Inland Steel Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 31, 1947

73 N.L.R.B. 19 (N.L.R.B. 1947)

In the Matter Of INLAND STEEL COMPANY, EMPLOYER and DISTRICT 50,
UNITED MINE WORKERS OF AMERICA, AFL, PETITIONER
Case No. 14-R-1620.-Decided March 31, 1947
Pope cfi Ballard, by Mr. William F. Price, of Chicago, Ill., for the
Employer.
Mr. John Belsher, of Herrin, Ill., for the Petitioner.
Mr. Stanley Segal, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon an amended petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held
at St. Louis, Missouri, on January 22, 1947, before Harry G. Carlson,
hearing officer. 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 Relations
Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF TILE EMPLOYER
Inland Steel Company, a Delaware corporation with its principal
office in Chicago, Illinois, owns and operates fluorspar nines at Rosi-
clare, Illinois, and Marion, Kentucky, and gravity and flotation mills
at Rosiclare, Illinois. Only the operations at Rosiclare are involved
in the instant proceeding. The Rosiclare operations include the Hill-
side Mine, the Rock Candy Mountain Mine and gravity and flotation
mills. During 1945, the Employer mined and shipped in interstate
commerce at least 1,000 tons of fluorspar valued in excess of $50,000
and, during the same period, it purchased mining tools and supplies
valued in excess of $10,000, 50 percent of which was purchased outside
the State of Illinois.
The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. TIIE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the American
Federation of Labor, claiming to represent employees of the Em-
ployer.
73 N. L. R. B., No. 3. 19"
20 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Employer refuses to recognize the Petitioner as the exclusive
bargaining representative of employees of the Employer until the
Petitioner has been certified by the Board in an appropriate unit.
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning
the representation of employees of the Employer, within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Petitioner seeks a unit of all production and maintenance em-
ployees, including flotation mill operators, sample boy, auto mechanic,
and picking belt foreman, but excluding chief electrician, mill me-
chanic, carpenter foreman, laboratory workers, chemists, shift leaders,
master mechanic janitress, office and clerical employees, and super-
visors. The Employer agrees that generally the aforesaid Unit is
appropriate. However, it would include the office janitress and ex-
clude the picking belt foreman.
The Employer urges the inclusion of the office janitress-in the unit
on the ground that she is an hourly paid employee. The duties of
the janitress are to sweep and clean the Employer's offices. Her work
is manual in nature. We are of the opinion that, because of the
character of her work, she properly belongs in the same unit with
production and maintenance employees. We shall include her in the
unit.
The Employer states that the picking belt foreman has supervisory
authority and should therefore be excluded from the unit. The pick-
ing belt foreman is an hourly paid employee whose work is entirely
manual. He works in the crushing shed in the gravity mill on a
picking belt, picking out waste from the-produce of the mines as it
passes over the belt. At the time of the hearing lie was the only
employee working on the belt. However, there have been times when
other employees worked with him. When this occurred, the picking
belt foreman merely transmitted to them instructions received from
his own supervisor. He had no authority to hire, discharge, or effec-
tively recommend changes in the status of such other employees. We
find that the picking belt foreman is not a supervisor within the
Board's definition. We shall include him.
We find that all production and maintenance employees 1 at the
Employer's Hillside and Rock Candy Mountain Mines and the gravity
and flotation mills at Rosiclare, Illinois, including office janitress,
flotation mill operators, sample boy and auto mechanic, but excluding
chief electrician, mill mechanic, carpenter foreman, laboratory work-
This includes the picking belt foreman.
INLAND STEEL COMPANY 21
ers, chemists , shift leaders , master mechanic , office and clerical em-
ployees , and all supervisory employees with authority to hire, pro-
mote, discharge , discipline , or otherwise effect changes in the status
of employees , or effectively recommend such action , constitute a unit
appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the mean-
ing of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining with Inland Steel Company, Rosiclare,
Illinois, an election by secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possi-
ble, but not later than thirty (30) days from the date of this Direction,
under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the
Fourteenth Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National
Labor Relations Board, and subject to Section 203.55 and 203.56, of
National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 4,
among the employees in the unit found appropriate in Section IV,
above, who were employed during the pay roll period immediately
preceding the date of this Direction, including employees who did not
work during said pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation
or temporarily laid off, and including employees in the armed forces of
the United States who present themselves in person at the polls, 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, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented by
District 50, United Mines Workers of America, AFL, for the purposes
of collective bargaining.
CHAI ialAN HERZOG took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Direction of Election.