Mallinckrodt Chemical Works

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Oct 20, 1949

86 N.L.R.B. 662 (N.L.R.B. 1949)

In the Matter Of MALLINCKRODT CHEMICAL WORKS , EMPLOYER and
INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF FIREMEN , OILERS AND MAINTI7-
NANCE MEN, LOCAL No. 6, AFL, PETITIONER
Case No. 14-RC-608
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION
AND
CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
October 20,1949
Pursuant to a Decision and Direction of Election issued by the Na-
tional Labor Relations Board on June 14, 1949,E an election by secret
ballot was conducted. on July 14, 1949, under the direction and super-
vision of the Regional Director for the Fourteenth Region, among the
employees of the Employer in the voting group described in paragraph
numbered 4 of the said Decision and Direction of Election.
Following the election the parties were furnished with a Tally of
Ballots. The tally shows that there were approximately 18 eligible
voters and that 16 valid ballots were cast, of which 12 were for the
Petitioner and 4 were for the Independent Union of Chemical Plant
Workers, hereinafter referred to as the Intervenor. On July 18, 1949,
the Intervenor filed Objections to the Conduct of the Election and to
Conduct Affecting the Results of the Election, alleging: (1) that the
date set by the Board for the election was during vacation time when
all of the employees were not present and able to vote; and (2) that
the Petitioner through its organizers and others engaged in conduct
which interfered with the employees' free and untrammeled selection
of a bargaining representative.
After an investigation, the Regional Director on September 12,
1949, issued his Report on Objections recommending that the objec-
tions be overruled on the ground that they do not raise substantial or
material issues with respect to the election. Thereafter, the Inter-
venor timely filed Exceptions to so much of the Regional Director's
Report as recommended that the Objections to Conduct Affecting the
Results of the Election be overruled.
184 N. L. R. B. 291.
86 N. L. R. B., No. 95.
662
MALLINCKRODT CHEMICAL WORKS 663
Various incidents were cited by the Intervenor to demonstrate that
the employees were coerced and intimidated in the selection of a bar-
gaining representative :
The Locker Room Incident
A few days before the election, five employees were present in the
Employer's locker room. One of the employees, a known member of
the Petitioner, remarked in a voice loud enough for all to hear,
"That works all alone and doesn't do anything around here, just
stays on the `belt'. If he doesn't come in with us now, we ought to
beat the out of him." One of the men who heard this remark,
although admittedly it was not addressed to him, assumed he was the
man referred to by the speaker because he was the only man who
worked on the "belt." We believe that the implications of this remark
are ambiguous and do not constitute such a threat as would justify
setting aside the election, particularly because the remark was uttered
by one rank-and-file employee without official status in the petitioning
union to another rank-and-file employee 2
The Incident of the Ostracized Employee
Another occurrence referred to by the Intervenor is a series of
remarks made to an employee who had been ostracized by members of
the Petitioner since a prior election, held in April 1948. Among the
remarks made to this employee, all of which were made by rank-and-file
employees, were : (1) that he would be treated as "one of the gang" if
he would not vote in the election; (2) that if he voted in the election,
he would be made so miserable on his job that he would be glad to
get out; (3) that if he did not vote in the election he "would be in the
clear." In addition, the night before the election, this employee was
visited at his home by a member of the Petitioner and a business agent
of the Petitioner. The business agent told him, "It is your privilege
not to vote if you don't want to, just as it is your privilege to vote.
There won't be any grudge." The employee was told that if he did
not vote, he would be treated as "one of the men." The employee then
agreed that he would not vote. and was told, "That's the best way out
of it; you're in the clear all round." We do not find in any or all of
these remarks threats of reprisal or promises of benefit of a type which
would normally affect employees' freedom of choice at an election.3
We agree with the Regional Director that the balance of the inci-
dents alleged to have interfered with the employees' free choice of a.
bargaining representative, even if true, were either too insignificant or
2 Matter of Minneapolis Knitting Works, 84 N. L. R. B. 826.
See Matter of Stonewall Cotton Mills, 75 N. L. R. B. 762.
664 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
occurred too far in advance of the .date of the election to have had any
probable effect upon the employees' votes in the election .4
Neither the facts disclosed by the investigation of the Regional
Director nor the facts alleged in the Intervenor's Objections and Ex-
ceptions, considered separately or in conglomeration, show that the
employees were prevented from exercising a free choice at the polls by
conduct which was both coercive in character and so related to the
election in time or otherwise as to have had a probable effect upon the
employees' actions at the polls. Accordingly, we overrule the Inter-
venor's objections to conduct affecting the results of the election.
As no exceptions were filed with respect to the Regional Director's
recommendation that the Intervenor's objections to the date of the
election be overruled, we hereby adopt the Regional Director's recom-
mendation.
In the Decision and Direction of Election previously referred to
the Board made no final determination of the appropriate unit, but
stated that such determination would depend in part upon the results
of the election among the employees in the voting group. The Tally
of Ballots shows that the Petitioner has secured a majority of the
ballots cast in the election. The employees in the voting group there-
fore have indicated their desire to be represented in a separate
bargaining unit.
Upon the basis of the entire record in the case, the Board makes
the following :
817PPLEMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
We find that all employees in the two powerhouses at the Employer's
St. Louis, Missouri, plant, including powerhouse firemen, powerhouse
maintenance men, powerhouse operators, and powerhouse coal un-
loaders, but excluding clerical employees, all stationary engineers, and
other supervisors as defined in the Act, constitute a unit appropriate
for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Sec-
tion 9 (b) of the Act, as amended.
CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
IT IS HEREBY CERTLFIED that International Brotherhood of Firemen,
Oilers, and Maintenance Men, Local No. 6, AFL, has been designated
and selected by a majority of the employees of the above-named
- Employer, in the unit hereinabove found by the Board to be appro-
priate, as their representative for the purposes of collective bargaining
+ Matter of Laclede Gas Light Company, 80 N. L. R. B. 839 ; Matter of NAPA New York
Warehouse, Inc., 75 N. L. R. B. 1269; Matter of Kroder-Roubei Company, Inc., 72 N. L.
R. B. 240.
MALLINCKRODT CHEMICAL WORKS 665
and that pursuant to Section 9 (a) of the Act, as amended, the said
organization is the exclusive representative of all the employees in
such unit for the purposes of collective bargaining with respect to
rates of pay, wages, hours of employment, and other conditions of
employment.
CHAIRMAN HERZOG and MEMBER HOUSTON took no part in the con-
sideration of the above Supplemental Decision and Certification of
Representatives.