365 NLRB No. 74 (N.L.R.B. 2017)

Cristal USA Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsMay 10, 2017

365 NLRB No. 74 (N.L.R.B. 2017)

365 NLRB No. 74 NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the bound volumes of NLRB decisions. Readers are requested to notify the Ex- ecutive Secretary, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C. 20570, of any typographical or other formal errors so that corrections can be included in the bound volumes. Cristal USA, Inc. and International Chemical Work- ers Union Council of the United Food & Com- mercial Workers International Union, Petition- er. Case 08–RC–188482 May 10, 2017 ORDER BY CHAIRMAN MISCIMARRA AND MEMBERS PEARCE AND MCFERRAN The Employer’s request for review of the Regional Di- rector’s Decision and Direction of Election is denied as it raises no substantial issues warranting review. Dated, Washington, D.C. May 10, 2017 ______________________________________ Mark Gaston Pearce, Member ______________________________________ Lauren McFerran, Member (SEAL) NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD CHAIRMAN MISCIMARRA, dissenting. I would grant review of the Regional Director’s find- ing that a bargaining unit consisting of Plant 2 South warehouse employees, excluding Plant 2 South produc- tion employees and Plant 2 North production employees, is appropriate. The Regional Director applied Specialty Healthcare & Rehabilitation Center of Mobile, 357 NLRB 934 (2011), enfd. sub nom. Kindred Nursing Cen- ters East, LLC v. NLRB, 727 F.3d 552 (6th Cir. 2013) (“Specialty Healthcare”), in upholding the exclusion of the Plant 2 production employees, and I believe Specialty Healthcare was wrongly decided for the reasons ex- pressed in Macy’s, Inc., 361 NLRB No. 4, slip op. at 22– 33 (2014) (Member Miscimarra, dissenting). Additionally, although Plant 2 North and Plant 2 South are located on opposite sides of a public road, the facili- ties are functionally integrated to achieve the production of titanium dioxide. For example, Plant 2 North and Plant 2 South are connected by an underground system of pipes, and Plant 2 North’s production of another chemical, titanium tetrachloride, is subject to further pro- cessing in Plant 2 South. The warehouse employees in Plant 2 South and the production employees in Plant 2 North and Plant 2 South wear the same uniform, use sim- ilar protective equipment, attend the same orientation program, and receive the same employee benefits with regard to health insurance, retirement, holiday, and vaca- tion, among other things. Moreover, the Regional Direc- tor’s Decision and Direction of Election indicates some interchange between Plant 2 South production employees and Plant 2 South warehouse employees, and all employ- ees working in production positions in Plant 2 North and Plant 2 South and warehouse positions in Plant 2 South are affected by any startup or shutdown of operations. In these circumstances, I would grant review on the basis that substantial questions exist regarding whether the unit consisting exclusively of Plant 2 South warehouse em- ployees erroneously disregards or discounts the commu- nity of interests these employees share with production employees in Plant 2 North and Plant 2 South and pro- motes instability by creating a fractured or fragmented unit. See Macy’s, Inc., supra, slip op. at 27–29 (Member Miscimarra, dissenting); DPI Secuprint, Inc., 362 NLRB No. 172, slip op. at 10–18 (2015) (Member Johnson, dissenting). Dated, Washington, D.C. May 10, 2017 ______________________________________ Philip A. Miscimarra, Chairman NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD