U. S. Plywood-Champion Papers, Inc.

292 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD U. S. Plywood-Champion Papers, Inc. and Western States Regional Council 3, International Woodworkers of America, AFL-CIO and International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local Union No. 932, AFL-CIO, Petitioners. Cases 36-RM-492, 36-RC-2338, and 36-RC-2348 February 3, 1969 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Under separate petitions duly filed under Section 9(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, a consolidated hearing was held before Hearing Officer Thomas P. Graham, Jr. The Hearing Officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. Following the hearing, this case was transferred to the National Labor Relations Board in Washington, D.C., pursuant to Section 102.67 of the National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations and Statements of Procedure, Series 8, as amended. All of the Petitioners and the Intervenor, Western Council of Lumber and Sawmill Workers, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners, AFL-CIO, have filed briefs which have been duly considered by the Board. 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 for the following reasons: The Units Sought The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local Union No. 932, AFL-CIO, hereinafter IBEW , seeks a departmental maintenance unit of some 30 employees in the general classifications of millwright, electrician and apprentice , carpenter , automotive mechanic, machinist, oiler, and powerhouse employee. The IBEW contends that the maintenance and powerhouse employees constitute an appropriate unit in that they compose an identifiable homogeneous group of employees sharing a community of a-`:rest which is separate and distinct from that ( of the production employees. Alternatively, IBEW seeks to represent the general maintenance employees excluding the powerhouse employees if the inclusion of the latter in the unit is found to be inappropriate. By separate petitions the Employer and the Western States Regional Council 3, International Woodworkers of America, AFL-CIO, hereinafter IWA, seek an election in the overall production and maintenance unit. They contend that because of the highly integrated functional and operational nature of the Employer's plywood and lumber manufacturing business, the only appropriate unit is the overall unit, and that, therefore, the petition seeking the maintenance unit should be dismissed. The Intervenor, the Western Council of Lumber and Sawmill Workers, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners, AFL-CIO, hereinafter LSW, joins with the Employer and the IWA in contending that the only appropriate unit is the all-inclusive unit. Bargaining History The Employer's sawmill was constructed in 1956. Following an election in 1957, the Board certified the LSW as the bargaining representative in an all-inclusive employee unit at this point.' A collective-bargaining agreement covering that unit was thereafter negotiated. Later the Employer expanded the facility to include a complete plywood plant, and in 1959 a stipulation of agreement was entered into whereby the recognition clause in the collective-bargaining agreement was revised to include the employees in the expanded facility as part of the unit. In 1961 following the reopening of the contract negotiations, an employee decertification petition was filed covering the established all-inclusive unit.' This was followed by a disclaimer on the part of the LSW as a result of which the Regional Director dismissed the petition for decertification. Thereafter, the LSW filed a petition seeking certification as the representative of only those employed in the sawmill part of the Employer's operation .3 After a hearing, the Regional Director dismissed this petition finding "nothing to warrant upsetting the collective-bargaining practices on an overall unit basis." Later, in 1963, the IWA filed a petition seeking an election in the all-employee unit. A consent election was held in which a majority of the employees in the unit chose not to be represented. The Employer's Operation The Employer's lumber and plywood plant is located close to its source of raw material on the remote Rogue River near the small coastal town of Gold Beach, Oregon. This facility employs some 380 persons, has an annual payroll of nearly $3,000,000, and generates annual expenditures of a nearly equivalent amount for supporting services, raw 'Case 36-RC-1266 'Case 36-RD-155 'Case 36-RC-1677 174 NLRB No. 48 U. S. PLYWOOD-CHAMPION PAPERS 293 materials, and related supplies. Independent contractors harvest and transport logs from the Employer's nearby timberlands to the plant's woodyard, where they are graded and sorted according to size and quality. Peelable logs are tagged for plywood manufacture, and sawlogs are tagged for the sawmill and the production of lumber. Tagged logs are rolled into a log pond for storage until needed, at which time they are removed, debarked, mechanically returned to the water, and pushed by the pond boat either to the in-feed end of the plywood plant or the sawmill. At the plywood plant debarked logs are cut to predetermined lengths, charged into a huge lathe and peeled into a continuous sheet of veneer. As the veneer sheet moves at high speed along a bank of conveyors it is clipped into desired lengths by a stationary knife, the pieces are sorted and graded, and transferred to another conveyor system which processes them through huge ovens at a speed which will dry the wood to a predetermined moisture content. The dried veneer then is passed through a series of glue-spreading rollers and stacked or sandwiched in a hot-press and squeezed to a predetermined pressure bond. The plywood is trimmed into a true rectangle and either packaged for warehousing, in the event the particular order calls for rough facing; or it may be processed further in the form of sanding, after which it is similarly packaged and warehoused. Through this process the plywood plant has the capacity to produce 400,000 feet of plywood every 24 hours, and an interruption of the production process at any key point would shut down the remainder of the production line within 15 minutes. The manufacture of lumber at the sawmill involves production processes similar to those used at the plywood plant. Logs are conveyed from the pond to a log deck where they are trimmed or cut into lengths up to 32 feet. They are then hoisted onto a carriage mounted on rails which is run back and forth by means of a steam-powered cylinder. The carriage holds logs up to 7 feet in diameter and runs them at high speeds against a fixed band saw. The carriage moves back and forth, turning the log by means of huge arms to achieve desired thickness and maximum utilization. From this point the slabs of lumber drop onto a continuous conveyor system and are run through a series of stationary saws which cut them to predetermined widths. These rough boards, still the length of the original logs, are conveyed by a chain conveyor system to a bank of 17 circular saws which trim or cut the planks to length from whence they pass to a sorting belt. The boards are sorted, passed through a planer, graded, and finally stacked for storage. A log starting at the in-feed end of the sawmill will be a pile of stacked planks at the other end of the mill within 15 minutes. Trimmings, chips, and other waste wood from both the plywood plant and the sawmill are converted into what is called hog fuel and conveyed by means of a blower system to the powerhouse to be used as fuel. The powerhouse generates the power supply for both mills and in turn is dependent upon their combined waste products to accomplish this task. The plant operates on a 3-shift basis, although presently most of the production is accomplished on the first shift. The first shift operates at full production capacity, the second shift at partial capacity, and the production line is shut down on the third shift. Of the 380 employees working at both the plywood plant and the sawmill on the 3 shifts, the vast majority are production employees, 27 are general maintenance type employees, and there are 6 powerhouse employees.4 Although there is a maintenance superintendent with responsibility for the hiring and firing of maintenance and powerhouse personnel, the handling of their grievances, and the keeping of their time and work records, he shares his authority with the production foremen who directly supervise all maintenance employees working on the production floor. Futhermore, although the maintenance superintendent does hire maintenance personnel, it should also be noted that his actual authority in this regard is somewhat limited in that the maintenance crew is composed largely of former production employees who have bid in to the various maintenance jobs. Because of the remoteness of the plant's location from any city or source of labor supply and perhaps because of the industrial uniqueness of much of the heavy production machinery used, the Employer has been obliged to make its own maintenance crews by training production line employees. As a result, of course, many of the maintenance personnel are experienced production operators and quite frequently, when needed, will fill in on production jobs. The maintenance millwrights and electricians, who comprise a majority of the maintenance crew, spend from 75 to 90 percent of their time working in production areas, largely answering emergency calls for the production line. In fact they are normally assigned to either the production area of the plywood plant or of the sawmill and report there at the beginning of their shift after collecting the necessary tools and supplies from the maintenance shop. The only exception is a group of four employees on the plywood day-shift referred to as the "shop crew" and consisting of two millwrights, 'At the plywood plant the maintenance crew is composed of ten employees on the first shift (four millwrights , two electricians and one apprentice, one carpenter, one automotive mechanic , and one machinist), five employees on the second shift (two millwrights, two electricians, one automotive mechanic), and seven employees on the third shift (two millwrights, one electrician and one apprentice , one automotive mechanic, one oiler, and one serviceman for rolling equipment) At the sawmill only one millwright is employed on each of the first two shifts, and one millwright, one helper and one oiler are employed on the third shift At the powerhouse one fireman and one fuelpuncher are employed on each of three shifts 294 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD the carpenter, and the machinist. The shop crew acts as a kind of first-shift pool whose work is assigned out of the maintenance shop on a priority basis by the maintenance superintendent. The two millwrights on the shop crew spend 85 to 90 percent of their working time in production areas. The carpenter works in various areas of the plant, and the machinist generally works in the maintenance shop. The remaining members of the maintenance crew are the automotive mechanics and one oiler. The automotive mechanics work principally in the maintenance shop, and the oiler spends his entire time oiling the shut-down machinery on the third shift. On the day shift, the work of the maintenance employees other than that of the shop crew is assigned by one of two methods, the first called whistle-chasing and the other termed preventive or routine maintenance. The Employer has installed an elaborate electrical code system which permits the machine operator who encounters difficulty in the operation of his equipment to call for maintenance assistance by pressing a button near his machine which activates a loud whistle in both the plant facility and in the maintenance shop and which will alert the production foreman and, according to the code used, will call either a millwright or electrician and will also designate the area of the plant in which the operator is working. Millwrights and electricians spend most of their time chasing whistles. Routine or preventive maintenance is assigned as fill-in work between whistle-chasing. When an operator believes that his machine is in need of maintenance service but that the need is not an immediate one, he will file a report with his production foreman. The production foreman will review the request and, if warranted, transmit it to the maintenance superintendent. The maintenance superintendent reviews all of these requests except those requiring electrical work which he passes on to the lead electrician. If the particular request for maintenance service is approved, the work is assigned by noting it on a blackboard which is kept for that purpose in the production area. Thus, maintenance employees who are between whistles will go to this blackboard for work assignments. Whistle-chasing is confined to the first and second shifts because only during these shifts is the production line operating. Preventive maintenance work for both the second and third shifts is assigned by the maintenance superintendent or the day shift leadmen who note the assignments on the blackboard or otherwise leave written or oral assignments. Inasmuch as the production line does not operate on the third shift, the third shift maintenance employees spend all of their time doing general repairs and routine or preventive maintenance. Thus, most of the maintenance employees spend time in the production areas carrying out their main function of doing everything necessary not only to keep production machinery operating, but also, in the event of machine breakdown, to effectuate repairs and reestablish operations as soon as possible. Machine operators and their assistants also share the objectives of the maintenance employees and, in fact, the machine operator has primary responsibility for keeping his machine running by servicing it himself if possible or by seeking the assistance of maintenance personnel when necessary. Spare parts, supplies, and tools for servicing equipment are located at various areas throughout the plant near the machines as well as in the maintenance shop. The record is clear that the machine operators and other production employees engage in routine servicing of the production machinery and the machine operators often participate in the more complicated aspects of the maintenance problems. For example, because of the large size and industrial uniqueness of some of the machinery, as well as the special skills of the machine operators, the operator of such equipment as the huge lathes which peel the veneer from the logs or the large device or carriage which rotates and planks logs is necessarily involved in any significant maintenance of the machine and often his advice and participation in the correction of the particular problem is required. When maintenance help is needed, the appropriate maintenance employees are summoned by whistle or otherwise. When machinery difficulties threaten or curtail the continuity of the production process, it is a matter of routine for millwrights, electricians, carpenters, machinists, and anyone else necessary, to be called to aid in diagnosis and repair. If, for example, investigation discloses the difficulty to be electrical, the electrician assumes primary responsibility and the millwright, operator, or whoever else proves to be necessary and is called, becomes in effect the electrician's helper, and vice-versa if the problem is mechanical and thus the millwright's primary responsibility. The production foreman may be present on such an occasion and may instruct, advise, or consult with the operator or the maintenance employee involved. The powerhouse employees, a fireman and fuel puncher on each of the 3 shifts, work strictly in the powerhouse. They are under the technical supervision of the maintenance superintendent, who checks on them every week or so through a personal visit, but they are also subject to the daily orders of the production superintendents and foremen regarding steam or power requirements for their respective plants or departments. Otherwise, they have little contact with the production or other maintenance employees. Finally, the record indicates that all hourly employees share common fringe benefits and a common wage structure. With regard to wages, there is a single common denominator, the common labor rate, on the basis of which all other classifications are determined in accordance with U. S. PLYWOOD-CHAMPION PAPERS their relation to that classification after , evaluating experience, responsibility, skill, and ingenuity. Furthermore, production workers can and do bid into maintenance jobs and, as previously mentioned, constitute the Employer's major source of supply for maintenance personnel. Moreover, in the event of a production curtailment or reduction in force, maintenance employees have the right to bump back into the production units. In addition, and quite frequently, maintenance employees with prior production experience are expected to fill-in on the production line when needed because of absences or otherwise. Administratively, there is a unitary system for processing and maintaining personnel and payroll records, and although separate time and work records are kept by the maintenance superintendent for maintenance personnel, costs for the services of the maintenance employees are allocated to the production cost center in which the particular maintenance work was perfomed. Unit Findings The Employer, the IWA, and the LSW, contend that the overall plantwide unit is alone appropriate in that the employees involved, the maintenance and production workers, are an inseparable part of an integrated and functionally interdependent continuous flow production process in which they share common and overlapping work tasks, common supervision, job bidding, bumping, and hiring rights, as well as common facilities and a common wage structure and fringe benefits. They argue, further, that the maintenance unit sought by the IBEW comprises neither a distinct homogeneous group of skilled journeymen nor a readily identifiable and functionally distinct department working at trades for which a tradition of separate representation exists. Rather, the maintenance and powerhouse employees in question, it is contended, are an inseparable part of an integrated and functionally interdependent production unit, who, working jointly with employees who operate the production equipment, perform necessary functions on the production line as a matter of routine. While' there was prior bargaining at this plant on a plantwide basis, it is not controlling in view of the approximately 7-year interval since the LSW ceased to represent the employees. We note, however, that the employer is engaged at least in substantial part in the basic lumber industry.' This industry has historically bargained on a plantwide basis, which has been conducive to a substantial degree of stability in labor relations, and this background was a substantial reason for the rule announced in Weyerhaeuser Co.' We no longer adhere to the Weyerhaeuser doctrine, but determine the appropriateness of units in this industry based on the same factors as any other type of enterprise.7 However, the integrated nature of the operations as well as the industry bargaining pattern and stability 295 which were the underlying reasons for the Weyerhaeuser decision remain valid factors to be' considered and weighed in making unit findings, even though they are not sufficient in and of themselves to preclude consideration of other relevant factors.8 However, we are persuaded, in view of our evaluation of all relevant factors, that the maintenance department unit sought herein is not composed of a distinct and homogeneous group of employees with interests separate from those of other employees, and hence is not appropriate.9 As more fully set forth above, the majority of the maintenance crew spend 75 to 90 percent of their time on the production floor working with production employees under the supervision of production foremen. The remainder of the day maintenance employees, consisting of four employees known as the "shop crew," serves, in effect, as a pool for assignment out of the maintenance shop on a priority basis. Of this crew, two millwrights spend 85 to 90 percent of their working time in the production areas, the carpenter works in various areas of the plant, and only the machinist works entirely in the maintenance shop. Further, and very significantly, maintenance employees frequently substitute on production jobs, and the production and the maintenance employees enjoy a common wage structure and the same fringe benefits. In addition, maintenance employees are recruited largely from the production ranks and may bump back to production jobs in the event of a reduction in force. Based on the entire record, we conclude that any separate community of interests which the maintenance employees might enjoy by reason of their skills and training- has been largely submerged in the broader community of interests which they share with other employees, especially by reason of the common supervision in the performance of their usual tasks, the fact that production employees and maintenance employees perform some similar functions and frequently work together in the repair and maintenance of machinery, the line of progression from the production department to maintenance department and the right of maintenance employees to "bump back" into production work in the event of a layoff, and the frequent assignment of maintenance employees to perform production work. 'Cf Burke Millwork Co., Inc, 100 NLRB 522, 523. '87 NLRB 1074, holding that only plantwide units embracing all production and maintenance employees were appropriate in basic lumber operations. 'Mallinckrodt Chemical Works, Uranium Division , 162 NLRB 387. 'Timber Products Company, 164 NLRB 1060 In view of this conclusion, we need not consider whether a maintenance unit in this plant should include the powerhouse employees. "See American Cyanamid Company, 131 NLRB 909, 910 In that decision the Board relied in part on the "similarity of function and skills" among the maintenance department employees There is no basis in the instant case for concluding that the employees sought have similar skills On the contrary, it appears that they exercise a variety of skills and perform a variety of functions, although all are directed to the end of attaining continuing mechanical operation of the equipment 296 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD In view of the above, it is apparent that Crown Simpson Pulp Company, the case cited and relied on by our dissenting colleagues, involved totally different facts and is thus inapposite." In this connection, it is to be noted that in American Cyanamid Company, supra, the case usually cited in support of the principle that a maintenance department unit may be appropriate, the Board did not hold that every maintenance department must automatically be found to be an appropriate unit for collective-bargaining purposes, but only that such a unit may be appropriate where the record establishes that maintenance employees are a separately identifiable group performing similar functions which are separate from production and having a community of interest such as would warrant si parate representation. Accordingly, we find that the unit sought by the Petitioner herein is inappropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining, and we shall dismiss the petition. 4. We find, for the reasons above cited, that the following employees of the Employer at its Gold Beach plant constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act: All employees of the Employer at its Gold Beach operations excluding office clerical employees, professional employees, guards and supervisors. ORDER It is hereby ordered that the petition filed in Case 36-RC-2338 be, and it hereby is, dismissed. [Direction of Election12 omitted from publication.] MEMBERS FANNING and ZAGORIA, dissenting: We do not agree with our colleagues' conclusion that the maintenance operation is not sufficiently identifiable to warrant finding as appropriate the departmental maintenance unit sought. The Board found appropriate a strikingly similar multicraft 11163 NLRB 796 We find that decision is distinguishable on its facts and not controlling in the instant case. Thus, in contrast with the findings herein, there the maintenance department was separately administered, had a seaparate wage scale, and had its own maintenance superintendent who hired maintenance department employees and reported directly to the plant engineer; there was no interchange between production and maintenance employees; the maintenance funtion was separately identifiable and there is no indication that production employees did any maintenance work or that maintenance employees were ever supervised by production supervisors, when maintenance and production employees worked together the latter performed functions incidental to those of the maintenance employees; the maintenance department was separately located and was composed of groups of craft-type employees, each having its own work area; and the tools were housed in the maintenance budding and were primarily for use of maintenance personnel 1'An election eligibility list, containing the names and addresses of all the eligible voters, must be filed by the Employer with the Regional Directoi for Region 36 within 7 days after the date of this Decision and Direction of Election . The Regional Director shall make the list available to all parties to the election . 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 maintenance unit in a previously unorganized plant in this industry in Crown Simpson Pulp Company.' 3 In the present case, as the Employer's plant has remained unorganized for some 7 years, there is no controlling bargaining history on a broader basis to preclude finding appropriate the maintenance unit sought under the principles of American Cyanamid" Moreover, in the present case there is a maintenance department headed by a superintendent who hires and fires maintenance employees, handles their grevances, assigns work, and keeps separate employee time and work records. He is assisted in some or all of these tasks by subordinate leadmen There is a maintenance shop located in a separate building which houses the tools, equipment, and workbenches of the maintenance employees. In this ship, distinct areas for work and storage of equipment, tools, and supplies exist for the electricians, the millwrights, the oiler, the mechanics, and the machinist. Some maintenance employees, such as the machinist and the automotive mechanics, spend most of their time working in the maintenance shop. The electricians and the millwrights work out of the maintenance shop in the production areas. They generally report to the shop before going to their assigned production areas to prepare for work and to gather up their tools. Although the great majority of their time, 75 to 90 percent, is spent making repairs or servicing machinery on the production line, the work that they perform is clearly maintenance work calling for the exercise of traditional maintenance skills and it is work which can be accomplished on the production line. Moreover, they normally exercise this skill because the particular maintenance problem cannot be handled at the production employee level. Thus, when the maintenance service needed is beyond the competence of the machine operator, the electrician or the millwright is summoned, by whistle or otherwise, to exercise his traditional skill. The remainder of the time of the millwrights and electricians is spent performing traditional routine or preventive 'maintenance assigned as fill-in work directly by maintenance department leadmen or the maintenance superintendent. In addition, a substantial number of the maintenance employees eat their lunch or have coffee in the maintenance shop whether or not they are assigned to work in production areas Furthermore, although they punch in at a common time clock area with the production employees, their cards are separately racked and designated. Finally the maintenance employees generally receive substantially higher wages than the production employees. 13163 NLRB 796 14131 NLRB 909. See National Carbon Company, 107 NLRB 1486, wherein the Board found that the absence of a bargaining history for only 5 years constituted a sufficient period of time to overcome a prior bargaining history on a broader basis and premit the Board to find as U. S. PLYWOOD-CHAMPION PAPERS In the comparable Crown Simpson case the maintenance employees at the previously unorganized plant there involved were found to constitute an identifiable homogeneous group of employees sharing a community of interest separate and distinct from that of the production employees based on facts similar to those existing in the present case: the maintenance department was located in its own building where the various craft type employees had their own tools and work areas; although the maintenance employees worked with the production employees, the functions performed by the production workers were only incidental to the preparation of the equipment for the maintenance or repair work; the maintenance department was administered separately from the production department, had its own wages scale, and had its own superintendent who did the hiring; and production employees regularly transferred to the maintenance department where they started at the lowest rate in the maintenance wage scale. In accord with long standing Board policy concerning initial organization, and based on the factors recited above, the Board found that the maintenance employees at that plant could constitute a separate unit if they so desired.' S It is true, that the Employer's plant is a highly automated plant which produces lumber and plywood through a continuous flow process and that the maintenance functions are necessarily integrated into the production process insofar as that process comes to a complete halt whenever the machinery is not maintained in operating condition. However, precisely the same situation obtained in Crown Simpson, and the Board specifically found that, despite these factors, and despite the fact that another union was seeking to represent an overall production and maintenance unit, the maintenance appropriate a unit limited to the employer's maintenance employees. "American Cyanamid, supra ' N.L R.B v Pittsburgh Plate Glass Co., 270 F 2d 167 (C A. Mallinekrodt Chemical Works, Uranium Division, supra 297 employees were entitled to an opportunity to be represented in a separate unit if they so desired. The majority's refusal to apply this same policy to the Employer's maintenance employees finds no justification in relevant distinguishing factors of record, and must, therefore, be rejected as contrary to the accepted principle that it is improper for the Board to arbitrarily discriminate between industries in the application of its general rules governing unit determinations.' 6 We think industrial stability is best insured by giving employees "fullest freedom" pursuant to the statutory mandate of Section 9(b) of the Act to select the bargaining representative they think will best serve them - at least on initial organization and in view of the limited opportunity available to them thereafter to change their bargaining representative. Accordingly, we would find that the maintenance employees in the present case, like those in Crown Simpson, are readily identifiable as a group whose similarity of functions and skills create a community of interest warranting separate representation. We would include in such a unit the powerhouse employees who have been and are a part of the maintenance department and who work under the overall supervision of the maintenance superintendent. We would, therefore, direct self-determination elections in the maintenance and powerhouse unit and in the overall unit." "Member Fanning would also point out that the Board's failure to find the maintenance unit at this unorganized plant to be an appropriate unit further resurrects the limitations imposed upon employee organization in the lumber industry by Weyerhaeuser Timber Company, 87 NLRB 1076. In his dissent in Timber Products Company, 164 NLRB 1060, Member Fanning noted that the failure to find a craft unit of journeymen electricians in the previously unorganized plant there involved would put craft representation in an even less desirable position in the lumber industry than had existed under the 18 year sway of the Weyerhaeuser doctrine The present decision seems only to add to the limitations contemplated in that dissent, for the majority decision in the present case would appear, in Member Fanning' s view, to contravene the principles of American Cyanamid, supra, by denying the appropriateness of a departmental maintenance unit in a previously unorganized plant