Phillip Morris & Co. Ltd., Inc.

'In the Matter of PHILIP MORRIS & Co. LTD., INC., EMPLOYER and INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS, LODGE No. 10, PETI- TIONER Ca-se No. 6-RC-28.-Decided August 25,1948 DECISION AND ORDER Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before a hearing officer of the National Labor Relations Board. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. Upon the entire record in the case, the Board finds: 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations 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, under the following circumstances : The Petitioner seeks to- represent approximately 50 machine ad- justers and machine fixers 1 at the Employer's 5 tobacco plants in Richmond, Virginia, serving these employees as a bargaining unit from an existing 5-plant production and maintenance unit of 2,400 employees, currently represented by Tobacco Workers International Union, Local No. 203, AFL, herein called the Intervenor. The Inter- venor opposes this severance, predicating its opposition principally upon three grounds : (a) that a currently existing agreement bars the 1 The terms adjuster and fixer are used interchangeably, although the term adjuster is generally applied to those employees who maintain the machines in the stemmeries , and the term fixer is generally applied to those employees who maintain machines in the cigarette and smoking-tobacco plants Hereinafter, except as particularly noted, the term fixer will be used to describe both categories. 79 N. L. R. B., No. 10. 56 PHILIP MORRIS & CO. LTD., 'INC. 57 )resent proceeding; 2 (b) that fixers are not true craftsmen and con- sequently may not appropriately be subject to craft severance; and (c) that the interests of fixers lie with those of production workers with whom they have been joined in a single unit over an 11-year history of collective bargaining. The Employer takes no position on the unit issue. Fixers are closely allied with two other categories of plant em- ployees, (1) production machine operators, and (2) machinists in the machine shop. These are included, respectively, in the existing production and maintenance unit and in the existing machine-shop unit.3 Fixers are responsible for maintaining, repairing, and adjusting a line of automatic machines used in the manufacture of tobacco prod- ucts and are run by machine operators. New parts for these machines are, however, tooled and inserted by machine-shop employees. While the machinists are for the most part headquartered in the machine shop, fixers are not confined to any particular area in the plant apart from production machine operators. The general working conditions of machine operators and fixers are alike. Fixers are drawn from the most efficient machine operators who demonstrate mechanical skill, and, in the event of a reduction in fixer personnel, the fixer, under present contract conditions, may return to his job of operator. There is, however, no interchange between fixers and machinists, who have bargained since 1941 in separate bar- gaining units. Fixers, as such, serve a 21-month apprenticeship before they earn the maximum rates as fixers. Adjusters, as distinguished from fixers, serve a 3-year apprenticeship before they obtain the maximum rate as adjusters 4 The Employer, however, asserts that 3 years is the time necessary for a fixer to reach optimum efficiency. A machine operator undergoes a 4- to 5-week training period, but does not attain maximum efficiency on the machine until about 2 years thereafter. Machinists, on the other hand, in the machine shop undergo a regular 4-year apprenticeship. 2 The Inteivenor contends that the collective-bargaining agreement entered into between the Employer and the Intervenor on February 14, 1945, and amended November 5, 1945, to expire January 31, 1949, is a bar to this proceeding In view of our dismissal on the ground that the unit sought by the Petitioner is inappropriate, we find it unnecessary to resolve the contract-bar issue. 8 These two bargaining units were established as a result of consent elections conducted by the Regional Director on April 25, 1941. From 1937 to the date of the consent elections, production and maintenance employees at the Employer's Richmond plants, including ma- chine-shop employees, bargained as a single unit ' The difference in the apprenticeship is alleged to be due to a "bargaining advantage" obtained for fixers which was, for some reason undisclosed by the record, not obtained for adjusters '58 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL • LABOR RELATIONS BOARD The fixer's mechanical skill relates strictly to the maintenance of automatic tobacco machines of which he is an expert operator. The skills of a journeyman machinist are not so narrowly applicable. Neither the fixer nor the machinist can do the other's work. Each is regarded by the Employer as equally skilled in his respective sphere of activities. From the foregoing facts, it appears that fixers are comparable to set-up men in other industries. They may make some use of the tools in the machine shop, but they make no machine parts. They primarily fix or adjust production machines so that the machines operate prop- erly in the production of tobacco products. Fixers are thus closely related to machine operators and necessary to the continued operation of their machines. In the event of a reduction in fixer personnel, fixers traditionally revert to their former jobs as operators. Ap- prentice training for fixers is not on a formal basis as it is for machin- ists. Although the machine operator may become a fixer after a 21- month training period, the Employer maintains that 3 years is the time necessary for a fixer to reach top efficiency as such. • In an earlier representation proceeding involving the Employer's fixers, the Petitioner herein sought to sever fixers from the production and maintenance unit, which included machine operators, and to represent fixers as a part of its existing machine-shop unit. The Board, although finding that "the fixers have a sufficient degree of skill and cohesiveness to constitute a separate unit along craft lines," nevertheless denied the severance and dismissed the petition, basing its decision in part on the further finding that "the fixer is in origin a machine operator and may revert to that status." 5 On the basis of the present record, we are of the opinion that the fixers sought by the Petitioner do not constitute a sufficiently segre- gated craft group to warrant, in view of the long and successful his- tory of collecting bargaining on a plant-wide basis, severing them from the existing unit of production and maintenance workers, with whom they have bargained jointly since 1937. Accordingly, we find the proposed unit inappropriate. ORDER Upon the basis of the entire record in this case, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that the petition filed in the instant matter be, and it hereby is, dismissed. 5 Matter of Philip Morris t Co., Ltd., Inc., 70 N. L. R. B. 274, 279.