Southern Paperboard Corp.

302 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Southern Paperboard Corporation and International Brother- hood of Paper Makers, AFL, and International Brotherhood of Pulp, Sulphite & Paper Mill Workers, AFL, Joint Petitioners and International Association of Machinists , District Lodge No. 96, AFL 1 and Local Union 1391, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL 2 and United Association of Jour- neymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipe Fitting In- dustry of the United States and Canada, Local 188, AFL,3 Pe- titioners. Cases Nos. 10-RC-2836, 10-RC-2839, 10-RC-,0845, 10-RC-2846, 10-RC-2847, and 10-RC-2856. April 20, 1955 DECISION, ORDER, AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS Upon separate petitions duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the Na- tional Labor Relations Act, a consolidated hearing was held before John S. Patton, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. The various motions to dismiss petitions referred to the Board by the hearing officer, which are grounded upon contentions that the units requested are inappropriate, and exceptions taken to rulings made by the hearing officer are disposed of in accordance with the findings and conclusions hereinafter set forth under paragraph numbered 4. The Joint Petitioners' request for oral argument is denied because the record and the briefs submitted by the parties adequately present the issues and the positions of the parties. 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 involved in this proceeding claim to rep- resent certain 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) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act in Cases Nos. 10-RC-2836, 10-RC-2839, 10-RC-2845, 10-RC-2847 and 10-RC-2856. For the reasons discussed in paragraph numbered 4, below, no ques- tion affecting commerce exists within the meaning of the above sections of the Actin Case No. 10-RC-2846. 4. The Employer operates a pulp and paper mill at Port Went- worth, Georgia. After the completion of the plant in 1948, several unions instituted representation proceedings before the Board. After winning the ensuing election directed by the Board,4 the IBEW, the IAM, and the Joint Petitioners were certified as the joint bargaining Herein called the JAM. z Herein called the IBEW U Herein called the Plumbers * Southern Papei board Corporation, 80 NLRB 1456. 112 NLRB No. 41 SOUTHERN PAPERBOARD CORPORATION 303 representative for a plantwide unit of the Employer's production and maintenance employees. Since that time these unions have bargained with the Employer as a single representative for the entire production and maintenance unit in all matters except grievances. Each union has processed, without the assistance of the others, grievances arising among employees in job classifications within that union's jurisdic- tion, a procedure provided in the bargaining agreement between the Employer and the joint representative. No longer wishing to act jointly, these unions-and the Plumbers-have by separate petitions initiated the instant proceeding. Joint Petitioners seek to represent the Employer's production and maintenance employees in a single, plantwide unit, but they also ask that they appear on the ballot in any election directed in this proceed- ing. The Plumbers and the IBEW request the establishment of sepa- rate units of pipefitters and electricians, respectively. The TAM peti- tions for separate units of machinists, welders, and millwrights and by intervention seeks separate units of automobile and diesel me- chanics, blacksmiths, carpenters, painters and store department em- ployees. The JAM also asks that in the event the separate units it seeks are found inappropriate, a single maintenance unit be established which would include all maintenance employees except those craft em- ployees sought by the IBEW and Plumbers, if the Board finds these crafts may constitute separate appropriate units. Joint Petitioners and the Employer oppose the establishment of any unit other than a production and maintenance unit. The Employer contends that the severance of craft units in its plant is precluded by the history of collective ban aniiing on It more com- prehensive basis; the high degree of integration of production proc- esses and maintenance work in the plant; the disruptive effect the separate representation of the units requested herein would have on the Employer's operations and bargaining negotiations; and the sub- stantial overlap and integration of work performed by the various alleged craft groups. As the record discloses that the craftsmen sought devote no substantial part of their time to work outside their respective crafts, and as it is the Board's policy to permit the severance of craft units, except in certain specified industries which do not in- clude the pulp and paper industry, we find no merit in the Employer's contentions.' Joint Petitioners and the Employer also argue that to meet the "traditional representative" test for craft severance a union must dem- onstrate actual, historical representation of such employees within the industry in question. And acting on this premise, Joint Petitioners undertook at the hearing to affirmatively demonstrate, through ex- 5 American Potash c€ Chemical Corporation, 107 NLRB 1418, Bethlehem Steel Company, 108 NLRB 241 , Caltfoima Fish Canners Associattian, 108 NLRB 1320 304 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD pert testimony and research studies, that they are the only unions which have been exclusively dedicated to, and have specialized in, the representation of both production and maintenance employees in the pulp and paper manufacturing industry. We find no merit in this argument as it construes too narrowly the "traditional representative" requirement for craft severance established by the Board in American Potash. The Unit Requested by Joint Petitioners In Case No. 10-RC-2835 Joint Petitioners seek to represent the pro- duction and maintenance employees in a single, plantwide unit, which unit the Employer also contends is the only appropriate one. As a plantwide unit is presumptively appropriate 6 and as the employees in question have been represented in such a unit over the past 7 years, we find that a production and maintenance unit constitutes a unit ap- propriate for the purposes of collective bargaining. The employees which the Plumbers, the IBEW, and the IAM seek to sever in separate craft units are all found in the Employer's various maintenance departments. These departments are under the ultimate supervision of the superintendent of maintenance and the direct super- vision of the machinist foreman, the pipefitting foreman, the outside maintenance foreman, the chief electrician, and the millwright fore- man. The Employer's plant operates through round-the-clock shifts in the manufacture of pulp and paper by continuous interdependent production operations. The work of the maintenance departments is organized to reduce to a minimum the interruption of these operations by the failure of production machinery. Most of the maintenance employees work only during the day shift. However, millwrights, electricians, and pipefitters are divided into two groups, the day maintenance mechanics and the operating or tour mechanics. The day maintenance mechanics work only the day shift and are super- vised almost entirely by the foremen of their respective departments in prescheduled maintenance projects throughout the plant. To make maintenance mechanics quickly and continuously available to remedy unanticipated stoppages in production machinery, the operating elec- tricians, pipefitters, and millwrights are assigned in rotation to all three work shifts, are stationed in the production departments, and are subject to the direction of production department foremen. How- ever, day maintenance mechanics and operating mechanics in each job classification are interchangeable, are carried on a single seniority list, and exercise the same skills. While they have small stalls or shops at one end of the machine shop where they keep personal tools and perform some tasks, the 6 Beaumont Forging Company, 110 NLRL' 2200 SOUTHERN PAPERBOARD CORPORATION 305 maintenance mechanics, other than the machinists, perform much of their work in production areas in close contact with production em- ployees. Both prescheduled and unscheduled maintenance projects frequently require the coordinated efforts of a "team" made up of mechanics in several classifications, but each mechanic performs pri- marily these tasks pertaining to his craft. During periods when work is slack in one classification, maintenance mechanics may be tempo- rarily assigned to assist in other classifications rather than be al- lowed to stand idle. Nevertheless, it is clear from the record that maintenance mechanics work primarily within the ambit of their own job classifications. Maintenance classifications which have the same pay scale, under the recently expired contract, are millwrights, machinists, pipefitters, electricians, head oiler, diesel and motor mechanics, welders, boiler- makers, and blacksmiths. The top rate for mechanics in these classifi- cations, other than leadmen, is $2.25 an hour, a rate which is exceeded by that for no other maintenance classification except electronic elec- tricians and by only 8 of about 90 production and other classifications. In securing qualified maintenance mechanics, the Employer relies first upon the progressive advancement of helpers assigned to each maintenance mechanic classification; only for machinists does the Employer maintain a formal apprenticeship program. The full period for advancement of helpers, in 6-month steps, from the begin- ning to the top helper classification is set by contract at 48 months, but, depending upon the Employer's needs and the helper's ability and prior experience, the time required for advancement to the top helper and journeyman positions may be considerably less. However, helpers require an average of about 31/2 years experience to attain the pro- ficiency the Employer seeks in maintenance mechanics. Failing to secure mechanics through the helper system, the Employer employs mechanics experienced in paper mill maintenance where possible. If mechanics who are without paper mill experience but are otherwise qualified in their trade must be employed, they may need as much as 2 or 3 months orientation to become fully familiar with their main- tenance duties at the Employer's plant. However, the Employer's maintenance work is not significantly different from the work of main- tenance mechanics in other industries or of construction mechanics as is demonstrated by the fact that many of the Employer's mechanics have transferred from, or returned to, other industries or construc- tion work with no apparent difficulty. The Unit Requested by the Plumbers In Case No. 10-RC-2836 the Plumbers seeks to sever a unit of pipefitters. the lead pipefitter and pipefitter helpers. There are at 306 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD present 9 pipefitters and 5 pipefitter helpers, in addition to an insu- lator and a boilermaker, in the pipefitting department supervised by the pipefitter foreman. Five of the pipefitters are assigned to the day maintenance shift, four work as operating mechanics. In addition to the generalizations concerning maintenance mechanics set out above, the following facts establish the Employer's pipefitters as craftsmen in their trade : they are primarily employed for, and engaged In, pipefitting Work, little of which is performed by other maintenance employees in the plant; about half of them have been employed as pipefitters in the construction trades; a minimum of 31/2 years is re- quired for a helper to advance through the Employer's system of progression to become a qualified pipefitter. In our opinion the Em- ployer's pipefitters constitute a distinct and homogeneous group of skilled journeymen craftsmen working as such. And as the Plumbers is a union which has traditionally represented craftsmen in this trade, we find that the Employer's pipefitters may constitute an appropriate bargaining unit despite the history of bargaining on a plantwide basis." We further find that the pipefitter helpers, who assist no other craftsmen and who are in the line of progression for pipefitters, and the lead pipefitter should be included in this unit. The Unit Requested by the IBEW In Case No. 10-RC-2839 the IBEW requests a unit of electricians, lead electricians, and electrician helpers. There are 4 lead electricians, 4 electronic electricians, 6 general electricians and 2 helpers regularly assigned to the department supervised by the chief electrician. Like the pipefitters, the lead and general electricians and their helpers perform the duties usually associated with their craft and are the only employees qualified or required to perform electrical work in the plant. Although the Employer also maintains a helper progres- sion system for electricians rather than a formal apprenticeship pro- gram, it is clear that these electricians comprise a separate, distinct, and homogeneous group of journeymen craftsmen. Accordingly, the lead and general electricians, together with the helpers regularly assisting them and in their line of progression, may, if they so desire, be represented as a separate craft group by the IBEW which has traditionally represented such units. It appears that one of the gen- eral electricians is regularly assigned to maintenance of the plant air-conditioning system. As the record does not contain sufficient evidence of the nature of his duties and skills to permit us to deter- 7In the earlier case involving this Employer, Southern Paperboard Corporation, 80 NLRB 1456, at 1458, the Board declined to establish a separate unit of plumbers, steam- fitters, pipefitters, and welders "in the absence of evidence" that these employees pos- sessed craft skills. We are compelled to reach a contrary conclusion in the instant pro- ceeding on the basis of more adequate record evidence concerning pipefitters. SOUTHERN PAPERBOARD CORPORATION 307 mine his unit placement, we shall allow him to vote subject to challenge in the election hereinafter directed for electricians in voting group (2). The electronic electricians, whom the IBEW has not requested be included in the unit, are higher paid than the general electricians and are responsible for the repair and maintenance of electronic equipment employed in the regulation and control of production processes. It does not appear by what means the Employer secures or trains employees in this classification. As it has not been demon- strated that the interests, skills, and duties of the electronic elec- tricians are sufficiently identified with those of the other electricians, we shall exclude them from the unit.' The Units Requested by the TAM In Cases Nos. 10-RC-2845, 10-RC-2846, and 10-RC-2847 the TAM has petitioned for separate units of machinists and machinist ap- prentices ; welders, welder leadmen, and we] der helpers ; and mill- wrights, the maintenance leadmen, millwright leadmen, millwright helpers, the head oiler, oilers, and the knife grinder, respectively. By intervention in Case No. 10-RC-2856 the TAM seeks separate units of automobile and diesel mechanics and their helpers; the blacksmith and his helper; carpenters and carpenter helpers; painters and painter helpers; and store department employees. The TAM also asks that in the event the separate units it seeks are found inappropriate, a single maintenance unit be established which includes all maintenance employees except those in the units the IBEW and Plumbers seek if the Board finds them appropriate. The Employer and Joint Peti- tioners oppose the severance of the separate units sought by the TAM for such reasons, in addition to those already discussed, as the em- ployees sought are not skilled craftsmen or the IAII is not their traditional representative. The machinist unit sought by the TAM consists of four journeymen machinists and an undisclosed number of apprentice machinists under the supervision of the machine shop foreman. Under an agreement with the TAM the Employer maintains a 4-year apprenticeship pro- gram for machinists. Working to close tolerances in operating the drill presses, shapers, milling machines and other machine tools found in the machine shop, the machinists must exercise the skills of journey- men machinists. As the TAM traditionally represents machinists and their apprentices and as they are an identifiable, distinct, and homogeneous craft group in the Employer's plant, we find that the machinists and machinist apprentices may constitute an appropri- ate bargaining unit. And we find no merit in the Employer's con- 9 Cf. North American Aircraft, Inc, 108 NLRB 863 369028-56-vol 112-21 308 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD tention that this and the other units sought by the IAM should be denied severance under the principle applied by the Board in Mills Industries, Incorporated.' The IAM is not here seeking to reestab- lish itself in a unit in which it was displaced as bargaining repre- sentative by the election and certification of another labor organization.10 The IAM seeks to sever as a separate craft group the Employer's welders. As the Board has recently found separate units of welders not to be appropriate," we shall dismiss the petition for this unit. Because they are not regularly assigned to work with particular crafts we find no justification for including them in any of the other units sought herein. The unit of millwrights and oilers the IAM seeks consists of the employees, except the knife grinder, supervised by the millwright foreman. They are the maintenance leadman, 15 millwrights, 5 mill- wright helpers, the head oiler, and 12 oilers. It is the millwrights' function, as either day maintenance or operating mechanics, to install new equipment, remove and overhaul worn out equipment, and main- tain in operating condition production and standby equipment in the plant. To acquire proficiency in the performance of these duties a helper needs an average of 3 or more years' experience in the system of progression for helpers the Employer maintains to develop quali- fied millwrights. Oilers, acting in dual roles, assist as millwrights and lubricate plant equipment. Although oiling requires little skill or training, the oiler and millwright helper classifications are both in the helper progression system leading to full status as a general millwright-an employee entering this system alternates at 6-month intervals between the 2 classifications until he becomes eligible for promotion to the position of head oiler or millwright. We find that the millwrights constitute a distinct and homogeneous group of crafts- men exercising the skills of their trade, who may, if they so desire, be represented in a separate unit by a union which is a traditional representative of millwrights.12 As the millwright helpers and oilers, including the head oiler, are also supervised by the millwright fore- man and advance in a common progression system leading to full millwright status, we shall include them in the unit. We shall include in this unit the maintenance leadman who is also under the supervi- sion of the millwright foreman and acts principally as a leadman for the millwrights. We shall exclude the knife grinder. A year's ex- perience as a millwright helper is necessary to qualify for that posi- tion, but the knife grinder while working in that capacity does not 9 108 NLRB 282 10 Cf. American Cyanamid Company, 110 NLRB 89. 11 Clayton d Lambert Manufacturing Company, 111 NLRB 540. 12 American Cyanamid Company, 110 NLRB 89. SOUTHERN PAPERBOARD CORPORATION 309 perform millwright work or further qualify for promotion to mill- wright status, and he is supervised by the machine shop foreman. Nor will we include the knife grinder in the machinist unit as re- quested in the alternative by the IAM as it appears that this employee does not exercise the skills of a journeyman machinist. The motor mechanic and diesel mechanic and their helpers are supervised by the outside maintenance superintendent in --hose depart- ment are found several other maintenance classifications. As their job classification titles imply, they maintain and repair automotive and diesel-driven equipment, each at times assisting the other. The Employer maintains a 48-month helper progression system for these classifications. As it has not been demonstrated that these mechanics are any more skilled than others in these classifications the Board has found not to qualify for severance as skilled craftsmen'13 we find the unit of motor and diesel mechanics requested by the IAM not to be appropriate. The blacksmith and his helper normally work in the blacksmith shop in the salvage yard and are also supervised by the outside main- tenance foreman. In addition to performing the small amount of blacksmith's work, the Employer's operations require they assist other craftsmen and perform salvage work. As no showing has been made that the blacksmith has or exercises the skills of a journeyman crafts- man in this trade, we shall deny the IAM's request for the establish- ment of a blacksmith's unit. The only basis upon which the IAM seeks a separate unit of store department employees seems to be that it includes a tool checker, a classification frequently included in departmental units represented by the IAM. However, as there appears to be no valid basis for the severance of this department,14 we find that the hearing officer was justified in denying the IAM's motion to intervene for a'unit of store department employees. We also affirm the hearing officer's rulings denying the IAM's motions to intervene for separate units of car- penters and painters as the Board has held the IAM not to be the traditional representatives of these groups.'-' Finally, we find the overall maintenance unit requested in the alternative by the IAM to be inappropriate in view of the history of collective bargaining for the Employer's employees on a more comprehensive basis."B Accordingly, we shall direct that elections be conducted in the fol- lowing voting groups of employees at the Employer's Port Wentworth, Georgia, plant : (1) All pipefitters, the lead pipefitter, and pipefitter helpers, ex- cluding the pipefitting foreman and all other employees. 'Gulf Oil Corporation, 108 NLRB 162; Armour & Company, 110 NLRB 587. 14 See American Potash & Chemical Corporation, supra 0 Campbell Soup Company, 109 NLRB 475, American Cyanamid Company, 110 NLRB 89- 10 American Cyanamid Company, supra. 310 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD (2) All electricians, lead electricians, and electrician helpers, ex- cluding the chief electrician, electronic electricians, and all other employees. (3) All machinists and machinist apprentices, excluding the ma- chine shop foreman and all other employees. (4) All millwrights, the maintenance leadman, millwright helpers, the head oiler and oilers, excluding the knife grinder, the millwright foreman, and all other employees. (5) All production and maintenance employees including woodyard crew leaders, woodroom operators, recovery operators, the powerhouse maintenance man, but excluding clerical employees," professional em- ployees,'° and employees in voting groups (1), (2), (3), and (4), landscape laborers, executives, watchmen, guards, superintendents, and foremen and all other supervisors 11 as defined in the Act?° If a majority of the employees in each or any of voting groups (1), (2), (3), and (4) select the labor organization seeking to represent them separately, those employees will be taken to have indicated their desire to constitute a separate appropriate unit and the Regional Director conducting the elections is instructed to issue a certification of representatives to the labor organization thus selected in each group, which the Board, in such circumstances, finds to be an appropriate unit for purposes of collective bargaining. If a majority of the em- ployees in all of voting groups (1), (2), (3), and (4) vote for the labor organizations seeking to represent them separately and if a majority of the employees in voting group (5) vote for Joint Peti- tioners, the Regional Director is instructed to issue a certification of representatives to the Joint Petitioners for a separate nit of em- ployees described in voting group (5) which the Board, under the circumstances, finds appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining. On the other hand, if a majority of the employees in each or any of voting groups (1), (2), (3), and (4) do not vote for the labor or- 17 Excluded as clericals are the steam clerk , clerk-typist under the instrument and gen- eral labor foreman, chief chemist's clerk, storekeeper, and storekeeper's clerk 18 Excluded as a professional employee is the draftsman 19 The Employer and Joint Petitioners agree to exclude as supervisors the following classifications which have been created since the Board's earlier decision involving the Employer : the pulp and power superintendent , the maintenance and engineering supet in- tendent , the assistant pulp mill superintendent , and the assistant powerplant super- intendent. 20 This voting group, for the most part , constitutes the unit the Board found appropriate in its earlier Decision and Supplemental Decision in Southern Paperboard Corporation, 80 NLRB 1456, 84 NLRB 822. The Employer and the joint bargaining representative have since bargained on the basis of that unit and at the hearing in the instant proceeding the Employei and Joint Petitioners stipulated that no substantial changes have been made in the duties the employees performed at the time of the earlier proceeding We have ex- cluded from this voting group , of course , employees included in voting groups ( 1), (2), (3), and (4) and have made no finding or unit placement of temporary woodhandlers as it does not appear that the Employer any longer employs woodhandlers on a temporary basis. LOCAL UNION NO. 249 311 ganization which is seeking to represent them in a separate unit, the employees in each such group will be included in the overall group and their votes pooled with those of voting group (5),21 and the Re- gional Director conducting the elections is instructed to issue a cer- tification of representatives to the labor organization selected by a majority of the employees in the pooled group which the Board, in such circumstances, finds to be a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining. [The Board dismissed the petition in Case No. 10-RC-2846.] [Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication.] MEMBER LEEDOM took no part in the consideration of the above Decision, Order, and Direction of Elections. 21 If the votes are pooled , they are to be tallied in the following manner : The votes for the unions seeking the separate unit shall be counted as valid votes , but neither for nor against the union seeking to represent the more comprehensive unit; all other votes are to be accorded their face value, whether for representation by the union seeking the com- prehensive group or for no union General Teamsters, Chauffeurs and Helpers , Local Union No. 249, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Ware- housemen and Helpers of America, A. F. L. and Crump, Incor- porated. Case No. 6-CC-94. April 21, 1955 DECISION AND ORDER On May 17, 1954, Trial Examiner Ralph Winkler issued his Inter- mediate Report in the above-entitled proceeding, finding that the Respondent had engaged in and was engaging in certain unfair labor practices and recommending that it cease and desist therefrom and take certain affirmative action, as set forth in the copy of the Inter- mediate Report attached hereto. Thereafter, the General Counsel and the Respondent filed exceptions to the Intermediate Report and the Respondent filed a brief in support of its exceptions. The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner made at the hearing and finds that no prejudicial error was committed. The rulings are hereby affirmed. The Board has considered the Inter- mediate Report, the exceptionscand Respondent's brief, and the entire record in the case and hereby adopts the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the Trial Examiner, with the following modi- fications.' We agree with the Trial Examiner to the extent that he found that the Respondent, while picketing Kaufmann's premises, including the site upon which Crump, the secondary employer, was constructing an addition to Kaufmann's existing department store facilities, engaged 112 NLRB No. 49.