Allied Chemical & Dye Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 19, 1948

78 N.L.R.B. 408 (N.L.R.B. 1948)

In the Matter of SOLVAY PROCESS DIVISION OF ALLIED CHEMICAL &
DYE CORPORATION, EMPLOYER and DAYTON BROW, PETITIONER and'
UNITED GAS, COKE & CHEMICAL WORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO, ON
BEHALF OF ITS LOCAL 160, UNION
Case No. 7-RD-5.-Decided July 19,1948
Butzel, Eaman, Long, Gust and Bills, by Mr. Gordon Scupholm, of
Detroit, Mich., for the Employer.
Mr. George C. Bowles, of Detroit, Mich., for the Petitioner.
Mr. Walter Nelson, of Detroit, Mich., for the Union.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition for decertification duly filed, hearing in this case
was held at Detroit, Michigan, on March 23, 1948, before Harry N.
'Casselman, hearing officer. Before the hearing, the Union moved to
dismiss the petition, alleging that the individual who filed it was in
fact acting for District 50 of United Mine Workers of America, herein
called the Mine Workers, a labor organization which has not complied
with the filing requirements of Section 9 (f), (g), and (h) of the Act.
The Petitioner moved to dismiss the Union's motion. Both motions
were referred by the Regional Director to the hearing officer, who in
turn referred them to the Board. For the reasons hereinafter stated,
both motions are hereby denied. The hearing officer's rulings made at
the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor RelatiQias
Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the
Act. '
1 Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act, the
National Labor Relations Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to
a three -man panel consisting of the undersigned Board Members [ Chairman Herzog and
Members Murdock and Gray].
78 N. L. R. B., No. 50.
408
ALLIED CHEMICAL AND DYE CORPORATION
U. THE PARTIES INVOLVED
409
The Petitioner is an individual representing employees of the Em-
ployer, who asserts that the Union's Local 160 is no longer the repre-
sentative of the Employer's employees as defined by Section 9 (a) of
the Act, as amended.
The Union, a labor organization affiliated with the Congress of In-
dustrial Organizations, appeared on behalf of its Local 160,2 which
was certified by the Board's Regional Director on February 7, 1944, as
the exclusive bargaining representative of employees of the Employer.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
Petitioner seeks decertification of Local 160 pursuant to Section 9 (c)
of the Act.
On February 7,1944, following a consent election,8 the Union's Local
160 was certified as the bargaining representative of all hourly paid
production and maintenance employees at the Employer's Detroit
plant. Thereafter, the Employer and Local 160 entered into succes-
sive collective bargaining contracts, the last of which was to remain in
effect until March 11, 1948, and from year to year thereafter, in the
absence of notice to terminate, given 60 days before any anniversary
date of the contract. None of the parties has asserted the contract as
a bar to this proceeding, nor could they, for the Union stayed the opera-
tion of the automatic renewal clause by requesting the major modifica-
tions in the contract on January 8, 1948. The petition herein was filed
6 days later.
As noted above, the Union moved to dismiss the decertification peti-
tion, asserting that the Petitioner was in fact acting on behalf of
District 50 of the Mine Workers, which has not complied with the filing
requirements of the Act. The Petitioner denies this, but asserts that
even if it were true, under Section 9 (c) (1) of the Act, the Board
would nevertheless be required to direct an election herein. The Peti-
tioner further objects to the Union's motion, on the ground that Local
160; the certified bargaining agent for whom the Union appeared, has
not complied with Section 9 (f) of the Act.
Without passing on the merits of the Petitioner's contentions, we-
deny the Union's motion. The individual Petitioner' s installation as a
provisional officer in a newly chartered local of the, Mine, Workers 15
2 By a letter dated January 5, 1948, and delivered the following day; the Union notified
the officers and'mdmbers of the executive board, of, its Local 160 that they were removed
from office, and that the affairs of the local were being placed in the hands of an Admin-
istrator The Union s Administrator was still in charge of the local 's affairs at the time
of the hearing
3 Case No. 7-R-1500.
410 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
days after the filing of the petition is not, in our opinion, a sufficient
basis for. finding that the Petitioner was acting as an agent of the Mine
Workers at the time that he filed his petition .4
We find that a question affecting commerce exists concerning the
representation of employees of the Employer, within the meaning of
Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
"We find, substantially in accord with the agreement of the parties,
that all production and maintenance employees of the Detroit plant
of the Solvay Process Division of Allied Chemical & Dye Corpora-
tion, excluding plant protection men and guards, professional em-
ployees, confidential "employees, office employees, restaurant employees,
laboratory employees, foremen, and all other supervisors as defined
in the Act, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective
bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION S
As a part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the
purpose of collective bargaining with Solvay Process Division of
Allied Chemical & Dye Corporation, Detroit, Michigan, an election
by secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than
thirty (30) days from the date of this Direction, under the direction
and supervision of the Regional Director for the Seventh Region, and
subject to Sections 203.61 and 203.62 of National Labor Relations
Board Rules and Regulations-Series 5, among the employees in the
unit found appropriate in Section IV, above, who were employed dur-
ing the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of this Direc-
tion, including employees who did not work during said pay-roll
period because they were ill or on vacation, or temporarily laid off,
but excluding those employees who have since quit or been discharged
for cause and have not been rehired or reinstated prior to the date
of the election, and also excluding employees on strike who are not
entitled to reinstatement, to determine whether or not they desire to
be represented by Local 160, United Gas, Coke & Chemical Workers
of America, CIO, for the purposes of collective bargaining.
Cf. Matter of Campbell Soup Company, 76 N. L. R. B. 950.
As Local 160 is not in compliance with Section 9 (f) and (h) of the amended Act,
the Board will certify only the arithmetical results of the election if Local 180 wins , unless
it has by then complied. Matter of Harris Foundry and Machine Co., 76 N. L. R. B. 118.