The Bunker Hill Co.

730 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL The Bunker Hill Company and United Steelworkers of America, AFL-CIO, Petitioner and International Brotherhood of Boilermakers , Iron Ship Builders, Blacksmiths, Forgers & Helpers, Local Lodge No. 242, AFL-CIO, Petitioner and Local Union 73, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO and Local Lodge No. 1425, International Association of Machinists & Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO, Petitioner. Cases 19-RC-4093, 19-RC-4094, 19-RC-4098, and 19-RC-4105. June 21,1967 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION BY CHAIRMAN MCCULLOCH AND MEMBERS BROWN AND JENKINS Upon separate petitions duly filed under Section 9(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, a consolidated hearing was held before a Hearing Officer of the National Labor Relations Board. The Hearing Officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. The Employer, the Intervenor, and all of the Petitioners except the Steelworkers have filed briefs which have been duly considered by the Board. 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. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds: 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act and it will effectuate the purposes of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein. 2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent certain employees of the Employer. 3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representation of certain 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. A. The Parties' Requests The Boilermakers, in Case 19-RC-4094, the Machinists, in Case 19-RC-4105, and the Electrical Workers, in Case 19-RC-4098, respectively, seek to sever from the established production and maintenance unit, the following separate groups of employees: (1) all maintenance mechanics, helpers, and apprentices at the zinc plant, mine, smelter, and concentrator, excluding underground maintenance mechanics and drill doctors; (2) all auto mechanics, body and fender repairmen, auto painters, auto electricians, frame and front-end repairmen, diesel Mallinckrodt Chemical Works, Uranium Division, 162 NLRB 387 LABOR RELATIONS BOARD mechanics, lube and tire repairmen, and all helpers and apprentices of the above employed in the garage; and (3) all instrument department repairmen and their apprentices and helpers, and all electrical powerhouse operators in the smelter powerhouse. The Steelworkers, in Case 19-RC-4093, seeks an election in the overall production and maintenance unit currently represented by Northwest Metal Workers Union, Intervenor herein. It does not, however, oppose the foregoing severance petitions and has stated on the record that if the Board directs elections on the severance petitions it does not wish to appear on the ballots in such elections. The Employer and the Intervenor, Northwest Metal Workers Union, Independent, oppose each of the above-described severance requests. They contend that under the recently established standards in the Mallinckrodt case' no warrant exists for carving out any of the requested units from the established production and maintenance unit. For reasons set forth below, we agree. B. Bargaining History The history of bargaining among the employees here involved dates back to 1942. It was initially established on the basis of a comprehensive unit embracing all of the Employer's production and maintenance employees. In 1950 and in 1964 the Board directed craft severance elections among certain employees of Employer. As a result, Electrical Workers acquired a certification for electricians in 1950, Boilermakers, for boilermakers and blacksmiths in 1964, and Machinists, for machinists also in 1964.2 However, all of the employees sought to be severed in the instant proceedings have been continuously represented as part of the production and maintenance unit. C. The Employer's Operations The Employer is engaged, at Kellogg, Idaho, in the mining of lead, zinc, and silver and the refining and processing of these ores. It employs approximately 1,700 employees at these operations, about 1,450 of whom are currently represented as part of the production and maintenance unit. These operations, although functionally divided into several departments corresponding to the various distinct phases through which each of these ores is ultimately processed, are nevertheless highly integrated in nature. Ores, upon their removal from the mines, are transported to the Company's concentrator which separates the lead from the zinc and disposes of the waste rock. The lead and zinc distillates are then conveyed by rail to the Company's lead smelter and zinc plant. At the smelter the concentrated lead is exposed to a 2 See The Bunker Hill Company, 146 NLRB 331 165 NLRB No. 85 THE BUNKER HILL COMPANY pyrometallurgical process which produces refined lead and other allied metals. A similar result is obtained at the zinc plant by the application of electrolysis to the zinc concentrate. This process, consisting essentially of roasting, releases gases which are then passed through a sulphuric acid plant at the zinc refinery. The sulphuric acid so processed becomes an ingredient of phosphoric acid prepared at a separate plant a short distance from the zinc refinery. The refining process is not a perfect one. As a result of less than absolute efficiency, there is an interchange of zinc produced at the lead smelter with lead produced at the zinc plant. In addition to this exchange, the silver produced at the zinc plant is refined at the smelter. The undisputed evidence establishes, and we find, that a curtailment of production at either or both of the mines would shortly lead to a companywide shutdown, and, moreover, that the cessation of ore processing at the concentrator would bring to a standstill all production activity at the lead smelter and the zinc plant. D. The Functions, Skills, and Interests of the Employees Here Sought to be Severed With the possible exception of the four powerhouse operators who are part of the group sought by the Electrical Workers, all of the employees herein sought to be severed are engaged in maintenance and repair work. Some of them are craftsmen, and some are not. Their particular functions and skills, the extent to which the continued normal operation of the production process is dependent upon the performance to the assigned functions of the employees, and other relevant factors are described more fully below in the detailed separate consideration of each of the severance petitions. 1. Case 19-RC-4094: The employees requested by the Boilermakers The Boilermakers proposes the severance of approximately 67 employees engaged as maintenance mechanics, helpers, and apprentices at four separate locations, viz, the mine, the zinc plant, the smelter, and the concentrator. It would exclude all maintenance mechanics engaged in underground operations and those employed above ground in the mine surface plant who are known as "drill doctors" or floor or bench mechanics. The Boilermakers has indicated that it desires to represent the requested employees as part of the craft unit of boilermakers 7 See The Bunker Hill Company, supra, 146 NLRB at 333-336 In its brief, Boilermakers expresses its willingness to include the underground maintenance mechanics as part of its proposed unit in the event the Board determines that they have a community of interests with the above-ground employees specifically sought here In the prior proceeding, where the Boilermakers expressly sought to include the underground mechanics, we pointed out that 731 and blacksmiths it currently represents. It contends, among other things, that most of these employees perform substantially the same kind of work tasks as do the boilermakers it now represents, and use the same kind of tools and equipment. The employees in question constitute the same group of above-ground maintenance mechanics that the same union in the 1964 proceeding asked us to sever along with boilermakers and blacksmiths as part of a single-craft unit.3 We there denied the request on the grounds, among others, that such mechanics were under different supervision from boilermakers and blacksmiths, performed a different kind of work, and exercised different skills. We also noted that, unlike the blacksmiths and boilermakers, these employees had an informal rather than a formal apprenticeship program. The record here shows that there has been no substantial change in the duties of these employees since the date of our earlier decision. Although they are now under a 4-year formal apprenticeship program, that program is not the same as the one under which boilermakers are apprentices. It is thus obvious that the same considerations that led us to reject, in 1964, the requested combination of maintenance mechanics with the craftsmen boilermakers and blacksmiths, are equally applicable now. Accordingly, we find no merit in the Boilermakers claim that maintenance mechanics share with boilermakers and blacksmiths such a substantial community of interest as appropriately to warrant their joinder in the same unit. We are also persuaded that such separate community of interests as the maintenance mechanics may enjoy by reason of differences between their skills and training and those possessed by other production and maintenance employees would not, in the circumstances of this case, warrant our now affording them an opportunity to change their mode of representation. The functions they perform are in major part integrated with those of production employees; they involve the correction and prevention of mechanical breakdowns in approximately 8,000 machines utilized in the production process and located throughout the complex of the Employer's operations. Approximately 95 percent of this work is performed at the location of the machines, and in performing it the mechanics come into direct contact with production personnel. Maintenance mechanics assigned to the concentrator, moreover, have the same supervisor as production personnel. they performed work different in character and under different conditions and different supervision from that done by above- ground maintenance mechanics , boilermakers, and/or blacksmiths In any event , we do not deem the inclusion of the underground mechanics , or their exclusion , to be a critical factor in the disposition of the Boilermakers petition herein 732 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD There is no evidence that the special interests of maintenance mechanics have been inadequately served by their representation as part of the production and maintenance unit to which they have continuously been attached for the past 25 years. Indeed, the record shows that under the most recent contract negotiated by the incumbent production and maintenance union, the maintenance mechanics receive hourly wage rates and other benefits that are virtually identical to those of the boilermakers now represented by the Boilermakers. Moreover, since 1960, a number of executive offices of the incumbent and of its governing board have been filled by maintenance mechanics. Finally, the record reveals that Boilermakers has no contracts with, and does not represent any maintenance mechanics of, other employers in the mining industry in the Pacific Northwest area. Nor does it appear that it has traditionally devoted itself to representing this particular craft. For all the foregoing reasons, we find no sufficient basis under our applicable standards for combining the requested maintenance mechanics with the boilermakers and blacksmiths now represented by the Boilermakers, or for now setting apart the maintenance mechanics in a separate unit after their 25-year history of bargaining as a component part of the production and maintenance unit. Accordingly, we hereby dismiss the petition in Case 19-RC-4094. 2. Case 19-RC-4105: The employees requested by the Machinists Machinists seeks to sever the approximately 12 employees classified as auto mechanics, their helpers and apprentices, servicemen, and tire repairmen.4 All of these employees are assigned to the transportation department where other employees classified as truckdrivers, garage warehousemen, and heavy equipment operators are also assigned. All transportation department employees are commonly supervised by a transportation supervisor. All of them report daily to the garage for work assignment, and all use the same dry and change room facilities. The auto mechanics are under a 4-year apprenticeship program approved by the United States Department of Labor. Their primary work functions entail the repair and maintenance of the Employer's 160 pieces of variously powered combustion engine equipment and vehicles which include not only trucks and passenger cars, but also railroad diesel engines and highly specialized forklifts, front-end loaders, cranes, power shovels, and caterpillars. The Employer uses this equipment 4 Machinists defined the unit as including also the following job classifications which the Employer does not in fact maintain auto body and fender repairmen, frame and front-end repairmen; auto painters , and electricians ; diesel mechanics , and lubemen The work functions these alleged classifications describe are performed by employees in the classifications set out in the text. to move and transport ores, materials, finished products, and field personnel on a day-to-day basis throughout its mining and processing complex. In general, auto mechanics have no regular assignment or fixed stations, but are dispatched from the garage as needed to the points of vehicular failure. In performing their work, auto mechanics use both their own and the Company's tools. They must identify and understand the functions of such components of motorized equipment as steering mechanisms, fuel, ignition, and braking systems, axels, frames, and front ends. The Employer provides them with manuals and blueprints of many of its vehicles as aids. The servicemen have no apprenticeship program. Their work is similar in nature to that of a typical service station attendant, except that it is here usually performed in the field rather than in the garage. Servicemen lubricate and refuel the equipment which the auto mechanics are required to repair, clean air filters, and repair tires. Most servicemen moved into their positions from lower rated truckdriver jobs as a result of bidding for openings as they occurred. There is no established line of progression from servicemen to any other jobs. As is clear from the foregoing, the unit proposed by the Machinists is but a segment of a departmental group of employees who are under common supervision and who share the same facilities. Plainly, the servicemen are not identifiable as members of any craft group, and their job interests are more closely related to departmental employees whom the Machinists does not seek to represent than to the auto mechanics with whom it proposes to combine them in a separate unit. The status of auto mechanics as a separate identifiable group of craftsmen may be conceded. But, as we have indicated in the recently decided Mallinckrodt and related cases which set forth our current severance policies, we do not regard craft identity as alone a sufficient ground for carving out a small segment of workers from an established production and maintenance unit. In this case we find numerous factors militating against the requested severance. Among them are that auto mechanics perform nearly all their work in areas which bring them into close contact with other production personnel, that they are but a segment of a commonly supervised departmental grouping of employees, and that their work efforts are of critical importance to the maintenance of continuity in the highly integrated and transportation-dependent operation of the mining complex. In the discussion herein, our use of the terms "auto mechanics" will refer also to those who are auto mechanics' helpers and apprentices, and our use of the term "servicemen" will include tire repairmen There appears to be only one individual in the latter classification THE BUNKER HILL COMPANY 733 There is also other evidence indicating that such special interests as auto mechanics may have in common by reason of their craft identity have to a substantial extent been subordinated to the broader community of interests they share with other employees in the existing production and maintenance unit. Thus, under the bargaining contracts covering the production and maintenance unit of which the auto mechanics are now a part, all personnel within the unit enjoy common seniority rights on both a plant and departmental basis, allowing auto mechanics to "bump" into production jobs in the event of layoff. Moreover, the record fails to demonstrate prejudice to any cognizable special bargaining interests they may possess by their inclusion in the production and maintenance unit. In fact, the record shows that their hourly rates of pay closely approximate those received by the skilled machinists whom the Machinists currently represent, and that they receive identical insurances, vacation, pension, and other fringe benefits. In light of all the foregoing circumstances, including the 25-year history of bargaining, the close functional integration of auto mechanics in the Employer's operations, the community of interests they share with other production personnel, and the absence of any compelling countervailing considerations, we find that the interest to be served by maintaining the stability of the existing bargaining unit of approximately 1,450 employees outweigh the interests that might be served by affording the approximately 12 or less auto mechanics an opportunity to be represented as a separate unit.5 We conclude, accordingly, that the unit proposed by the Machinists in Case 19-RC-4105 is inappropriate, and we hereby dismiss the petition in that case. 3. Case 19-RC-4098: The employees sought by the Electrical Workers The Electrical Workers severance request embraces 11 employees, 7 of whom are rated as instrument repairmen (a group including leadmen, journeymen, specialists, helpers, and apprentices) and 4 of whom are classified as blowerhouse or powerhouse operators. The record is unclear as to whether the Electrical Workers seeks to add all or some of these employees to the unit of skilled electricians for which it currently bargains with the Employer, or whether it seeks to represent them as a separate unit. In proposing the severance of the blowerhouse operators, the Electrical Workers claims that the employees perform tasks akin to those of the generator operators it now represents as part of the craft unit of skilled electricians. In proposing the severance of the instrument repairmen, it identifies these employees as a distinct group of skilled craftsmen, and alleges that their work functions closely resemble, and are but an extension of, work functions performed by electrician craftsmen whom it has traditionally represented. The record shows that the smelter blowerhouse operator job has historically been filled by physically incapacitated employees. Most of those presently in these jobs have come out of the production unit. Although located in a separated area of the smelter, the blowerhouse operators share change facilities with the rest of the smelter work force. They have no apprenticeship program. In the execution of their assigned tasks they have no contact with instrument repairmen or electricians. Contrary to the Electrical Workers claim, blowerhouse operators do not perform tasks like those of the generator operator whom it represents at the zinc plant. The equipment for which the generator operator is responsible is predominantly electrical, whereas the equipment operated by the smelter blowerhouse operator consists of a mechanical compressor and blower which makes only small use of electricity as a source of power. The compressors and blowers channel air under high pressure into the production area of the smelter. The air is generated by synchronous motors activiated by a switch gear and distribution system within the powerhouse. The operators watch the compressors and blowers for overheating. They also oil them, take hourly readings from their gauges, and, in the event of an interruption in the operation, bring the compressors and blowers to a halt. They perform none of the maintenance and repair work on this equipment. Indeed, such work is done by maintenance mechanics and sometimes by machinists, but not by electricians. It is clear therefore that blowerhouse operators need little if any knowledge of the principles of electrical or electronics theory to properly perform their job responsibilities, and that they exercise no craft skills. Indeed, in the 1950 proceeding in which this same Union sought to sever these individuals as part of the skilled electricians craft,6 we denied their request on findings-equally applicable here-that they possess no craft identity and that their community of interest lies with production personnel. The instrument repairmen are, concededly, skilled craftsmen. They are responsible for the maintenance and repair of the process control instruments and valves (some of which are 5 We have not overlooked Petitioner's qualification as a traditional representative of the auto mechanics ' craft However, it does not confine itself to representation of the special interests of this craft Indeed, at the instant plant it represents members of the separate machinists craft We note, also, that Machinists adduced evidence establishing that it has two contracts covering auto mechanics groups at other mining companies in the area We do not deem this evidence sufficient to establish an industry pattern of bargaining supportive of the Machinist' s position here. 6 See Bunker Hill and Sullivan Mining and Concentrating Company, 89 NLRB 243,249. 734 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD electrically operated and some of which are pneumatic and hydraulic devices), the gas combustion equipment, and the communications system. All of the equipment which they maintain and repair is essential to the efficient and continued operation of the Employer's mining and processing complex. The work they perform on gas equipment is intimately related to the production process itself, as a significant proportion of the Employer's heat- producing equipment burns natural gas as fuel. The instrument repairmen have no specific plant assignments, but move throughout the Employer's operations to the point of difficulty. They are supervised by the instrument and combustion engineer and have their own shop. Contrary to the claim of the Electrical Workers herein, the tasks which instrument repairmen perform are substantially different in character from those performed by skilled members of the electricians' craft and require the exercise of skills not ordinarily possessed by electricians. Instrument repairmen are under an apprenticeship program different from that maintained for electricians. And, as above indicated, much of the work they are called on to do does not involve electrically operated equipment. In those instances where the instruments they repair are electrically operated, their tasks and those of electricians are wholly distinguishable.' Thus, an electrician's function is to bring or restore electrical power to the meter or instrument, while that of the instrument repairman is to repair or keep the meter or instrument in proper working condition. In brief, where the electrician's function ceases, the instrument repairman's begins. Because the latter's work is unique, he possesses many tools not found in the electrician's repair kit. It does not appear from the evidence that the Electrical Workers has devoted itself to representing the special interests of instrument repairmen such as those here sought. Nor does it appear that the Electrical Workers have any contracts in the mining industry covering such employees. Indeed, in a number of cases, we have expressly rejected contentions that electricians and instrument repairmen should be combined in the same unit See, e.g , E I Dupont DeNemours and Co (May Plant, Camden, S C.), 162 NLRB 413, Colgate- Palmolive Company, 120 NLRB 1567. 9 An election eligibility list, containing the names and addresses of all the eligible voters, must be filed by the Employer with the Regional Director for Region 19 within 7 days after the date of this Decision and Direction of Election The list may initially be used by the Regional Director to assist in determining The requested instrument repairmen have been continuously bargained for as part of the production and maintenance unit since the creation in 1953 of that job classification. There is no showing that their special interests have not been appropriately served because of their representation in that unit. Indeed, the record shows that their rates of pay are closely comparable to those received by the skilled electricians currently represented by the Electricial Workers, and that their disability, health, life insurance, vacation, and other fringe benefits are identical. The duties, functions, and skills of the instrument repairmen here sought are substantially similar to those of the instrument mechanics who were denied severance in the Mallinckrodt case. The arguments advanced for severance in that case also substantially parallel those made by the Electrical Workers in the instant case. The reasons which led us to dismiss the severance petition for instrument mechanics in the Mallinckrodt case are thus equally applicable here. For these reasons, and also because no valid basis appears for combining instrument repairmen with blowerhouse and powerhouse operators in a single, separate unit, we find that the unit proposed by the Electrical Workers is inappropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining. We shall, therefore, dismiss the petition in Case 19-RC-4098. 4. Case 19-RC-4093: The employees sought by the Steelworks The Steelworkers petition covers all employees who are part of the established production and maintenance unit currently represented by Intervenor Metal Workers , and which we here find to be a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act. [Direction of Election8 omitted from publication.] an adequate showing of interest . The Regional Director shall make the list available to all parties to the election when he shall have determined that an adequate showing of interest among the employees in the unit found appropriate has been established No extension of time to file this list shall be granted by the Regional Director except in extraordinary circumstances . Failure to comply with this requirement shall be grounds for setting aside the election whenever proper objections are filed Excelsior Underwear Inc , 156 NLRB 1236