Mallinckrodt Chemical Works

In the Matter Of MALLINCKRODT CHEMICAL WORKS , EMPLOYER and INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF FIREMEN , OILERS AND MAINTI7- NANCE MEN, LOCAL No. 6, AFL, PETITIONER Case No. 14-RC-608 SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES October 20,1949 Pursuant to a Decision and Direction of Election issued by the Na- tional Labor Relations Board on June 14, 1949,E an election by secret ballot was conducted. on July 14, 1949, under the direction and super- vision of the Regional Director for the Fourteenth Region, among the employees of the Employer in the voting group described in paragraph numbered 4 of the said Decision and Direction of Election. Following the election the parties were furnished with a Tally of Ballots. The tally shows that there were approximately 18 eligible voters and that 16 valid ballots were cast, of which 12 were for the Petitioner and 4 were for the Independent Union of Chemical Plant Workers, hereinafter referred to as the Intervenor. On July 18, 1949, the Intervenor filed Objections to the Conduct of the Election and to Conduct Affecting the Results of the Election, alleging: (1) that the date set by the Board for the election was during vacation time when all of the employees were not present and able to vote; and (2) that the Petitioner through its organizers and others engaged in conduct which interfered with the employees' free and untrammeled selection of a bargaining representative. After an investigation, the Regional Director on September 12, 1949, issued his Report on Objections recommending that the objec- tions be overruled on the ground that they do not raise substantial or material issues with respect to the election. Thereafter, the Inter- venor timely filed Exceptions to so much of the Regional Director's Report as recommended that the Objections to Conduct Affecting the Results of the Election be overruled. 184 N. L. R. B. 291. 86 N. L. R. B., No. 95. 662 MALLINCKRODT CHEMICAL WORKS 663 Various incidents were cited by the Intervenor to demonstrate that the employees were coerced and intimidated in the selection of a bar- gaining representative : The Locker Room Incident A few days before the election, five employees were present in the Employer's locker room. One of the employees, a known member of the Petitioner, remarked in a voice loud enough for all to hear, "That works all alone and doesn't do anything around here, just stays on the `belt'. If he doesn't come in with us now, we ought to beat the out of him." One of the men who heard this remark, although admittedly it was not addressed to him, assumed he was the man referred to by the speaker because he was the only man who worked on the "belt." We believe that the implications of this remark are ambiguous and do not constitute such a threat as would justify setting aside the election, particularly because the remark was uttered by one rank-and-file employee without official status in the petitioning union to another rank-and-file employee 2 The Incident of the Ostracized Employee Another occurrence referred to by the Intervenor is a series of remarks made to an employee who had been ostracized by members of the Petitioner since a prior election, held in April 1948. Among the remarks made to this employee, all of which were made by rank-and-file employees, were : (1) that he would be treated as "one of the gang" if he would not vote in the election; (2) that if he voted in the election, he would be made so miserable on his job that he would be glad to get out; (3) that if he did not vote in the election he "would be in the clear." In addition, the night before the election, this employee was visited at his home by a member of the Petitioner and a business agent of the Petitioner. The business agent told him, "It is your privilege not to vote if you don't want to, just as it is your privilege to vote. There won't be any grudge." The employee was told that if he did not vote, he would be treated as "one of the men." The employee then agreed that he would not vote. and was told, "That's the best way out of it; you're in the clear all round." We do not find in any or all of these remarks threats of reprisal or promises of benefit of a type which would normally affect employees' freedom of choice at an election.3 We agree with the Regional Director that the balance of the inci- dents alleged to have interfered with the employees' free choice of a. bargaining representative, even if true, were either too insignificant or 2 Matter of Minneapolis Knitting Works, 84 N. L. R. B. 826. See Matter of Stonewall Cotton Mills, 75 N. L. R. B. 762. 664 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD occurred too far in advance of the .date of the election to have had any probable effect upon the employees' votes in the election .4 Neither the facts disclosed by the investigation of the Regional Director nor the facts alleged in the Intervenor's Objections and Ex- ceptions, considered separately or in conglomeration, show that the employees were prevented from exercising a free choice at the polls by conduct which was both coercive in character and so related to the election in time or otherwise as to have had a probable effect upon the employees' actions at the polls. Accordingly, we overrule the Inter- venor's objections to conduct affecting the results of the election. As no exceptions were filed with respect to the Regional Director's recommendation that the Intervenor's objections to the date of the election be overruled, we hereby adopt the Regional Director's recom- mendation. In the Decision and Direction of Election previously referred to the Board made no final determination of the appropriate unit, but stated that such determination would depend in part upon the results of the election among the employees in the voting group. The Tally of Ballots shows that the Petitioner has secured a majority of the ballots cast in the election. The employees in the voting group there- fore have indicated their desire to be represented in a separate bargaining unit. Upon the basis of the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following : 817PPLEMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT We find that all employees in the two powerhouses at the Employer's St. Louis, Missouri, plant, including powerhouse firemen, powerhouse maintenance men, powerhouse operators, and powerhouse coal un- loaders, but excluding clerical employees, all stationary engineers, and other supervisors as defined in the Act, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Sec- tion 9 (b) of the Act, as amended. CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES IT IS HEREBY CERTLFIED that International Brotherhood of Firemen, Oilers, and Maintenance Men, Local No. 6, AFL, has been designated and selected by a majority of the employees of the above-named - Employer, in the unit hereinabove found by the Board to be appro- priate, as their representative for the purposes of collective bargaining + Matter of Laclede Gas Light Company, 80 N. L. R. B. 839 ; Matter of NAPA New York Warehouse, Inc., 75 N. L. R. B. 1269; Matter of Kroder-Roubei Company, Inc., 72 N. L. R. B. 240. MALLINCKRODT CHEMICAL WORKS 665 and that pursuant to Section 9 (a) of the Act, as amended, the said organization is the exclusive representative of all the employees in such unit for the purposes of collective bargaining with respect to rates of pay, wages, hours of employment, and other conditions of employment. CHAIRMAN HERZOG and MEMBER HOUSTON took no part in the con- sideration of the above Supplemental Decision and Certification of Representatives.