Case No. R 2003-014

Public Case No. R 2003-014

(Cross References R 1992-011, R 1995-032, R 1992-016, RD 2000-052, RD 1998-034 and R 2003-012)

United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing & Pipefitting Industry, Local 562 v.
International Union of Operatoring Engineers, Local 2, Incumbent and City of St. Louis, Missouri

In Case No. R 2003-012, the Operating Engineers sought to represent all Mechanical Maintenance Workers, Lead Mechanic Maintenance Workers, Water Plant Maintenance Mechanics, Lead Water Plant Maintenance Mechanics, excluding all supervisors, managers, clerical and secretarial employees, and Mechanical Maintenance Workers in Building Maintenance at Lambert Airport. In Case No. R 2003-014, the Pipefitters sought to represent all full-time and part-time Mechanical Maintenance Workers, Lead Mechanical Maintenance Workers, Mechanical Maintenance Foreman, and Mechanical Maintenance Helpers, excluding all others. The City maintained that both proposed bargaining units were appropriate. Since the two proposed bargaining units overlapped, the two representation petitions were consolidated for hearing and decision.

The Operating Engineers objected to the consolidation of the two cases and the holding of a hearing. The Board held that the two representation petitions were properly consolidated for hearing and decision. The petitions were filed four days apart. The two petitioned for bargaining units clearly overlapped. The City was the Respondent in both cases and maintained that both units were appropriate. A question of representation existed in both cases. Furthermore, since the City agreed that both bargaining units are appropriate, the units were prima facia appropriate units. Nothing in the Board’s regulations or procedures prevented the Board from consolidating petitions for hearing and decision. The consolidation of the cases also led to judicial economy and was within the broad discretion of the Board.

As to the issue of appropriate bargaining unit, the Board applied the traditional eleven factors to determine community of interest. Based upon an analysis of the factors, the Board determined that the Mechanical Maintenance Workers, Lead Mechanical Maintenance Workers, Mechanical Maintenance Foreman, Mechanical Maintenance Helpers, Water Plant Maintenance Mechanics, and Lead Water Plant Maintenance Mechanics shared a clear and identifiable community of interest. Therefore, they constituted an appropriate unit and an election was ordered.

Furthermore, the Board concluded that the bargaining unit petitioned for by the Operating Engineers in Public Case No. R 2003-012 would cause an over-fragmentation of the bargaining unit and that the Operating Engineers failed to demonstrate that the twenty-eight employees in their proposed bargaining unit required separate representation to protect their right to effective bargaining. The petition in that case was dismissed. However, since the Operating Engineers had a 10% showing of interest in the appropriate unit, both unions appeared on the ballot.