Koppers Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Oct 28, 1944

58 N.L.R.B. 1474 (N.L.R.B. 1944)

In the Matter of KOPPERS COMPANY and UNITED MINE WORKERS OF
AMERICA, DISTRICT 50
Case No. 17-R-969.-Decided October 28, 1944
Mr. John M. Crimmins, of Pittsburgh, Pa., for the Company.
Mr. Fred K. Hefferly, of Denver, Colo., and Mr. Casper Yinger, of
.Salida, Colo., for the Union.
Mr. A. Sumner Lawrence, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon a petition duly filed by United Mine Workers of America,
District 50, herein called the Union, alleging that a question affecting
commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of
Koppers Company, Salida, Colorado, herein called the Company, the
National Labor Relations Board provided for an appropriate hearing
upon due notice before Elmer L. Hunt, Trial Examiner. Said hearing
was held at Salida, Colorado, on September 25, 1944. The Company
and the Union appeared, participated, and were afforded full op-
portunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to
introduce evidence bearing on the issues. The Trial Examiner's rul-
ings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are
hereby affirmed. All parties were afforded an opportunity to file briefs
with the Board.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Koppers Company, a Delaware corporation with its principal place
of business in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, operates, among other plants
in various parts of the United States, a wood preserving plant at
Salida, Colorado, the only one involved in this proceeding, at which
' Incorrectly described in the petition and other formal papers as "Koppers Company,
Wood Preserving Division," and corrected by stipulation at the hearing.
58 N. L R B., No. 265.
1474
KOPPERS COMPANY 1475
plant the Company is engaged in the treating of telephone poles, rail-
road ties, and piling, with cresote, oils, or salt solutions. During the
year 1943 the Company processed at its Salida plant 1,500,000 cubic
feet of timber, of which approximately 55 percent was shipped to
points outside the State of Colorado. During the same period, ap-
proximately 75 percent of the timber purchased by the Company for
treatment in its plant was shipped to it from points outside the State
Of Colorado.
The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
United Mine Workers of America, District 50, is a labor organiza-
tion admitting to membership employees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION'
On or about August 12, 1944, the Union, claiming majority repre-
sentation among the production and maintenance employees of the
Company at its Salida, Colorado, plant, requested that the Company
recognize it as the bargaining representative thereof. The Company
declined to recognize the Union upon the ground that it questioned
the Union's claim to majority representation.
A statement of a Field Examiner for the Board, introduced in evi-
dence at the hearing, indicates that the Union represents a substantial
number of employees within the unit hereinafter found appropriate.2
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning
the representation, of employees of the Company within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Union and the Company are in substantial agreement that all
production and maintenance workers employed by the Company at its
Salida, Colorado, plant, excluding salaried and clerical employees,
supervisors, and watchmen, constitute an 'appropriate unit.3 The
Company contends, however, in opposition to the Union, that one
Casper Yinger should be excluded from the unit upon the ground that
this individual is a supervisory employee within the meaning of the
Board's customary definition.
'The Field Examiner reported that the Union had submitted 31 designations dated
August 1944, all of which checked with the Company s pay roll of August 20, 1944, con-
taining 35 names within the claimed appropriate unit
3 In accordance with the agreement of the part us, Ave shall exclude from the unit here-
inafter found appropriate the following employee classifications • assistant superintendent,
tie card foreman. salaried and clerical employees ( including the stenographer -clerk), and
watchmen.
1476 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
With respect to the question of including or excluding Yinger from
the appropriate unit, the record discloses that this employee, while
presently carried on the pay roll in the classification of treating oper-
ator and paid on an hourly basis,' supervises during normal operations
of the Company, approximately eight other employees in the boiler
room and treating room department.' It also appears that, among
other supervisory duties, Yinger directs and instructs the employees
in his department with respect to methods of operation. The duties
of Yinger include not only the giving of oral instructions to employees
working with him on the day shift, but also the preparation of written
instructions for employees on the night shifts during which periods
Yinger is absent from the plant. In addition thereto, Yinger is called
by employees on the telephone at his home for instructions at any time
during the night in the event a question arises with respect to the
treating process. Yinger determines which employees shall be as-
signed to the various shifts and approves the requests of individual
employees for transfer from one shift to another. He also disciplines
and criticizes the work of employees under his supervision and checks
and approves the time records of employees in the department, which
records are thereafter, submitted to the assistant superintendent in
charge of plant operations.. In the absence of the assistant superin-
tendent, Yinger is in charge of his department and may, in the event
of an emergency, take whatever steps are necessary to remedy the situa-
tion. The evidence further reveals that Yinger has authority to
recommend changes in the status of employees under him, and that
such authority has on occasion been exercised effectively.,, While it
is undisputed that duties of Yinger include at-the present time a sub-
stantial amount of manual labor, upon the Company's return to normal
operations his time will be more fully occupied with supervisory duties,
and little, if any, with manual labor. In view of the above considera-
tions, we find that Yinger is a supervisory employee within the mean-
ing of our usual definition. Accordingly, we shall exclude him from
the unit hereinafter found appropriate.
We find that all production and maintenance workers of the Com-
pany, employed at its Salida, Colorado, plant, excluding salaried and
clerical employees (including the stenographer-clerk), watchmen, the
* The status of Yinger as an hourly paid employee resulted from a request by Yinger
that he be changed from a salaried to an hourly basis in order to be eligible for overtime
payments. His rate at the present time is, however, substantially higher than that of the
other hourly paid employees in his department.
5 At the present time, due to a curtailment in the Company's operations, there are only
three employees under Yinger's supervision
0 The record discloses that on at least two occasions Yinger has made recommendations
with respect to the hiring of employees, and has discussed with the assistant superintendent
the capacity and ability of the employees in the treating room department. It is admitted
by Yinger, who testified for the Union, that his authority to recommend promotions Is
greater than that of the other hourly paid treating room employees.
KOPPERS COMPANY 1477
assistant superintendent, the tie yard foreman, the treating operation
supervisor,' and all other supervisory employees with authority to
hire, promote, 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
meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
a
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
We shall direct that the question concerning representation be re-
solved by an election by secret ballot among the employees in the
appropriate unit who were employed during the pay-roll period imme-
diately preceding the date of the Direction of Election, subject to the
limitations and additions set forth in the Direction.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National Labor
Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act,
and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of the National Labor Relations
Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3, as amended, it is hereby
DIREOrED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Koppers Company,
Salida, Colorado, 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 Seventeenth Region, acting in this matter as agent
for the National 'Labor Relations Board, and subject to Article III,
Sections 10 and 11, of said Rules and Regulations, among the employees
in the appropriate unit 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 any 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 United Mine Workers of America, District 50, for the purposes of
collective bargaining.
° Casper Yinger.