Sinclair Rubber, Inc.

220 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Association of Bridge, Structural and Ornamental Iron Workers, AFL. MEMBERS HOUSTON and STYLES took no part in the consideration of the above Second Supplemental Decision and Order Amending Certification of Representatives. SINCLAIR RUBBER, INC. and OIL WORKERS INTERNATIONAL UNION, CIO, PETITIONER. Case No. 39-RC-303. September 18, 1951 Decision and Direction of Elections Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Clifford W. Potter, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member panel [Members Houston, Reynolds, and Styles]. Upon the entire record in this case,' the Board finds : 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. 2. The labor organizations 2 involved claim to represent certain em- ployees 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) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. 4. The appropriate unit : The Petitioner seeks a unit of production and maintenance em- ployees, excluding office clerical and technical employees, watchmen, guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act. Each of the intervening unions, with the exception of the Hod Carriers, has requested a craft unit generally covering job classifications within its particular craft jurisdiction. The Machinists seeks a unit composed of all first-class I The requests by the Employer and the Petitioner for oral argument are hereby denied because in our opinion the record and the briefs submitted adequately present the issues and the positions of the parties. 2 The following organizations were allowed to intervene on the basis of a sufficient showing of interest : District Lodge No. 37, International Association of Machinists, herein called the Machinists International Union of Hod Carriers, Local Union No. 18, AFL, herein called the Hod Carriers; Carpenters and Joiners Union of America, Local Union No. 213, AFL, herein called the Carpenters ; International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders and Helpers of America, AFL, herein called the Boilermakers ; United Association of Journeymen & Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipefitting Industry of the United States and Canada, Local Union No. 211, AFL, herein called the Pipefitters ; and International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local No. 716, AFL, herein called the Electrical Workers. 96 NLRB No. 32. SINCLAIR RUBBER, INC. 221 machinists 3 and the toolroom keeper. The Carpenters seeks a unit composed of all carpenters. The Electrical Workers seeks a unit composed ,of all electricians. The Boilermakers seeks a unit com- posed of all boilermakers, temporary boilermakers, welders, and drag- line operators. In the alternative, should the Board find such unit to be inappropriate, the Boilermakers seeks separate units composed of dragline operators, and all boilermakers and temporary boiler- makers, respectively. The Pipefitters seeks a unit composed of all pipe fitters. In addition, the Pipefitters seeks a separate unit of welders, but only if the Board should decide that the welders do not belong in a unit of boilermakers and dragline operators, as requested in the first instance by the Boilermakers. The Hod Carriers seeks a unit composed of all laborers, temporary laborers, janitors, and chauf- feurs. In the alternative, should the Board find the above requested, unit to be inappropriate, the Hod Carriers seeks three separate units composed of all chauffeurs, all janitors, and the laborers, including temporary laborers, respectively. The Employer contends that a pro- duction and maintenance unit is appropriate or, in the alternative, separate units for the production and maintenance employees, and would exclude therefrom, as supervisors, the two labor foremen. The Petitioner contends that only a production and maintenance unit is appropriate and would include the two labor foremen in the unit. The Employer manufactures butadiene, a basic ingredient used in the production of synthetic rubber. Construction of the plant in- volved herein, which is owned by the United States Government, began in 1942 and operations began in early 1944. The plant is operated continuously, 7 days.per week, 24 hours per day, in a manner similar to other continuous-operation chemical plants in related fields of industry. From May 1, 1943, until the latter part of 1947, the employees were represented by a local of the Petitioner in a unit covering all produc- tion and maintenance, employees. The first contract was executed before the plant began operations. However, in 1944 the Petitioner was certified for a plant-wide unit following a Board-directed elec- tion.4 In October 1947, the plant ceased operations. It was reacti- vated on July 11, 1950, and the employees have been unrepresented since that date. It is clear, of course, as the Board has already determined in the earlier proceeding, that a plant-wide production and maintenance unit, 8 Although each of the craft units is described in terms of "first-class," the record estab- lishes that in the maintenance and engineering department where all of the employees involved herein are located there are no helper , apprentice, or "second-class" craftsmen classifications. For convenience, therefore, the designation "first-class" is omitted in the discussion hereinafter. 4 Sinclair Rubber, Inc., 57 NLRB 800. 222 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD as requested by the Petitioner, and-as 'its first request-by the Em- ployer, is appropriate. The question remains, however, as to whether smaller craft units may not also be appropriate . The Petitioner and the Employer urge that such units should not be found to be appro- priate in the plant involved herein because of (1) the past bargaining history and prior Board determination , and (2) the integrated nature of the Employer's operations, as a result of which there are no truly homogeneous craft groups . We do not agree. So far as the first contention is concerned , it is now well established that neither the fact that past bargaining has been successfully con- ducted on a plant-wide basis, nor the fact that the Board found a plant- wide unit appropriate in an earlier proceeding , precludes the Board from permitting the severance of smaller units.5 Turning to the Petitioner's and Employer's second contention, the record reveals that in this plant, as in most continuous-process chemi- cal operations in which preventive maintenance is an important factor, there is a relatively high degree of integration between production and maintenance. However, we do not perceive in this particular branch of the chemical industry that degree of integration between produc- tion and maintenance and a well-established industry pattern of bar- gaining on a plant-wide basis which has impelled the Board to the conclusion in certain industries that only units embracing all produc- tion and maintenance -employees are appropriate .6 Moreover, the Board has already determined that craft units may be appropriate in a plant manufacturing butadiene? Nor do we find apposite those cases to which the Petitioner and Em- ployer direct our attention 8 in which the Board dismissed petitions for groups of maintenance employees in-chemical plants where the Board concluded that, because of the absence of any craft training require- ments and the commingling of skills in the performance of mainte- nance work, among other things, the groups sought were not craft in character and lacked the identifiability and homogeneity essential to establishment as separate units. As noted in more detail below, the maintenance employees sought herein in the craft petitions are all reg- ularly assigned to a separate maintenance and engineering depart- ment. While some of them work throughout the plant in the per- formance of their duties , they are at all times subject to the ultimate supervision of their respective craft foremen. Although the Employer 6 See Section 9 (b) (2) of the Act ; Hughes Tool Company, 77 NLRB 1193; Westinghouse Electric Corporation, 75 NLRB 638. " E g Natsonal Tube Company , 76 NLRB 1199; Ford Motor Company (Maywood Plant), 78 NLRB 887; Weyerhaeuser Timber Company ( Springfield Lumber Division ), 87 NLRB 1076, r Shell Chemical Corporation , 94 NLRB No. 121. 8 E g. Monsanto Chemical Company , 83 NLRB 109 ; E. I. DuPont de Nemoicrs Company, 85 NLRB 1301 ; Carborundum Company, 80 NLRB 756; see also Sylvania Division, Ameri- can Viscose Corporation , 84 NLRB 202; Celanese Corporation of 4merica, 84 NLRB 207. SINCLAIR RUBBER, INC. 223' does not conduct any formal craft apprenticeship program, the crafts- men here involved have either served apprenticeship terms in their respective crafts or have had comparable training and experience be- fore being employed by the Employer. Seniority is on a craft as well as plant-wide basis. On occasion-as, for example, during emergency shutdowns or "turn grounds" s-maintenance employees in one craft category may assist on jobs in another category and may be assisted by some production employees.' However, the record clearly estab- lishes that in its normal operation the Employer adheres to craft lines in the assignment of maintenance work, and we do not believe that this occasional commingling destroys the homogeneity of the craft groups.1o Under all -the circumstances we conclude that none of the factors relied upon by the Petitioner and the Employer is sufficient to warrant the conclusion that only a plant-wide unit is appropriate. We turn, therefore, to a consideration of the specific unit requests of the vari- ous intervenors. The Proposed Machinists' Unit The Machinists requests a unit composed of machinists and the toolroom keeper. The Employer's 15 machinists are highly skilled and use the customary precision hand and machine tools, including micrometers, calipers, shapers, milling machines, lathes, etc., and perform the traditional work of the machinists' trade. They dis- mantle and repair machinery and are frequently required to work to close tolerances. Although machinists occasionally perform duties within another craft classification, they ordinarily work within their own craft, and, with rare exceptions, they are the only employees performing work of that nature. As already noted, the Employer does not maintain an apprenticeship program for machinists, but all of them, except Jefferson, were hired as machinists on the basis of their prior training and broad experience. Although Jefferson was transferred from the operating department to the machine shop as a machinist first-class, he had considerable prior training and ex- perience as a machinist helper. The machinists' equipment, office, and working area are located in a separate area of the maintenance department. Some of their work is performed in production areas but they are always under the ultimate supervision of the machine shop foreman. 9 Every month, on a rotating basis , certain pieces of machinery are shut down for inspec- tion and repair. Each piece of machinery is ordinarily tested and repaired every 6 to 18 months, deAending upon the particular needs of each kind of equipment. 10 Todd Shipyards Corporation , 94 NLRB 774; Carthage Hydrocol, Inc., 91 NLRB No. 67; The Plumbing Contractor's Association of Baltimore , Maryland, Inc., et al, 93 NLRB 1081 ; United States Rubber Company, 91 NLRB No. 213 224 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD We find that the machinists constitute a homogeneous, identifiable, craft group who may, if they desire, constitute a separate bargain- ing unit. The record further establishes that the toolroom keeper who devotes the bulk of his time to work associated with the machin- ists has interests and working conditions similar to those of the machinists and is under the supervision of the machine shop foreman. Accordingly, we shall include him in the voting group with the machinists." The Proposed Carpenters' Unit The six carpenters sought in this proposed unit have their head- quarters in the carpentry shop which is a separately partitioned area in the maintenance department. Although the carpenters work throughout the plant and may assist craftsmen of other classifica- tions during "turn arounds," they normally perform only work within their own craft skills and are under the separate immediate super- vision of the carpentry foreman. The record reveals that these car- penters are skilled craftsmen and are so recognized by the Employer. They were all initially employed as carpenters first-class because of their prior training and experience. No employee has been trans- ferred from any other department to the carpentry shop, or vice versa; the carpenters perform no production work, and other em- ployees do not perform work involving carpentry skills. In these circumstances, we believe that the carpenters may, if they so desire, constitute a separate unit?2 The Proposed Electricians' Unit The seven electricians herein sought as a separate unit are respon- sible for electrical maintenance throughout the plant. This work consists mainly of repairing electrical motors and controls, and in its performance the electricians utilize the tools of their craft. Their shop is located in a separately enclosed area within the maintenance depart- ment and they are under the separate supervision of the electrician foreman, to whom they report at the beginning and end of each day. The electricians do not perform production work but the Employer points to evidence in the record that the electricians occasionally perform work within other maintenance classifications and that pro- duction employees occasionally perform minor electrical work of an unskilled nature, such as the changing of light bulbs. It is perfectly clear, however, that only the electricians spend the great bulk of their time on what can be described as skilled electrical work. As in the ,case of the groups already discussed, although the Employer does n Todd Shipyards Corporation, supra. 12 International Paper Company, Southern Kraft Division (Rayon Plant ), 94 NLRB 500. SINCLAIR RUBBER, INC. 225 not maintain an apprenticeship program for electricians, all of the electricians were required to have broad electrical training and ex- perience as a prerequisite for procuring employment. While they work throughout the plant in the performance of their duties, they are at all times subject to the ultimate control of their craft foreman. It is clear that the electricians constitute an identifiable, homo- geneous craft group of the type which the Board has in the past recognized as appropriate.13 They may, therefore, if they so desire, be established in a separate bargaining unit apart from the Employer's other employees. The Proposed Boilermakers' Unit The Boilermakers seeks a unit composed of all boilermakers, welders, and dragline operators. In the alternative, should the Board find that this single unit is inappropriate, the Boilermakers seeks separate units composed of the boilermakers and the dragline opera- tors, respectively. The boilermakers, welders, and dragline operators are separately located in a nonenclosed area within the maintenance department and are under the supervision of the boiler shop foreman. The boilermakers perform the usual functions involving their particu- lar craft skills and were all hired as skilled craftsmen by the Employer. No employees have been transferred from another department to the boiler shop, or vice versa. Despite the fact that other employees may perform some boilermaker work of an unskilled nature, and the boiler- makers may occasionally perform the functions of other craft groups, the boilermakers here sought are clearly distinguishable from all other employees of the Employer. They are at all times subject to the ulti- mate control of their craft foreman. We conclude, therefore, that the boilermakers may, if they so desire, be established in a separate bar- gaining unit apart from the Employer's other employees 14 The Employer's five welders work throughout'the plant performing jobs characteristic of their trade. Although they are located in the boiler shop and are nominally under the supervision of the boiler shop foreman, the record indicates that this is purely a matter of adminis- trative convenience. In actual operation the welders work in associa- tion with whatever other crafts require their special services in connec- tion with a particular job. They were all hired is skilled craftsmen, having completed prior training and experience sufficient to qualify them for journeyman status. They perform no production work. In these circumstances, we conclude that the welders should not be in- 13 Shell Chemical Corporation, supra; Danley Machine Specialities, Inc., 90 NLRB No. 14- 14 Tenne8see Copper Company, 88 NLRB 1516 Eleven temporary boilermakers have been employed by the Employer for several weeks prior to the hearing and no prospective date for the termination of their cmpi yment has been set. In accordance with a stipu- lation of the parties , we shall allow all temporary boilermakers to vote in this group. 226 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD cluded in the boilermakers' unit, but that they may, if they so desire, constitute a separate bargaining unit.- The dragline operators operate two large draglines, a Caterpillar tractor, and winch trucks. They work,with any employee requiring the services of such equipment. The record does not reveal that the dragline operators are skilled craftsmen, and, while they are physi- cally located in the boiler shop, this, as in the case of the welders, ap- pears to be merely a matter of administrative convenience. We, there- fore, conclude that they may neither constitute a separate unit nor be included in the boilermaker unit. The Proposed Pipefitters' Unit The Employer's pipe shop and its equipment are separately located in a nonenclosed area in the maintenance department. All of the Employer's pipefitters sought in this unit are skilled craftsmen and were initially employed as such, having completed prior training and experience sufficient to qualify them for journeyman status. Although they work throughout the plant, they perform only the traditional work of their trade and are at all times under the ultimate supervision of the pipefitter foreman. While other employees occa- sionally perform pipefitter work of an unskilled nature and at times assist the pipefitters in the performance of their duties, the pipefitters here sought are clearly distinguishable from all other employees of the Employer. They may, therefore, if they so desire, constitute a separate bargaining unit.- The Proposed Hod Carriers' Unit The Hod Carriers seeks a unit composed of all janitors, chauffeurs, laborers, and temporary laborers, excluding all other employees. In the alternative, should the Board find that such unit is inappropriate, the Hod Carriers requests 3 separate units for all chauffeurs, all janitors, and all laborers and temporary laborers, respectively. The Employer employs 1 chauffeur, 7 janitors, 15 laborers and 11 tem- porary laborers. They are all under the ultimate supervision of 2 labor foremen. Certain janitors are regularly assigned to work in the powerhouse and the laboratory, respectively, and are under the immediate supervision of those departmental foremen. The'laborers work throughout the plant. The record shows that there are other is International - Paper Company, Southern Kraft Division, 95 NLRB 155 (Supple- mental Decision and Order ). Because the Boilermakers has demonstrated a showing of interest in this group we shall accord that union an opportunity to appear on the ballot in the voting group of welders , although that union did not express a desire to represent welders separately. We shall also place the Pipefitters , who do seek the welders in a separate unit, on the ballot 16 United States Rubber Company, supra. SINCLAIR RUBBER, INC. 227 employees in the plant who perform work of an unskilled nature, whom the Hod Carriers does not seek to include in the unit. These employees have the same working conditions and employee benefits as the Employer's other production and maintenance employees, and have in the past been represented as a part of a plant-wide unit. Because of these reasons, and the further fact that the present Peti- tioner seeks to include them in the proposed plant-wide unit, we find that a unit composed of chauffeurs, janitors, laborers, and tem- porary laborers,is inappropriate for collective bargaining purposes." And, for the same reasons, separate units composed of the janitors, and laborers and temporary laborers, 'respectively, are likewise inappropriate. While a unit of chauffeurs would be appropriate, the record shows that the Employer employs only one chauffeur, and, we find, in accordance with our-established principles, that a separate unit for the one chauffeur is inappropriate for collective bargaining purposes.,, We shall direct that separate elections be held in the following voting groups deferring our conclusions as to the unit or units appro- priate for collective bargaining until such elections shall have been held : (1) All machinists. (2) All carpenters. (3) All electricians. (4) All boilermakers. (5) All welders. (6) All pipefitters. (7) All production and maintenance employees, including train- ees,19 plant clericals, head shift testers, and stillmen, but excluding employees in voting groups (1) through (6), office clerical and tech- nical employees, guards, labor foremen,20 and all other supervisors as defined in the Act. 17 D. B . Thornton and Lucy Thornton d/b/a D. B. Thornton Co., 94 NLRB 1188; Dover Appliance Company, 76 NLRB 1131. 18 Erie City Iron WVork8, 85 NLRB 1308. 19 These employees work throughout the plant in both the operating and the maintenance departments . Although they may at times be attached to particular craft maintenance groups, their lack of craft skills and diversity of interests militates against their inclusion in any of the particular craft groups. 20 Each labor foreman directs the work of approximately 20 employees and uses his own judgment and discretion in the-performance of the work. He. can handle and adjust minor grievances of the employees and can effectively recommend the promotion of these em. ployees to Special rates We therefore find, contrary to the Petitioner' s contention, that the 2 labor foremen are supervisors within the meaning of the Act. Salt Lake Refining Company, 86 NLRB 68. 228 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD If a majority of the employees voting in groups (1) through (6) select the union which seeks to represent them separately 21 they shall be deemed to have indicated their desire to constitute a separate unit. [Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication in this volume.] (21 In the case of voting group (5) this refers to either the Boilermakers or the Pipefitters if both choose to appear on the ballot. See footnote 15, supra. GEORGE AFTERGOOD & SON d/b/a CALIVOGUE SPORTSWEAR' and Los ANGELES JOINT BOARD, AMALGAMATED CLOTHING WORKERS OF AMERICA, C. I. 0., PETITIONER. Case No. 21-RC-1981 . September 18,1951 Decision and Direction of Election Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Frank H. Stout, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made At the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member panel [Members Houston, Reynolds, and Styles]. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds : 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. 2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain em- ployees 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) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. 4. The Employer has two plants in Los Angeles, which are about a city block apart, one being at 1209 East 14th Street and the other at 1005 East 14th Street. The Petitioner is seeking a unit of production workers in the latter plant only. The Employer contends, however, that the requested single-plant unit is inappropriate and that only a two-plant unit is appropriate for purposes of collective bargaining. The number 1209 plant is engaged primarily in the manufacture of swim trunks, walking shorts, undershorts, sport shirts, and separate supports for swim trunks. It also houses the Employer's offices and showroom. At the time of the hearing, June 25, 1951, this plant was closed down, as its business is largely seasonal, running from late I The name of the Employer appears a9 amended at the hearing. 96 NLRB No. 34.