B. F. Goodrich Chemical Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 20, 1949

84 N.L.R.B. 429 (N.L.R.B. 1949)

In the Matter of B. F . GOODRICH CHEMICAL COMPANY , EMPLOYER and
ELECTRICAL WORKERS UNION LOCAL No. 369, INTERNATIONAL
BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, AFL, PETITIONER
In the Matter of B . F. GOODRICH CHEMICAL COMPANY, EMPLOYER and
PIPE FITTERS LOCAL UNION No. 522, UNITED ASSOCIATION OF
JOURNEYMEN AND APPRENTICES OF THE PLUMBING AND PIPE FITTING
INDUSTRY OF THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA, AFL, PETITIONER
Cases Nos. 9-RC-401 and 9-RC-136, respectively. Decided June
20, 1949
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing in this consolidated matter I
was held before Martin Sacks, hearing officer. The hearing officer's
rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are
hereby affirmed. For the reasons stated in Sections 3 and 4, infra,
the motions of the Employer and Synthetic Rubber Workers' Union
Local No. 72, Distillery, Rectifying and Wine Workers' International
Union of America, AFL, herein called the Intervenor, to dismiss the
petitions are hereby denied.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor
Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with
this case to a three-member panel [Chairman Herzog, and Members
Reynolds and Murdock].
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1.' The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the National Labor Relations Act.
2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent employees
of the Employer.
i By order of the Regional Director issued April 5, 1949, Cases Nos. 9 -RC-401 and
9-RC-436 were consolidated . At the hearing the Employer moved to rescind the order
consolidating the cases but would not specify in what respect it was prejudiced by that
order . As the Employer has failed to show that it has been prejudiced by the consolida-
tion of these cases, its motion is hereby denied.
84 N. L. R. B., No. 52
429
853396-50-vol. 84-31
430 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
3. The questions concerning representation :
The Employer claims that the present proceeding is barred because
the employees involved have a certified representative who has nego-
tiated a collective bargaining agreement. The Intervenor claims that
this proceeding is-barred because it has been previously designated in
a Board-conducted election as the bargaining agent for the employees
involved. The most recent contract between the Employer and the
Intervenor, effective from April 28, 1948, until April 27, 1949, and
automatically renewable yearly in the absence of 60 days' notice,
covered production and maintenance employees, including the em-
ployees involved herein. As both the Employer and Intervenor admit
that timely notice to prevent automatic renewal was given and that
the-parties are negotiating a new contract, it is apparent that under
well-established Board principles this contract is not a bar to this
proceeding.
The most recent formal Board certification of the Intervenor as
bargaining representative for the production and maintenance em-
ployees at this plant of the Employer was issued on April 19, 1943.
On March 18, 1948, a Board-directed election was held among the
group of pipe fitters petitioned for herein. Because the majority of
the ballots of this group of?employees were cast in favor of the Inter-
venor, the Board, in the Supplemental Findings of Facts in its Sup-
plemental Decision issued June 25, 1948, determined that, as the In-
tervenor was currently the recognized exclusive bargaining repre-
sentative of the production and maintenance employees of the Em-
ployer, and as the majority of pipe fitters participating in the election
held on March 18, 1948, designated the Intervenor, it might bargain
for these employees as part of the production and maintenance unit.
In view of the fact that this designation does not embrace a complete
bargaining unit, but merely amounts to a finding that the group of pipe
fitters have indicated a desire to remain a part of the larger unit, such
designation does not constitute the type of certification which the
Board has generally considered a bar for the period of 1 year to the
raising of a question concerning representation.2 As more than a year
has passed since an election was held among this group of employees,
the statutory bar 3 does not apply to this 'proceeding.
We find that questions affecting commerce have arisen 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.
2 Cf Matter of Willborn Bros Company , Inc, 77 N . L. R B. 1026; Matter of Acme Boot
Manufacturing Company, Inc, 76 N L R B 441
3 Section 9 ( c) (3) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended.
B. F. GOODRICH CHEMICAL COMPANY 431
4. The appropriate units :
The Electrical Workers Union Local No. 369, International Brother-
hood of Electrical Workers, AFL, herein called the Electrical Workers,
seeks to represent as a craft, all instrument repairmen 4 at this plant
of the Employer in a unit separate from the craft unit of maintenance
electricians whom they currently represent. The Pipe Fitters Local
Union No. 522, United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices
of the Plumbing and Pipe Fitting Industry of the United States and
Canada, AFL, herein called the Pipe Fitters, seeks to represent as a
craft, all pipe fitters at this plant of the Employer, in a craft unit
and does not wish to represent welders as part of the pipe fitters unit.
The Employer and the Intervenor contend that the existing unit is
the only appropriate one and that the units requested are inappro-
priate. In support of this position, the Employer and Intervenor
urge the history of collective bargaining on a broader basis and the
alleged interrelation and interdependence of the production and main-
tenance groups. Furthermore, they assert that the severance of craft
groups would promote jurisdictional disputes and work stoppages; 5
that the instrument repairmen are not a true craft ; and that the pipe
fitters have decided in a Board-directed election under the amended
Act, not to be represented as a separate craft.'
The Employer operates a chemical plant engaged in the production
of synthetic resins. The plant operation consists largely of an in-
tricate arrangement of tanks, vats, and pipes. Of the approximately
300 production and maintenance employees at this plant, one-half
are maintenance employees. The Employer urges as evidence of the
interrelation of the production and maintenance groups the fact that
in the continuous chemical operation the closing of one unit for main-
tenance and repair will shut down subsequent units, and the fact that
practically all maintenance work is done in the production area. It
appears, however, that maintenance work is not performed in con-
junction with the production operation as a regularly repetitive opera-
tion, but, on the contrary, is generally performed by crews upon specific
requests as the occasion arises and as a large scale operation after the
'production process has been halted. We conclude, therefore, that the
4 These employees are referred to in the petition as "instrument maintenance employees"
and are classified by the Employer as "mechanics , first class" and "mechanics , second
class," but are generally referred to as "instrument repairmen."
6 The Board has considered this contention and found it to be without merit. See Mat-
ter of Southern Paperboard Corporation, 80 N L R B 1456.
B The Board has previously stated that there is no implication either in the Act or in
Board decisions that a craft group is entitled to only one opportunity to express its desires
as regards separate representation . See Matter of Tin Processing Corporation, 80 N L.
R. B 1369 , and cases cited therein.
432 DECISIONS- Or NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
facts in the instant case do not warrant a finding that the craft main-
tenance employees are an inseparable part of the over-all production
unit .7 Furthermore, there is presently in existence in this plant a
separate craft unit established by the Board after a Board-directed
election." Accordingly, we find that neither integration nor history
of collective bargaining precludes the establishment of separate craft
units among employees of the Employer.
The proposed unit of instrument repairmen
The instrument department, located in a small building separate
from other plant buildings, consists of an engineer, a foreman, and 16
instrument repairmen. The instrument repairmen generally maintain
and install electrical and mechanical instruments and gauges in con-
nection with the plant's chemical process. These instruments include
temperature, pressure, liquid level, and flow controls. The instrument
repairmen maintain, regulate, clean, test, check, and install, roto-
meters; flo-sites, thermometers, pneumatic instruments, gauges, pres-
sure alarms , electrically controlled impulses, and pressure relief and
safety valves. In the performance of their work, they do some clean-
ing of relays and solenoid switches, together with the replacing of
slide wires and the checking of tubes used in connection with electronic
instrument panels. They also maintain, clean, test, and check, all
types of scales ranging from 70 tons to as small as 1 pound. Approxi-
mately 85 percent of their work is performed in the production area.
Instrument repairmen are hired on the basis of background and
experience and in addition thereto are given on-the-job training until
they are experienced in repairing the instruments in this plant. In
view of the foregoing, we find that these instrument repairmen, who
are physically segregated and under separate supervision, and who
perform the usual duties of instrument repairmen, constitute a well-
defined, and functionally cohesive craft group of a type which the
Board has in the past found appropriate for purposes of collective
bargaining." The contention of the Employer that instrument repair-
men do not constitute a true craft apart from the maintenance elec-
tricians is without merit. As the Board stated in previous decisions,10
we find that there is a basic difference in the craft work performed by
T Matter of United States Rubber Company, 81 N. L. R B. 17; Aluminum Company of
America, 83 N. L. R B., 398.
8 As a result of the Board -directed election in Matter of B. F. Goodrich Chemical Com-
pany (Geon Plant ), 75 N. L It. B. 1142, the electricians were established as a separate
craft unit, and are presently being bargained for by the Electrical Workers.
8 Matter of Goodyear Synthetic Rubber Corporation , 78 N. L. R. B. 96 ; See also Matter
of B. F. Goodrich Company, 67 N. L. R. B. 358.
10 Matter of Goodyear Synthetic Rubber Corporation , supra, and cases cited therein.
B. F. GOODRICH CHEMICAL COMPANY 433
each group, and that the instrument repairmen may, alone, constitute
an appropriate craft unit.
The proposed unit of pipe fitters
The 51 pipe fitters, who are classified as head pipe fitters and pipe
fitters,, have their own foreman and occupy the pipe shop, which is
separated from the rest of the plant and contains all pipe threading
machines and related equipment. The major portion of the pipe
fitters' work is performed throughout the plant. They hookup pumps
and tanks; install and maintain acid lines, gas lines, and high pressure
air lines; hook up drains, supply lines, and exhausts; do all intercon-
necting pipe work between the various tanks; perform some metal
duct work; and clean lines and tanks. They also replace corroded
pipes, install new pipes, and alter existing lines. Some of their work
is done from blueprints but most of it is in accordance with oral
instructions. A large majority of these employees spend approxi-
mately 75 percent of their time in pipe fitting work and the remaining
portion of their time in related duties.
The Employer does not contend that its pipe fitters are not a craft.
In a prior decision involving the Employer," we found that the group
of pipe fitters at this plant were a craft group who might constitute
a separate appropriate unit. Upon the basis of the present record,
including the absence of evidence that the pipe fitters' duties have
changed materially since our prior decision involving the Employer,
we find that such pipe fitters are a craft group of the type to whom
we have customarily accorded separate representation. Although it
appears that the welders are very closely associated with the pipe
fitters,12 they are not a part of the pipe fitters craft. Therefore, we
shall not include welders in any unit of pipe fitters which we may
hereinafter find appropriate in this proceeding.13
We shall make no final unit determination at this time, but shall
first ascertain the desires of the employees as expressed in the elec-
tions hereinafter directed. We shall direct that separate elections
by secret ballot be held among the employees at the Employer's Geon
Plant, Louisville, Kentucky, within the following voting groups,
excluding supervisors and all other employees of the Employer :
1. All instrument repairmen.
2. All pipe fitters.
"Matter of B. F. Goodrich Chemical Company (aeon Plant), 75 N L. R B. 1142.
12 The welders spend a large percentage of their working time welding for the pipe
fitters.
"Matter of General Electric Company, 77 N. L. R. B. 1198; Matter of Standard Oil
Company of California, 79 N. L. It. B. 1466.
434 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS'
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining with the Employer, elections by secret
ballot shall be conducted as early as possible , but not later than. 30
days from the date of this Direction , under the direction and super-
vision of the Regional Director for the Region in which this case was
heard, and subject to Sections 203.61 and 203.62 of National Labor
Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 5, as amended, among
the employees in the voting groups described in paragraph numbered
4, above, who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately
preceding the date of this Direction of Elections 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 ex-
cluding employees on strike who are not entitled to reinstatement, to
determine (1) whether the employees in voting group 1 desire to be
i epresented , for purposes of collective bargaining , by Electrical Work-
ers Union Local No. 369 , International Brotherhood of Electrical
Workers, AFL, or by Synthetic Rubber Workers' Union Local No.
72, Distillery , Rectifying and Wine Workers' International Union
of America, AFL, or by neither; and (2) whether or not the em-
ployees in voting group 2 desire to be represented , for purposes of
collective bargaining, by the Pipe Fitters Local Union No. 522,
United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing
and Pipe Fitting Industry of the United States and Canada,- AFL,
or by Synthetic Rubber Workers' Union Local No. 72 , Distillery, Rec-
tifying and Wine Workers' International Union of America, AFL,
or by neither.