Ethyl Corp.

In the Matter of ETHYL CORPORATION (SODIUM AND TETRAETHYL LEAD AREAS), EMPLOYER and LODGE 1366, INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS, PETITIONER Case No. 15-RC-201.-Decided June 28, 1949 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing in this case was held at Baton Rouge, Louisiana, on March 21 and 22, 1949, before Robert B. Stark, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. The Employer moved to dismiss the petition on the ground that the unit sought is inappropriate. For the reasons set forth in Section 4, the motions are denied. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member panel [Members Reynolds, Murdock, and Gray]. 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 Petitioner, and an intervening Union, District 50, United Mine `Yorkers of America, herein called the Intervenor, are labor organizations claiming to represent employees of the Employer. 3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa- tion of employees of the Employer, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. 4. The appropriate unit : The Baton Rouge Plant of the Employer is divided into three pro- duction areas, each producing a different ingredient used in compos- ing the ultimate product, "Ethyl Antiknock Compound." Two units have been established for the plant as a whole, one by the Board in 1944,1 for all production and maintenance employees in the Sodium 3 Matter of E I. Du Pont de Nemour8 & Co., 58 N. L. R. B. 514. 84 N. L. R. B., No. 78. 662 ETHYL CORPORATION 663 and Tetraethyl Lead Areas, currently represented by the Intervenor, the other, consisting of the production and maintenance employees in the Ethyl Chloride Area, represented by the Cooperative Bargaining Agency of Baton Rouge, which is not a party to these proceedings. Proposed Machinists Unit On December 23, 1948, the I. A. M. filed its petition in the present case in which it seeks a unit of all inside and outside machinists in- cluding garage mechanics and their regularly assigned helpers and apprentices employed in the Tetraethyl Lead and Sodium Areas, ex- cluding supervisors, guards, and clerical and professional employees. The Employer and the Intervenor contend that the proposed unit is not appropriate. The Employer contends that the proposed unit is inappropriate be- cause it does not include the machinists of the Ethyl Chloride Area. We find this contention without merit. The employees of this Area have had an independent bargaining history since 1940 and are covered by an entirely separate contract. Furthermore, we have held that any severance of a craft must be coextensive with the unit from which it is severed. No contention was raised that the existing production and maintenance units are inappropriate, and we do not have that issue before us.2 On October 28, 1948, the Board issued its Decision and Order in Cases Nos. 15-RC-38 and 15-RC-39,3 involving the same parties as herein, in which the Employer's motion to dismiss the petition of the I. A. M. was granted. We held in that case, that both the outside and inside machinists were craftsmen and that the outside machinists could not properly be excluded from the proposed machinists unit.' The present record affirms that conclusion. We find that the proposed unit in the present case, insofar as it includes both inside and outside machinists, is appropriate and constitutes a craft group possessing similar skills and performing comparable work.5 2 Matter of Central Foundry Company, 74 N. L. it. B. 1026 ; Matter of T. C. King Pipe Company, 74 N. L. R B. 468. s In the Matter of Ethyl Corporation (Sodium and Tetraethyl Lead Areas), 80 N. L. R. B. 9. 4 The "inside" machinists work in the machine and anode shops . The "outside" ma- chinists perform maintenance work and are all specialists, working on scales, refrigerators, pumps, gears, and turbines. The Employer further opposed any craft severance because of the integrated nature of its operations , relying on our decision in Matter of National Tube Company, 76 N. L. R. B. 1199. We find no merit in this contention . The record does not reveal any such high degree of integration as we found existed in the basic steel industry . See also Matter of Worthy Paper Company Ass'n, 80 N. L. R. B. 19; and cf. Matter of Monsanto Chemical Company, 78 N. L. R B 1249. 664 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Garage Mechanics The Employer takes the position that the garage mechanics should be excluded from the proposed unit since these men are not skilled crafts- men and were specifically denied craft severance in the previous case. In that case, Petitioner sought a separate unit for the garage mechan- ics. We held that these employees were not true craftsmen and there- fore could not be severed from the established production and mainte- nance unit. The Petitioner contends that the present case differs from the former, in that it is now seeking to include these mechanics as a component part of the outside machinists group and that the garage mechanics perform sufficient skill"sd tasks to permit their severance and representation by the I. A. M. We find no merit in this contention. Although the record shows that the garage mechanics are classified as outside machinists 6 and are required to go through a training period as helpers, there is no evidence that the garage mechanics per- form the highly skilled tasks of the machinists in the machine and anode shops or the specialized skills of the outside machinists. The major work in the garage appears to be repair and maintenance jobs on bicycles which are used extensively in the plant. Other vehicles are also brought there for repair, such as gas jitneys, electric jitneys, and electric trucks. One man and his helper are assigned to work on three plant locomotives, servicing them, shining them, and doing such work as removing the electric motors.7 Major jobs, however, such as machining armatures, are done by the machinists in the machine shop and reboring of cylinders on other vehicles is done in an adjacent town and not in the plant. We are of the opinion that there is nothing in the evidence in the present case to support a finding that the garage mechanics are highly skilled machinists warranting severance from the established unit of production and maintenance employees in the plant.' They shall be excluded from the unit.° 'The record indicates that most of the mechanics in the garage remain there and are not generally transferred elsewhere. ' There is no special shop for repairing these locomotives They are driven under a shed and over a pit, where the work is done 8 Matter of Gulf Oil Corporation, Supplemental Decision, 79 N. L. R B. 1274. , Cf. Matter of Cities Service Refining Corporation, 83 N L. R B. 890, where the I. A M. successfully sought a unit of inside machinists , outside machinists , and garage mechanics. The evidence there showed that the garage mechanics were highly skilled craftsmen who repaired mobile equipment, such as caterpillars , tractors , automobiles , trucks, and gas and Diesel-driven cranes. See also Matter of Weyerhauser Timber Company, 82 N. L. R. B. 820, where the Board found a unit composed of machinists and auto mechanics appropriate . Here, also the auto mechanics were skilled employees , engaged in the repair and maintenance of Diesel and gas trucks , Diesel tractors and gas powered equipment, such as compressors, welding machines, and water pumps. The cited cases stand in clear contrast with the matter before us where, as is detailed above , the duties performed are relatively simple ones on uncomplicated machines. ETHYL CORPORATION 665 Sodium or Day Service Mechanics 10 The Petitioner wishes to exclude the sodium or day service me- chanics on the ground that these employees do not perform work of skilled machinists. The Employer contends they should be included because their work in great part is similar to that of the outside machinists. There are some 32 of these employees working in the special sodium shop located in the Sodium Area. This shop is separated from the machine and anode shops and is under separate supervision. The men are classified as "sodium service mechanics," not machinists,1' and are on a separate seniority list 12 Their main task is to set up the cathode and anode cells in the proper position for the electrolytic process. They set the cathodes to a tolerance of 1/32 of an inch. The bricklayers 13 brick the cells, removing the neck jacks and sealing the holes, after which the cells are heated. The day service men also disassemble these cells, removing all shells, brick, and anodes, and strip the cells down to the frames, after which they are turned over to other departments, and the same process is repeated. We are of the opinion that the day service mechanics should be ex- cluded from the proposed unit. They appear to have had no special training as machinists and although there is evidence that some part of their work is comparable to that of outside machinists, they could not perform all the duties of the outside machinists without further training. They are not required to work with a great degree of pre- cision or with the tools or equipment which we have held to be indica- tive of a machinist's skills and a prerequisite to finding a craft unit. We shall therefore exclude them from the unit. Mechanical Inspectors The Employer contends these men should be included in the pro- posed unit because they do work ordinarily performed by outside machinists. Petitioner wishes to exclude them. This group of some 21 men was set up several years ago to inspect equipment and maintain it in good condition. They tighten valves, repack stills, repair plug cocks, adjust belts, agitators, and Rockwood drives. They do not use precision instruments requiring the skill of a machinist and although the outside night machinists perform some work done by the inspec- tors when the latter are not on duty, there is no evidence that inspectors 10 These employees were not considered in the previous case. "Until February 1948 their pay was less than inside or outside machinists '3 An individual who has had seniority in other machinist jobs, retains that seniority in this shop. 13 These are employees of an outside contractor and are not involved in this case. 666 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD perform or are trained to perform the skilled work of either the inside or outside machinist group.14 We shall not include the mechanical inspectors. Reclamation and Instrument Mechanics Petitioner contends these employees should be excluded from the proposed unit. The Employer appears to take no position as to these men. Since the record does not disclose that these mechanics possess the experience or perform the work of the skilled machinists, we shall exclude them from the proposed unit. The following employees of the Employer in the Tetraethyl Lead and Sodium Areas at its Baton Rouge, Louisiana, plant may constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act: all inside and outside ma- chinists but excluding the garage mechanics, sodium or day service mechanics, mechanical inspectors, reclamation and instrument me- chanics, office employees, clericals, guards, professionals and all super- visors, as defined in the Act. However, we shall make no final unit determination at this time, but shall first ascertain the desires of these employees as expressed in the election hereinafter directed. If a majority vote for the Petitioner, they will be taken to have indicated their desire to constitute a separate bargaining unit. DIRECTION OF ELECTION As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the pur- poses of collective bargaining with the Ethyl Corporation (Sodium and Tetraethyl Lead Areas) Baton Rouge, Louisiana, an election by secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than 30 days from the date of this Direction, under the direction and super- vision of the Regional Director for the Fifteenth Region, and subject to Sections 203.61 and 203.62 of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 5, as amended, among the employees in the group described above, who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of this Direction of Election, including employees who did not work during said pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation or temporarily laid off, but excluding those em- ployees who have since quit or been discharged for cause and have not been rehired or reinstated prior to the date of the election, and also excluding employees on strike who are not entitled to reinstatement, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented, for purposes of collective bargaining, by Lodge 1366, International Association of Machinists. 14 Matter of Tin Processing Corporation, 80 N. L R B 1369 where we held that oilers were not a part of the machinists craft.