Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Co.

In the Matter'Of MINNESOTA MINING &' . MANUFACTURING COMPANY and MINNESOTA MINING EMPLOYEES INDEPENDENT UNION _ In the Matter of MINNESOTA MINING & MANUFACTURING COMPANY and WAREHOUSE EMPLOYEES UNION, LOCAL 503J. B. T. C. W. & H. In the Matter Of MINNESOTA MINING & MANUFACTURING COMPANY and INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS , DISTRICT' #77-A. F. OF L. In the Matter 'Of MINNESOTA MINING & MANUFACTURING COMPANY and INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, LOCAL UNION No. 110 . Cases Nos. 18-R-979, 18-R-991, 18-R-993 and 18-R-1994, respee- tively.Decided July 20,1944 Messrs. Richard S. Felhaber and Robert H. Tucker, of St. Paul, Minn., for the Company. Lipsehultz, Serbine c0 Lipschultz, by Messrs. Samuel Lipschultz- and William M. Serbine, of St. Paul, Minn., for the Independent. Mr. Solly Robins, of Minneapolis, Minn., for the' Warehouse Em- ployees. . Mr..James Ashe, of St. Paul, Minn., for the I. A. M. Mr. Charles R. Brett. of St! Paul, Minn., for the I. B. E. W. Mr. William Gydesen, of St. Paul, Minn., for the A. F. of L. Mr. William D. Gunn, of St. Paul, Minn., for the A. F. of L., the I. B. E. W.,-and the I. A. M. Helstein d Hall, by Mr. Kenneth J. Enkel, of Minneapolis, Minn: and Mr. Robert Madigan, of St. Paul, Minn., for the Chemical Workers. Mr. Wallace E: Royster, of counsel to the Board. DECISION DIRECTION OF ELECTION AND ' ORDER STATEMENT OF THE CASE Upon petitions duly filed by Minnesota Mining Employees Inde- pendent Union, herein called the Independent; by Warehouse Em- 57 N L R. B., No. 90. 494 MINNESOTA 'MINING & MANUFACTURING COMPANY 495 ployees Union, Local 503, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers of America, A. F. of ,L., herein -called` the, Warehouse Employees ; by Lnteriiational, Association _of, Machinists, District #77-A. F. of L., herein called the I. `A. M.; and by International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local Union No. 110, A. F. of L., herein called the I. B. E. W ., each alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen , concerning the, representation of employees of Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Company, St. Paul ;'Minnesota , the National Labor Relations Board consolidated the proceedings 1Ierein and provided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice before Clarence A . Meter, Trial Examiner . ' Said hearing was held on May 5, 1944, at Minneapolis , Minnesota, and resumed-on May 11, 12 and ,13, 1944, at St. Paul , Minnesota. The Company,. the Independent , the Warehouse Employees, the I . A. M., the L.B. E. W., United Gas, Coke & Chemical Workers, Local 75, C. I . 0., herein called the Chemical Workers, and American Federation' of Labor, herein called the A. F. of L., appeared , participated and were afforded full opportunity to be heard , to examine and cross -examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing on th e issues . The Trial Exam- iner's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. All parties were afforded opportunity to file briefs with the Board., - Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following: ,FINDINGS of FACT 1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY Minnesota Mining & . Manufacturing Company is a Delaware cor- poration with its principal office and 'place of business ,in St. Paul, Minnesota , where, it is engaged in the manufacture of abrasive ma- terials,-pressure sensitive tapes, roofing granules , and chemicals. The Company also operates plants at Wausau, Wisconsin,, Detroit,, Michi- gan, and ' Copley, Ohio. The employees in the St. Paul plant alone are concerned in this proceeding. , During ,1943 the Company pur- chased raw materials for use at the St. Paul, plant , having a value in excess of $1,000,000, of which more, than 80 percent was shipped -to St. Paul from points outside the State of Minnesota . During the same period the finished products of the St. Paul plant exceeded $1,000,000 in value and 80 percent of such products was shipped from St. Paul to points outside the State of Minnesota. - I _ The Company concedes,,and we find, that it is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. 496. DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD II. THE` ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED t Minnesota Mining Employees Independent Union is an unaffiliated labor organization, admitting to membership employees of the Com- pany. . Warehouse Employees Union, Local 503, chartered by International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs,, Warehousemen & Helpers, of 'America, is affiliated through its parent with the American Federa- tion of Libor and is a labor organization admitting to' membership • 'employees of the Company. • • International Association of Machinists, District #17, is a labor organization affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, ad- mitting to membership employees off the Company. In Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local Union No. 110, is a labor organization affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, admitting to membership employees of the Company. United Gas, Coke & Chemical Workers, Local 75; is a labor organ- ization affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, ad- ,mitting'to membership employees of the Company. American Federation of Labor appears in this proceeding as a labor organization, admitting 'to membership -employees of the Company. III. THE QUESTION . CONCERNING REPRESENTATION In March '1944 the Independent and the Warehouse Employees ad- vised the Company that each represented a majority of the employees in the unit which it claims to be appropriate and requested recognition as bargaining representative for such employees. The Company re- 'fused to extend recognition to either labor organization's without Board certification. The I. A. M., the I. B. E. W., the Chemical Workers and the A. F. of L., did not request recognition prior to the hearing, but counsel for the Company stated on' the record that none of these organizations would be recognized with Board certification. A statement of the Field Examiner, introduced in evidence at the hearing,-'indicates that the several labor organizations represent a substantial number of the Company's employees.' ' 1 Eacli union submitted signed cards indicating its representation among the Company's employees to be as follows : Produc- Receiving tion and Depart- I A M I. B. E W. Mamte- ment unit unit unit, - nance unit in unit -------------------------------- Employees 2,718 57 100 *26 I peent------------------------------------- "735 34 6 . 14 Chemical Workers-------------- ----------------- 306 3 ' • 29 3 Warehouse Employees --------------------------- ------------ 35 ----------- ------------ I A. M ------- ------------ 28 I. B. E. W - ------------ ------------ ------------ 10 'The I B E. W. seeks a unit of only 13 employees in the Electrical Shop -Determined by a spot -check. MINNESOTA' MINING & MANUFACTURING COMPANY 497 We find that a question' affecting commerce has arisen concerning the representation of employees of the Company within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT ' The Company's main plant in St . Paul consists of a series of -21 interconnected buildings which house the major production and main- tenance departments. Some warehousing, shipping and receiving employees are located in rented warehouses in a downtown area some distance from the plant. All' employees attain certain prerogatives and rights based on the length of their service with the Company, but departmental seniority is controlling for purposes of promotions and lay-offs. The production processes of the Company are highly inte- -:grated and entail a systematic flow of raw materials and semifinished goods from and to the numerous departments and warehouses. The Company, the Independent , and the Chemical Workers contend that this integration argues for the propriety of a plant-wide industrial unit. 'The A. F. of L. agrees partially but would exclude from such a unit the employees claimed by the Warehouse employees , the I. A. M. and the 2. B. E. W. A. The Receiving and Shipping Department ,One of the Company's departments is denominated Shipping and another Receiving. Both function under a single superintendent and until 1942 constituted a single department. The Warehouse Em- ployees seeks a unit limited to the employees in. the Receiving De- partment who unload materials from freight cars and trucks for ware- housing or delivery to production departments. However, there is no clear functional separation between these employees and those in the Shipping Department. The latter also receive materials for de- livery to production departments 'and perform similar and in some cases identical work. Still other employees attached to production and maintenance departments receive and store materials. Identical categories such as checker, trucker, and helper are in both depart- ments, and employees are temporarily transferred from one depart- inent to the other. Receiving Department employees are not crafts- men and perform only a part of the task involved in securing the flow of materials into and products out of the plant. We find no reason on the basis of skill or function to, separate Receiving Department employees, for bargaining purposes, from other production, main- tenance, and service employees. We shall, therefore, dismiss the peti- tion of the Warehouse Employees in Case No. 18-R-991. 601248-45-vol 57-33 4 498 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD- B. The Machine Shop One of the departments of the Company, under a single superin- tendent, is the Machine Shop which is located in the main plant. The function of the Machine Shop is to construct machinery for the pro- duction processes and to keep production machinery and buildings in operation and repair; There are 140 employees in this department divided as follows : 60 machinists, machinist assistants, and helpers; 17 grinders; 9 millwrights, assistant•niillwrights, and helpers; 9 welders; 5 clerks; 2 janitors; painters; 10- steamfitters and steamfitter helpers; 26 electricians, assistant electricians, and electrician helpers. .Each major group such as machinists, shop electricians,_ laboratory electricians, welders, grinders, and steamfitters, is supervised by a fore- man with^the assistance of one or more leadmen. Eighteen machinists are regularly stationed throughout the plant maintaining production machinery and nearly all, on,occesion, work out of the machine shop. Welders, millwrights, and grinders also perform many of their duties out of the shop. The clerks include tool crib attendants, a receiving clerk, and a time-records clerk. The last is not a timekeeper but a clerk who supplies data for cost accounting. The I. A. M. desires to represent the machinists, the grinders, the welders, the millwrights, and their respective helpers, and the clerks, in a separate bargaining unit. There is no showing that this is 'a craft grouping and presumably welders, clerks, and millwrights have skills different from those of the machinists. Neither does the I.A. Al. proposal comprehend a functional grouping. It is apparent that steam fitters, painters, and electricians no less than machinists, grind- ers, welders, millwrights, and clerks, are essential to the maintenance function. 'We conclude that there is no reasonable support for, the unit described by the I. A. M. and, therefore, shall order the dismissal of its petition in Case No. 18-R-993. There are 26 electricians, assistant electricians, and helpers in the machine shop of whom the I. B. E. W. would represent 13. The group which the I. B. E. W. claims works in the electrical shop and through- out the plant installing and maintaining wiring systems. Iri. an adjacent room the electricians in the electrical laboratory design elec- trical equipment, such as control boxes, which then may be manu- 'factured by the electricians in the shop and installed by the cooperative MINNESOTA MINING, & MANUFACTURING COMPANY 499 efforts of the two groups. There is some indication that the laboratory, electricians 'are the more highly skilled although, perhaps, in a nar- rower field. The Company asserts that both groups have the same wage scale and perform closely related work . Since both shop electricians and laboratory electricians have complementary .skills in the same field, since they frequently work together, and since their working condi- tions and interests appear to be substantially identical , we, find no reason, to separate the two groups for bargaining purposes. Accord- ingly, we shall dismiss the petition of the I. B. E. W. in. Case No. 18-R-994. The employees in the other plants of the Company are represented in production and maintenance units plant-wide in scope. . At Wassau, Wisconsin, the employees are represented by an A. F. of L. affiliate; at Copley , Ohio, by a United Mineworkers Local; and at Detroit, Michigan, by a union local once affiliated with the C. I. O. but now, allegedly , with the United Mine Workers. Until 'recent months,; the production and maintenance employees at the St. Paul plant were rep- resented by an independent union in a plant-wide unit . This inde- pendent has since been disestablished by the Company. While these factors do not of themselves determine-the propriety of the plant-wide unit, coupled with others to which we have adverted , they tend to sup- port the position of the Chemical Workers and the Independent. None of the union 's which seeks a smaller unit has described a group we can deem appropriate, but, on the other hand , the Independent, the Chemi- cal Workers, and the A. F. of L. are in a position to represent the em- ployees in a plant-wide production and maintenance unit. We are convinced that the operations of the Company are so integrated and functionally interdependent that such a unit is the more feasible. All parties agree that boiler room employees, now represented by International Union of Operating Engineers, A. F. of L., under Board certification should be excluded from any bargaining unit found herein . We-agree. • The I. A. M. and the I. B. E. W . contend for the inclusion of lead- men. The other unions agree and would also include a similar classi- fication, assistant foremen. Since leadmen and assistant foremen have authority to recommend changes in the status of employees , we shall exclude them from the bargaining unit. In consideration 'of the foregoing conclusions , we find that all pro- duction and maintenance employees of the Company at its St. Paul plant and warehouses , including machine-shop employees and receiv- ing-department employees , but excluding. boiler-room employees, clerical employees other than the clerks in the machine shop, office em- ployees, watchmen, guards, leadmen, assistant foremen, foremen, and any other supervisory employees with authority to hire, promote; dis- 500 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR\ RELATIONS BOARD charge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of employ- ees or effectively. recommend such action, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act. V. THE DETERMINATION OF,,REPRESENTATIVES We shall direct that the question concerning representation which has arisen, be resolved by means of an election by secret ballot among the employees in the appropriate unit who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of the Direction of Election hearin, subject to the limitations and additions set forth in the Direction. DIRECTION OF ELECTION By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in-the National Labor Relations Board by Section 9 (c)' of the National',Labor Relations Act, -and- pursuant to Article III, Section 9; of 'National Labor•Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3, it is hereby DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa- tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Company, St. Paul, Minnesota, an election by secret - ballot,shall-be conducted as early as possible, but not later than thirty (30) days from the date of this Direction, under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Eighteenth Region, act- ing in this matter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Article III, Sections 10 and 11, of said Rules and Regu- lations, among the employees in the unit found appropriate in Sec- tion IV, above, who were employed during the pay-roll period im- mediately preceding the date of this Direction, including employees who did not work during the said pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation or temporarily laid off, and including employees in the armed forces of the United States, who present themselves in per- son at the polls, but excluding those employees who have since quit or been discharged for cause and have not been rehired or reinstated prior to the date of the election, to determine whether they desire to be represented by Minnesota Mining Employees Independent Union, or by United Gas, Coke & Chemical Workers, Local 75, affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, or by the American Federa= tion of Labor, for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by none. 2 All parties would permit employees on military leave to participate in the election. This question has had the sympathetic consideration of the Board but the attendant ad- ministrative difficulties appear to be insuperable . We shall , therefore, adhere to our usual procedure. See Matter of Mine Safety Appliances Company, 55 N,L. R. B..1190. ° MINNESOTA MINING & MANUFACTURING COMPANY 501 ORDER Upon the basis-of the foregoing findings of, fact and upon the entire record in the case; the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that the petitions for investigation and certification of representatives of employees of Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Company, St. Paul, Minnesota, filed herein by Warehouse Employees Union, Local 503, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehouse- men & Helpers of America,-A. F. of L., in Case No. 18-R-991; by In- ternational Association of Machinists, District #77-A. F. of L., in Case No. 18-8-993; and by International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local Union No. 110, A. F. of L. in Case N. 18-R-994, be, and they hereby are, dismissed. D