer took over the instant plant from Bardwell & McAllister, Inc, in
May 1955.
' The record shows that the employees in studio light department No. 22 were originally
included in one of the two Machinists' units, but does not indicate which unit that was.
For the purpose of this case, it is not necessary to determine that question.
1366 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
employees, grouping them on the basis of their union affiliation. The
contract refers to the individual unions only in providing for sep-
arate stew-ards'for each union and for representation of each union
on a grievance committee. Although members of one union, when
transferred to a department manned by members of a different union,
are required to transfer union affiliation, they are not required to pay
any initiation fee to the latter union. There is plant-wide seniority
and and employee may "bump" into any job held by all employee
junior in service to him, provided that he possesses the necessary
skill to perform the job. Employee benefits are uniform throughout
the plant.
From the foregoing and on the entire record, we find that the em-
ployees previously certified by the Board or recognized by the Em-
ployer as separate units have been merged into a single unit and
comprise the bargaining unit covered by the existing union-security
agreement contained in the 1955 contract.' Accordingly, as the unit
in which a deauthorization election is sought is not coextensive with
the broader unit covered by the existing union-security contract, we
find- that it is not appropriate for the purposes of a union-shop
deauthorization election.' We shall therefore dismiss the petition.
[The Board dismissed the petition.]
'Cf. San Juan Mercantile Corporation , 117 NLRB 8 , 10; Publicker Chemical Corpora-
tion, 117 NLRB 257; The Langenau Manufacturing Company , 115 NLRB 971.
s Publicker Chemical Corporation , supra ; F. W. Woolworth Company, 107 NLRB
671, 673.
Sheet Metal Workers International Association , Local Union No.
99 and Charles C . Cox and Dohrmann Hotel Supply Company,
Party to the Contract . Case No. 19-CB-467. June 1 2,1958
DECISION AND ORDER
On August 30, 1957, Trial Examiner James R. Hemingway is-
sued his Intermediate Report in the above-entitled proceeding, find-
ing that the Respondent had engaged in and was engaging in certain
unfair labor practices and recommending that it cease and desist there-
from and take certain affirmative action, as set forth in the copy
of the Intermediate Report attached hereto. 'T'hereafter, the Respon-
dent filed exceptions to the Intermediate Report and a supporting
brief.
The Board 1 has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner made
at the hearing and finds that no prejudicial error was committed.
' 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 Leedom and
Members Bean and Jenkins].
120 NLRB No. 184.