E. I. Dupont de Nemours and Co.

434 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD E. I. DuPont de Nemours and Company ( Indiana Ordnance Works) and International Brotherhood of Firemen & Oilers, Local No. 320, AFL, Petitioner. Case No. 9-RC-,2399. April 22, 1955 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 Alvin Schwartz, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirined. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds : 1. The business of the Employer : The Employer contests the jurisdiction of the Board over its op- erations at the plant involved herein. It is engaged in the operation and management of the plant under a contract with the United States Department of Defense. The plant, fixtures, and materials used in the manufacturing processes are Government-owned and the manufactured products are transferred to and owned by the United States. In the recent Maytag case 1 the Board decided that it would assert jurisdiction over enterprises which are engaged in providing goods or services directly related to national defense pursuant to Government contracts, including subcontracts, in the amount of $100,000 or more per year. The Employer herein meets the national defense standards of the Maytag case, as it is currently operating under a Government contract with the Department of Defense in- volving more than $100,000. Accordingly, we find that the Employer is engaged in commerce and that it will effectuate the policies of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein. 2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain employees of the Employer. 3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the represen- tation 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 to represent a unit of power department em- ployees, including boiler operators, switchboard operators, condenser operators, inside and outside water operators, refrigerator operators, compressor operators, well operators, turbine operators, instrument men, boiler cleaners, power area oilers, and coal handlers. The Em- ployer urges that the petition be dismissed on the grounds that : (1) The petition is not timely filed; (2) the unit is inappropriate because the power department is an integral part of the production process; I1nlaytap Au craft Co)p, 110 NLRB 594 112 NLRB No. 51. E. I. DUPONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY 435 (3) the record does not disclose that the Petitioner is a labor organ- ization of the type which traditionally and historically represents employees of the type sought herein; 2 and (4) the unit, as set forth in the petition, is defective because it includes categories of employ- ees whom the Employer would exclude and does not include cate- gories of employees who are properly part of the unit. The Operations of the Employer The Employer manufactures smokeless powder and other chem- icals at the Indiana Ordnance Works iuider contracts with the United States. The plant facilities occupy 5,000 acres of land and consist of approximately 1,800 buildings, laboratories, paint shops, powerhouses, automotive and railroad repair, and other shops and miscellaneous buildings used in the manufacture of various chemical products. The plant was constructed during World War II for the purpose of manufacturing munitions. At its peak wartime capacity it employed approximately 9,000 hourly paid employees of which 138 were employed in the Employer's 2 powerhouses. In 1945 s the Petitioner was certified as representative of powerhouse employees and represented these workers until 1946 at which time the Employer ceased operations.' The operations of the Employer, the processes involved and the products manufactured were the same during the last war as at the present time. However, the employees involved and the quantities of manufactured products have been reduced. With the outbreak of hostilities in Korea, the plant was reopened. The labor force was expanded in 1952 and 1953 until a peak of 7,000 production employees and 118 powerhouse employees was reached. Upon cessation of hostilities, production of munitions was again re- duced until, at the time of the hearing, there were approximately 2,000 production workers and 51 power department employees. Ap- proximately 85 percent of the plant is presently on an inactive or "standby" status. One of the powerhouses is on an inactive basis but being maintained by standby powerhouse personnel, while the other is operating at less than full capacity. The present contract between the Employer and the Department of Defense is effective until June 30, 1955. The record discloses that the parties are pres- ently negotiating for an extension of the contract until March 1956. No substantial changes in personnel or operations appear to be in prospect. 2 It is unnecessary to consider this argument as this is not a craft severance proceeding. See Rayonier, Inc , 110 NLRI: 1191 and cases cited therein aP I (lit Pont de iNcmours C Company, 59 NLRB 952 4 Aftei the 1945) election, the Board certified unit was, as follows • All powerhouse em- ployees including the sewage disposal operatois, and the chief coal handling operators, but excluding tractor operators, maintenance mechanics, and supervisors 369025-56-vol 112-29 436 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD As previously stated, the power generating and producing opera- tions of the Employer are substantially the same as at the time of the previous Board proceeding. These operations are carried on in two powerhouses located approximately one-half mile apart and each is designed to furnish power, water, and heat to a specific part of the plant. The powerhouses are connected to all parts of the plant by water pipes and electric lines. Thus, the power department produces electrical power and heat used in production processes and water used in some of the Employer's chemical processes. Power department employees work in or adjacent to the powerhouses, have a separate departmental symbol, perform power department tasks exclusively, are not interchanged with production employees, and are separately supervised. It is clear that these employees constitute a functionally distinct and separate group of the type which the Board-has frequently found appropriate.' The fact that the power plant produces steam, electricity, and water which is used in the Employer's manufacturing processes does not militate against the propriety of the unit.' We therefore find no merit in the Employer's contention that, because of the integrated character of its operations, the petition should be dismissed. With respect to the unit position of the parties, it appears that the Employer no longer has power department employees designated as condenser operators, inside and outside water operators, compressor operators, well operators, instrument men, boiler cleaners, and power area oilers. The functions performed by these employees have either been transferred to other departments or are performed in other power department categories. The record shows and the parties agree' that the power department presently includes : working leaders, boiler op- erators, switchboard operators, turbine operators, refrigeration and hydraulic operators, water-plant operators A, water-plant operators B, pumphouse operators, trade-waste operators, coal handlers, power- house helpers, tractor operators-heavy, oilers, janitors, and standby operators-inspectors. In view of the foregoing, and upon the entire record, we find that the following employees constitute an appropriate unit for the pur- poses of collective bargaining. All wage-roll power department employees at the Employer's Charlestown, Indiana, Ordnance Works, including working leaders, boiler operators, switchboard operators, turbine operators, refrigera- tion and hydraulic operators, water-plant operators A, water-plant operators B, pumphouse operators, trade-waste operators, coal han- 6 Sonthwestern Portland Cement Company, 110 NLRB 1388 General Electric Company (FttchNo g Wori ). 110 NLRB 744 6 General Electric Company (Fitchburg Worlds ), supra, and cases cited therein 7 The Employer, while agieeing that the named categories were included in the power department, at no time conceded the appropriateness of a power depaitment unit LOCAL 450 437 dlers, powerhouse helpers, tractor operators-heavy, oilers, janitors, and standby operators-inspectors, excluding condenser operators, in- side and outside water operators, compressor operators, well operators, instrument men, boiler cleaners and power area oilers, all other em- ployees, office clerical employees, professional employees, guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act s 5. The Employer asserts that since the cessation of hostilities in Korea it has reduced its working force of power department employees from 118 to 51, that operations are on a standby basis and that no election should be directed at the present time. We find no merit in this contention. The record shows that, although the power depart- ment has been reduced, a substantial number of employees are still working and apparently will be retained for at least another year and the Employer has no current plans for increasing production. In these circumstances we believe that the policies of the Act will be effectuated by the direction of an election at this time.9 [Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.] MEMBER LEEDOM took no part in the consideration of the above Decision and Direction of Election. 8 The Employer agrees that this description includes all classification of the power department In its brief however the Employer also attacks the appropriateness of the requested power department unit on the gi ound that it does not seek to include 10 main- tenance employees. These employees work out of a shop in powerhouse No. 2 and repair boilers. They perform no powerhouse duties, are separately supervised by a maintenance superintendent , and are not classified as power department employees but aie classified as maintenance department employees. we will therefore exclude them See E I. du Pont de Nemours ct Company, supra 9 See E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company, Inc, Construction Davnsvon, Savannah River Plant, 107 NLRB 734 and cases cited theieiu Local 450, International Union of Operating Engineers , AFL and W. J. Hedrick and H . W. Marschall, Jr., d/b/a Industrial Paint- ers and Sand Blasters. Case No. 39-CD-14. April 05, 1955 DECISION AND DETERMINATION OF DISPUTE This proceeding arises under Section 10 (k) of the Act, which pro- vides that "Whenever it is charged that any person has engaged in an unfair labor practice within the meaning of paragraph (4) (D) of Section 8 (b) the Board is empowered and directed to hear and de- termine the dispute out of which such unfair labor practice shall have arisen. ..." On September 13, 1954, W. J Hedrick and H. W. Marschall, Jr., doing business as Industrial Painters and Sand Blasters, herein called the Employer, filed with the Regional Director for the Sixteenth 112 NLRB No. 60.