The McGean Chemical Co.

In the Matter of THE MCGEAN CHEMICAL COMPANY, EMPLOYER and UNITED GAS, COKE AND CHEMICAL WORKERS (CIO), PETITIONER Case No. 8-R-9199.-Decided October'4, 1946 Mr. S. D. L. Jackson, Jr., of Cleveland, Ohio, for the Employer. Messrs. Howard M. Metzenbaurm, William Wimmer, and Wendell Ring'holz, of Cleveland, Ohio, for the Employer. Mr. Sidney Grossman, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in-this case was held at Cleve- land, Ohio, on August 2, 1946, before George F. Hayes, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from preju- dicial error and are hereby affirmed. Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations Board makes the following: . FINDINGS OF FACT I. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER The McGean Chemical Company, an Ohio corporation, with its principal office and place of business at Cleveland, Ohio, is engaged in the manufacture of chemical products. During the past year, the Employer's sales were in excess of $1,000,000 in value, of which approx- imately 50 percent represented sales outside the State of Ohio. Dur- ing the same period, its purchases were in excess of $500,000 in value, of which approximately 50 percent was secured from sources outside the State of Ohio. The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. H. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, claiming to represent employees of the Employer. III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION The Employer refuses to recognize the Petitioner as the exclusive bargaining representative of employees of the Employer until the Petitioner has been certified by the Board in an appropriate unit. 71 N. L. R. B., No. 28. 260 THE McGEAN CHEMICAL COMPANY 261 We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the representation of employees of the Employer, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT The Petitioner requests a unit consisting of production, mainte- nance, and warehouse employees, excluding truck drivers, firemen, watchmen, office workers, process men, foremen, and all other super- visory employees. The employer does not oppose the general compo- sition of the unit, but would include the process men. Process men. There are six employee classifications in the produc- tion group.' Normally, one out of three or four production employees is a process man. The Petitioner regards the process men as sub- foremen and therefore would exclude them from the unit as supervis- ory employees. Process men devote the principal part of their time to maiiual labor, and although they keep production, stock, and other records in their respective departments, no inference of supervisory authority can be drawn from their record-keeping functions. As more experienced and skilled employees, they may instruct new em- ployees, but such functions are also exercised by the process helpers and at times by A laborers, both of which categories the Petitioner would include. Inasmuch as the evidence does not show that the process men may hire or discharge other employees or that they make effective recommendations regarding changes in their status, we shall include them in the unit. We find that all production, maintenance, and warehouse employees, including process men, but excluding truck drivers, firemen, watchmen, office workers, foremen, and all or any other supervisory employees with authority to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or effectively recommend such action, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collec- tive bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act. V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES During the week ending May 4, 1946, following the Petitioner's request for recognition, the Employer discharged 60 employees in accordance with their seniority status. The Petitioner maintains that these employees were temporarily laid-off and therefore have not lost their employee status for the purposes of the election, and furthermore that the lay-off was discriminatory. The uncontradicted evidence shows that the discharges resulted from a cessation of the Employer's 'The production employee classifications are as follows- processman, process helper, A laborer, B laborer , C laborer, and D laborer . At the time of the hearing, there were about 77 production employees in the plant, of which 22 were pro •ess men. 262 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD operations because of a coal shortage and a discontinuance of several departments which were not restored when the Employer later resumed its normal operations. At the time of their separation, the employees in question were specifically notified that their services had been termi- nated. Only about five were subsequently rehired, but they were re- garded as new employees. Other than its bare assertion that the lay- off was discriminatory, no formal unfair labor practice charges were filed by the Petitioner with the Board. Upon these facts, we are of the opinion that there is no merit to the Petitioner's contention and that those employees who were separated from the Employer's pay roll during the week ending May 4, 1946, and were not subsequently rehired and employed during the eligibility period adopted herein, are not entitled to participate in the election hereinafter directed. DIRECTION OF ELECTION As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives fbr the purposes of collective bargaining with The McGean Chemical Com- pany, Cleveland, Ohio, 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 Re- gional Director for the Eighth Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Sections 203.55 and 203.56, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Reg- ulations-Series 4, among the employees in the unit found appropri- ate in Section IV, above, who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of this Direction, including employees who did not work during 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 or not they desire to be represented by the United Gas, Coke and Chemical Workers (CIO), for the purposes of collective bargaining.