Ironton Fire Brick Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 16, 1948

76 N.L.R.B. 764 (N.L.R.B. 1948)

Tn the Matter of IRONTON FIRE BRICK COMPANY , EMPLOYER and UNITED
BRICK AND CLAY WORKERS OF AMERICA , AFL, PETITIONER
Case No. 9-RC-17.-Decided March 16, 1948
Mr. H. Van Antwerp, Jr., of Ashland, Ky., for the Employer.
Mr. H. Clark, of Olive Hill, Ky., for the Petitioner.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at Ashland,
Kentucky, on December 18, 1947, before Alan A. Bruckner, 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 i makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
The Ironton Fire Brick Company is an Ohio corporation engaged
in clay mining and the manufacture of refractory products. From
the mine, located in Carter County, Kentucky, fire clay valued at more
than $25,000 per year is obtained. All of the clay so obtained is
shipped to the Employer's manufacturing plant in Ironton, Ohio;
there refractory products, valued at more than $50,000 per year, are
produced. Approximately 75 percent of those products is shipped to
points outside of Ohio.
The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
1 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 -man panel consisting
of the undersigned Board Members [ Chairman Herzog and Members Reynolds and Mur-
dock].
76 N. L. R. B., No. 108.
764
IRONTON FIRE BRICK COMPANY
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED WITH
765
The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the American
Federation of Labor, claiming to represent employees of the Employer.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Employer refuses to recognize the Petitioner as the exclusive
bargaining representative of employees of the Employer until the Peti-
tioner has been certified by the Board in an appropriate unit.
The Employer contends that because there is no evidence in the
record to support Petitioner's allegation of compliance with Section
9 (f) and (h) of the Act, the petition should be dismissed. For the
reasons stated in Matter o l Lion Oil Company 2 the Employer's motion
to dismiss is denied.
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
The Employer and Petitioner agree that the appropriate unit con-
sists of all production and maintenance employees at the mine in Carter
County, Kentucky, but excluding all clerical employees and super-
visors. A question is raised only as to one employee; 3 the Petitioner
contends he should be excluded from the appropriate unit as a super-
visor, while the Employer urges his inclusion. This employee's reg-
ular duties consist of running loaded cars of clay to the tipple, tipping
the clay, and returning the cars. He also notes the car weights, and
keeps a daily time sheet. Every 2 weeks, he recapitulates this informa-
tion for pay-roll purposes. It is estimated that his clerical duties ab-
sorb about 10 percent of his time. For approximately 1 month prior
to the hearing, this employee had been substituting for a foreman who
was absent due to injury. At the time of the hearing, the foreman was
expected back shortly. Previously, this employee had substituted for
this same foreman, in the latter's absence, for short periods of time,
rarely as long as a week. The Employer's superintendent estimated
that the total time this employee spends substituting for the foreman
does not exceed 1 month out of 12. We find, in view of the character
of this employee's regularly assigned duties, that he is not a supervisor
and should be included in the appropriate unit.
We find that all production and maintenance employees of the Em-
ployer at its Carter County clay-mining operation, but excluding all
2 76 N. L. R. B 565.
3 Clew Douglas.
766 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
clerical employees, guards, and all supervisors, constitute a unit appro-
priate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of
Section 9 (b) of the Act.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the
purposes of collective bargaining with Ironton Fire Brick Company,
Soldier, Kentucky, 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 Ninth 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 Sec-
tion IV, above, who were employed during the pay-roll period imme-
diately 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, 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 em-
ployees on strike who are not entitled to reinstatement, to determine
whether or not they desire to be represented by United Brick and Clay
Workers of America, AFL, for the purposes of collective bargaining.