Mobil Oil Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jan 22, 1968

169 N.L.R.B. 259 (N.L.R.B. 1968)

MOBIL OIL CORPORATION 259
Mobil Oil Corporation and International Union of
Operating Engineers , Local Union 30, AFL-CIO,
Petitioner . Case 29-RC-546
January 22, 1968
DECISION ON REVIEW AND ORDER
On December 28, 1966, the Regional Director
for Region 29 issued a Decision and Direction of
Election in the above-entitled proceeding, finding
appropriate the Petitioner's requested unit of
powerhouse employees at the Employer's Port
Mobil terminal in Staten Island, New York, for
severance from the established broader unit
represented by the Intervenor, Petroleum Asso-
ciation of Labor. Thereafter, the Employer re-
quested reconsideration of such Decision in the
light of the National Labor Relations Board's
decision in Mallinckrodt Chemical Works, Ura-
nium Division, 162 NLRB 387, issued the same
day. On January 6, 1967, the Regional Director
issued an Order in which, upon reconsideration,
he reaffirmed his Decision as consistent with the
rationale of Mallinckrodt. Thereafter, the Em-
ployer, in accordance with Section 102.67 of the
National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regula-
tions, Series 8, as amended, filed a timely request
for review of the Regional Director's Decision and
subsequent Order as to the craft severance issue
presented. The,Petitioner filed a statement in op-
position to the request for review.
By telegraphic Order dated February 9, 1967,
the'Board granted the request for review, invited
the parties to submit offers of proof concerning in-
dustry and area practice in the representation of
powerhouse employees, and stayed the election
pending decision on review. Thereafter, all the
parties filed briefs on review; the Employer and the
Petitioner also filed offers of proof.
The Board has considered the entire record in
this case, including the briefs on review and offers
of proof submitted by the parties, and makes the
following findings:
The Petitioner in its petition sought to sever a
unit of 5 licensed stationary engineers employed in
the powerhouse at the Employer's Port Mobil ter-
minal from the Intervenor's established unit cover-
ing all employees at 15 terminal's in the greater New
York City area which are administratively part of
the Employer's New York State division.' The In-
tervenor has bargained for the broader unit for over
20 years .2
In his Decision and Direction of Election, the
Regional Director found that the requested sta-
tionary engineers, including three bulk plant helpers
permanently assigned to assist the stationary en-
gineers in the powerhouse, constituted a func-
tionally distinct departmental unit, that the Peti-
tioner has traditionally represented separate units
of employees in powerhouses, and that, under
American Potash.' the powerhouse unit involved
was appropriate for severance from the broader unit
herein. In his Order, as above-indicated, he recon-
sidered the record in the light of the
Mallinckrodt standards enunciated by the Board to
replace those of American Potash, and he reaf-
firmed his conclusion that severance was appro-
priate.
The Employer and the Intervenor contend that
the Regional Director gave insufficient weight to
the length and stability of the established bargaining
relationship and the high degree of functional in-
tegration of powerhouse operations with terminal
operations. In addition, the Employer offers to
prove that among major oil companies with
unionized terminal facilities which have a power-
house like that at Port Mobil, the universal practice
has been to include the powerhouse employees in
a broader unit. The Petitioner argues that the Re-
gional Director correctly concluded that severance
was proper under the standards of Mallinckrodt.
Although it does not dispute the facts advanced in
the Employer's offer of proof, the Petitioner itself
offers to prove that it represents separate units of
powerhouse employees like those here in question
at six oil company storage facilities in New York
and New Jersey 4 and that it represents powerhouse
units in many industries.
At its Port Mobil terminal the Employer receives,
stores, and subsequently sells or redistributes its
petroleum products.5 The terminal covers approxi-
mately 203 acres and contains about 40 large tanks
for the storage of petroleum products, in addition to
smaller tanks used in the operation of terminal
equipment. There are pipelines throughout the ter-
minal used to convey salt water and fresh water,
steam, and the various petroleum products. Tank-
ers and barges unload products at a wharf for con-
veyance by pipe to the storage tanks. The products,
when sold or redistributed, are reloaded from the
tanks into barges at the wharf or into tank trucks at
I The Port Mobil terminal is the only one among the 15 terminals within
the unit which employs' powerhouse employees There are two other ter-
minals within the Employer's New York State division, located in
Brooklyn and Albany, New York, which do employ similar powerhouse
employees. At each of these terminals, the powerhouse employees are
represented by another labor organization as part of a termmalwide unit
L The Intervenor was certified as the representative of such unit on
May 7, 1456.
3 American Potash & Chemical Corporation, 107 NLRB 1418
4 As indicated above, there are powerhouse facilities at only three of the
169 NLRB No. 35
terminals in the Employer's New York State division. The Employer, in
its offer of proof, states that operation of its own high pressure boiler
system is economically competitive only in a large terminal such as Port
Mobil Other major oil companies apparently follow the same policy Of
the approximately 350 organized terminals of other major oil companies
listed in the Employer's offer of proof, only I 1 operate their own power-
houses
5 Gasolines, kerosenes , fuel oils, jet fuels, solvents , No 6 fuel oil, and
others
350-212 0-70-18
260 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
one of two truckloading racks. At one end of the
wharf there is a barge cleaning plant where barges
used for transporting a product are steam cleaned
in preparation for reuse in transporting a different
product. All the buildings, including the garage and
office building , warehouses for storage of steel
drums and pipes, the marine building, and the
powerhouse, are located at one corner of the pro-
perty.
A small percentage of the steam produced by the
high pressure boilers in the powerhouse is utilized
to heat the buildings at the terminal. Most of the
steam produced is used to heat the No. 6 fuel oil,
which is a heavy oil somewhat like tar when cold, in
order to facilitate its movement through pipes into
and out of storage tanks, to steam clean barges in
the barge cleaning plant, to power steam-driven
pumps on water pipelines and certain product
pipelines, and, when necessary in the winter time,
to heat the water pipes which are part of the fire
protection system.
Port Mobil terminal is in operation around the
clock everyday. The employees included in the In-
tervenor's contract unit consist of 15 bulk plant
men, 18 bulk plant helpers, 8 motor vehicle drivers,
1 auto mechanic, I dispatcher, and 5 stationary en-
gineers . The entire complement is under a terminal
superintendent and his assistant, and six foremen,
including four gauger or terminal foremen who
direct all operations on each shift, a stationary en-
gineer foreman, and a maintenance foreman. There
are bulk plant men assigned to each shift whose du-
ties are to gauge the products in the storage tanks,
receive and "ship" barges and tankers, and do
general maintenance work. There is at least one
bulk plant helper assigned to each shift to assist in
a variety of tasks and to do maintenance work. In
addition, as indicated above, there are three bulk
plant helpers permanently assigned to assist in the
powerhouse.
Of the five stationary engineers , four regularly
perform duties in the powerhouse, on rotating shifts
7 days per week. The fifth is the relief stationary en-
gineer . On the second and third shifts, the station-
ary engineers are assisted by one of the three bulk
plant helpers permanently assigned to such duties.
There is also a stationary engineer foreman 6 on the
day shift who supervises the five stationary en-
gineers and the bulk plant helpers assigned to the
powerhouse.
The relief stationary engineer , when not relieving
a regular powerhouse engineer , works on the day
shift and spends most of his time outside the power-
house performing maintenance and construction
work on boilers, pumps, and steam and water lines,
as well as some mainteanace work not related
8 The stationary engineer foreman supervises the first shift and handles
questions on technical matters on the other shifts, while on the second and
third shifts the gauger foreman supervises 'all employees, including sta-
tionary engineers , in nontechnical matters.
directly to the power system. At such times he is
assisted by bulk plant helpers, who, in addition, are
assigned as needed to powerhouse duties on the day
shift and as relief for bulk plant helpers permanently
assigned to the powerhouse on the second and third
shifts. When working with a stationary engineer, the
bulk plant helpers are under the supervision of the
stationary engineer foreman, but at other times are
under the supervision of the maintenance foreman
who also supervises two bulk plant men. Those hel-
pers permanently assigned to the powerhouse must
leave at intervals to check the outside pumps and
lines for the stationary engineer, and they are some-
times assigned to assist in such nonpowerhouse du-
ties as docking tankers when the terminal foreman
needs extra help, at which times they would ap-
parently be under the direct supervision of the
gauger foreman. In addition, other bulk plant hel-
pers may, on occasion, work on a temporary basis
in the powerhouse, performing special maintenance
work under the supervision of the stationary en-
gineer foreman.
All bulk plant helpers are paid the same wage
scale, regardless of their duty assignments, and
every 6 months the other bulk plant helpers may
bid, on the basis of seniority, for permanent assign-
ment to powerhouse duty.? The stationary en-
gineers must be liensed by New York City and are
the highest paid of the employees covered by the
existing contract. In all other respects all employees
have the same working conditions and benefits.
Thus, all have a basic 40-hour workweek, and per-
sonnel in each classification are required on each
shift; all have the same hours of work and are eligi-
ble for the same benefits, such as medical, survivor-
ship, and sickness and accident benefits, savings,
group accident insurance, etc. All employees are on
the same payroll, are paid the same day, wear the
same uniform and receive a standard allowance
therefor, punch the same timeclock, and have ter-
minalwide bumping rights in the event of a layoff,
provided the senior employee is qualified to do the
work. On the other hand, the Intervenor's contract
gives weight to the separate interests of the various
classifications, including stationary engineers,
through departmental seniority for such purposes
as vacations, layoffs, etc.
Although the Petitioner traditionally has
represented separate units of powerhouse em-
ployees in a number of industries, we note from the
Employer's offer of proof8 that it represents such
employees in some plants as part of a broader unit.
At installations engaged in the storage and distribu-
tion of petroleum products, such as the Employer's
here involved, it appears from the offers of proof
submitted on review that the pattern of bargaining
7 The three helpers now permanently assigned to the powerhouse have
been working there for 5 to 10 years.
8 Fn.4,supra.
MOBIL OIL CORPORATION 261
has, with minor exceptions, been in terminalwide
units including powerhouse employees. And it is
clear in this record that at other plants of the Em-
ployer bargaining has been conducted on that
broader basis.
On the undisputed facts contained in the record,
and giving due consideration to the offers of proof
submitted on review as they relate to the standards
set forth in Mallinckrodt, we conclude that
severance of the powerhouse employees from the
established broader unit is inappropriate herein.
Notwithstanding the licensing requirement for sta-
tionary engineers and their separate supervision in
technical matters, they share common supervision
with other employees in other respects on the
second and third shifts. Also, we agree with the Re-
gional Director that a departmental unit would have
to include everyone employed in that department,
but there is considerable interchange among the
bulk plant helpers. Thus, those permanently as-
signed to the powerhouse assist elsewhere and
other bulk plant helpers at times assist or work in
the powerhouse, coming under supervision of a
foreman other than their usual one in the course of
such temporary assignment. Furthermore, the per-
manent helpers in the powerhouse do not remain in
the powerhouse but often move through the other
operations in the course of their duties. And the re-
lief stationary engineer spends a substantial amount
of his regular working time outside the powerhouse
on both powerhouse- and other maintenance work,
at which time he is regularly assisted by bulk plant
helpers not normally assigned to the powerhouse.
This intermingling of duties and contact between
powerhouse and other workers and shifting of su-
pervision, when coupled with the other considera-
ions here present, including specifically the long
and stable bargaining history on a terminalwide
basis at the location involved here, the similar bar-
gaining practice at like terminals of this Employer
and other major oil companies, the apparent con-
sideration which has been given the interest of
powerhouse employees as part of the broader unit,
and the ;high degree of integration which exists
between the powerhouse function and the storage
and distribution operations of the terminal, lead us
to the conclusion that the separate interests of the
powerhouse employees are so merged into the
broader community of interest shared by all ter-
minal employees as to render a separate power-
house department unit inappropriate.
We shall, therefore, dismiss the petition in ac-
cordance with the principles we set forth in
Mallinckrodt. By so doing, of course, we do not
imply that units of powerhouse employees are in-
herently or presumptively inappropriate and may
never be severed. Rather we shall continue to ex-
amine the circumstances in each case, as the Board
or a panel thereof has done both here and in the
recent cases of Buddy L. Corporation, 167 NLRB
808, where we severed a unit of toolroom em-
ployees, and Mesta Machine Company, 167 NLRB
99, where we found a separate unit of powerhouse
employees appropriate.
It is hereby ordered that the petition filed herein
be, and it hereby is, dismissed.
Member Fanning, dissenting:
My colleagues are reversing the Regional-
Director , who found the requested powerhouse unit
appropriate for separate bargaining as a departmen-
tal unit in accord with established precedent. They
assume the appropriateness of this unit but dismiss
the petition on the basis of the recent Mallinckrodt
decision ,9 placing the primary onus for this reversal
on the 20-year history of bargaining for these em-
ployees as part of a larger unit. Even the
Mallinckrodt decision , however , recognized the
separate community of interests of powerhouse
employees . 10 In that very case my colleagues ad-
verted to the segregated work location of Mal-
linckrodt 's powerhouse employees and their virtual
lack of contact with other employees , and thus ex-
plained the fact that the powerhouse employees had
been permitted to sever. Also, in that case, because
of the distinguishing work characteristics with
respect to the powerhouse group , my colleagues
saw no "necessary inconsistency" in denying
severance to instrument mechanics with admitted
craft status. Here, with a separately located power-
house involved , one surely would think that they
would be concerned with the inconsistency in their
recent thinking about powerhouse units.
Actually the Board , from its earliest decisions,
has granted separate units to true powerhouse
groups.11 The published cases of the Board severing
' Matlinckrodt Chemical Works, Uranium Division, 162 NLRB 387, in
which I concurred in the new policy of not excepting any industry as such
from craft severance, though dissenting from the denial of severance to
skilled instrument mechanics
10 Mallinckrodt, above, at fn. 18.
11 See American Tobacco Company, 2 NLRB 198, where powerplant
employees, like office employees and machine shop employees, were ex-
cluded from the manufacturing group sought and described as "merely ad-
juncts", The Warfield Company, 6 NLRB 58, 64, where the Board
emphasized the work location in a building separate from the main plant
and the "radically different" duties from those of production workers;
National Distillers Products Corporation, 20 NLRB 467, small groups of
power plant employees at employer's three Louisville plants; Acme White
Lead & Color Works, 29 NLRB 1158, 1161, separate building, longer
workweek, and higher pay noted, as well as eligibility to other labor or-
ganizations
262 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
such units from larger units are legion.12 No doubt
the unpublished cases since 1961 - when authority
in representation cases was delegated to the
Board's Regional Directors with the result that rela-
tively few representation cases now reach the
Board for initial decision - reflect a similar pattern
of granting severance to true powerhouse units.
This is that sort of case.
Here we have five stationary engineers, all
licensed by New York City to operate high pres-
sure steam boilers and required by ordinance to
stand watch over such boilers, plus three helpers
permanently assigned to the powerhouse who have
acted in that capacity for 5 to 10 years, all under the
supervision of a stationary engineer foreman, or
chief engineer as also called. My colleagues find,
however, that the interests of these separately su-
pervised and separately located powerhouse em-
ployees having a unique work assignment at Port
Mobil have been merged with those of the approxi-
mately 400 nonpowerhouse employees in the exist-
ing contract unit. At the Port Mobil bulk plant and
terminal, where the powerhouse in question is
located, the nonpowerhouse employees (about 50
of them) are engaged in receiving steamers and
barges and dispatching and driving oil trucks. The
remaining contract unit employees apparently do
the same sort of work at other installations in the
New York City area comprising the unit. Other in-
stallations have no powerhouse; they purchase their
power. 13
My colleagues emphasize particularly the "long
and stable" bargaining history at Port Mobil as
ground for denying these powerhouse employees
democratic expression. Are they saying that these
12 General Foods Corp, Corn Mill Div., 54 NLRB 596; Sangamo
Electric Company, 59 NLRB 364, Chickasaw Wood Products Company,
65 NLRB 664; L. E. Shank Latex Products Inc., 67 NLRB 552,
Mallmekrodt Chemical Works, 67 NLRB 1147, and 76 NLRB 1055,
American Sugar Refining Company, 76 NLRB 1009, General Motors
Corporation, 76 NLRB 879; Kimberly-Clark Corporation, 78 NLRB
102; Mengel Company, 78 NLRB 880, Crocker, Burbank and Co, 80
NLRB 774, Wilson & Co, 80 NLRB 1463, and 80 NLRB 1466, Swift
and Company, 81 NLRB 333; C A. Swanson and Sons, 81 NLRB 321;
Jacobsen Mfg Co, 82 NLRB 1404, Baugh and Sons, 82 NLRB 1399;
Container Corporation ofAmeriea, 83 NLRB 424, Ralston Purina Com-
pany, 86 NLRB 107; John Oster Mfg Co, 86 NLRB 113, American
Smelting & Refining Co , 86 NLRB 1172; John Morrell & Co., 86 NLRB
192, Industrial Rayon Corporation, 87 NLRB 4, Armour and Company,
88 NLRB 309; American Box Board Company, 90 NLRB 122, A D. Jul-
hard & Co, Inc., 94 NLRB 1306; Electric Storage Battery Company, 94
NLRB 1308, Crown Zellerbach Corp, 96 NLRB 378, Federal
Telephone & Radio Corp, 98 NLRB 1324, Pabco Products, Inc., 101
NLRB 281; Schaffner Bros Co., 102 NLRB 1010; Kimble Glass Com-
pany, 102 NLRB 933, Anheuser-Busch & Co., Inc., 103 NLRB 1020;
Armstrong Tire and Rubber Company, 104 NLRB 892; W. C. Hamilton
and Sons, 104 NLRB 627, Celotex Corporation, 105 NLRB 815,
Standard Register Company, 106 NLRB 351, American Potash &
Chemical Corporation, 107 NLRB 1418; Industrial Rayon Corporation,
107 NLRB 1518; Procter & Gamble Manufacturing Company, 109
N LRB 315, Formica Company, 109 NLRB 964, Pioneer Division, Flint-
kote Company, 109 NLRB 1273; Natvar Corporation, 109 NLRB 1278;
General Foods Corporation, 110 NLRB 265, General Electric Com-
pany, 110 NLRB 744, Park Drop Forge Company, 110 NLRB 915,
Montgomery Ward & Company, 110 NLRB 256; Baldwinville Products,
Inc., 111 NLRB 752, Stauffer Chemical Company of Nevada, 113
employees sought by the Petitioner have had
satisfactory representation because their inclusion
in an overall unit for 24 years has been unaccom-
panied by labor strife? Under Mallinckrodt, are
groups traditionally granted separate representation
to be required to demonstrate an unstable bargain-
ing history by overt protest actions in order to quali-
fy for separate representation?14 The adequacy of
employee representation, it seems to me, is better
judged by employee reaction, expressed by vote in
an appropriate separate unit or voting group rather
than by Board fiat based solely on the presumption
that denial of opportunity to sever will necessarily
prolong stability. Separate seniority and top wages
under the contract, such as these powerhouse em-
ployees are said to have, may also, to my col-
leagues, seem like satisfactory representation -
though it is difficult to understand how these,same
factors are convincingly consistent with a merger of
interests with rank-and-file employees - but to the
employees concerned the problem of satisfactory
representation may be focused on entirely different
conditions of employment. Why now should the
Board substitute its judgement in this regard for the
hopes and desires of a majority of the employee
group?
The facts are accurately and succinctly set forth
in the Regional Director's Decision and Direction
of Election of December 28, 1966, which he reaf-
firmed on January 6, 1967, after considering the im-
pact of the intervening Mallinckrodt decision and
its footnote 18, referred to above. He should be af-
firmed. This small group stationed in the Port Mobil
powerhouse, with its stationary engineers licensed
for specialized boiler work, having only limited con-
NLRB 1255, international Harvester Company, 113 NLRB 750, North
American Aviation, Inc., 113 NLRB 1049, G Washington and Burnetts
Div. of American Home Foods, Inc, 114 NLRB 1352, Ketchikan Pulp
Company, 115 NLRB 379, Montgomery Ward & Company, 115 NLRB
510; American Bosch Arma Corporation, 115 NLRB 226, North Amer-
ican Aviation , Inc, 115 NLRB 1090 ; Hawley & Hoops, Inc, 115 NLRB
1276, Botany Mills, Inc, 115 NLRB 1497, U S Smelting, Refining and
Mining Company, 116 NLRB 661; Westinghouse Electric Corp, 117
NLRB 520, American Potash & Chemical Corporation, 117 NLRB 1508,
Union Steam Pump Company, 118 NLRB 689, Whippany Paper Board
Company, 119 NLRB 1615, Dana Corp, 122 NLRB 365; General Elec-
tric Company, 123 NLRB 884, Victor Manufacturing & Gasket Com-
pany, 133 NLRB 1283.
13 The majority relates the powerhouse function and the terminal's
storage and distribution operations and finds a "high degree of integra-
tion" between the two. This emphasis on the relationship of a supporting
function - of which a powerhouse is an excellent example - to the industri-
al operation it supports belabors the obvious The function of purchased
steam would be equally integrated with the Employer's total operation If
this basic fact of industrial life is to be "mobilized " to deny severance, few
employees engaged in a supporting function can anticipate separate
representation , regardless of the Act's wording and regardless of a long
tradition of separate representation These will do them no good Bargain-
ing by plant " subdivision" is well on its way to being read out of Section
9(b), despite that Section's mandate to the Board to assure to employees
the fullest freedom in exercising the rights guaranteed by the Act.
14 See Buddy L. Corporation, 167 NLRB 808, where the bargaining
history was marked by work stoppages, as well as direct bargaining by the
craftsmen with their employer with which the plantwide representative
was apparently in accord
MOBIL OIL CORPORATION
tact with employees in the large contract unit,
devoting its time to work involving the boilers, the
steam lines, and allied pumping equipment, is, by
Board standards including Mallinckrodt, entitled to
a self-determination election. I perceive nothing on
this record, including the bargaining history, which
justifies a change of policy with respect to this type
of bargaining unit.15
As the Regional Director's decision in this case
demonstrates, my colleagues' refusal to accord the
powerhouse employees an opportunity to change
their bargaining representative is not required by
the Board's recent decision in the Mallinckrodt
case, which strongly intimated that, because of their
traditionally recognized separate community of in-
terests, severance of powerhouse employees was
entirely consistent with the policy there set forth. In
other recent decisions, my colleagues have also
given assurances that the Mallinckrodt doctrine
was not intended always to foreclose severance
elections, and that, notwithstanding the adverse
decisions in those cases, they would permit the
15 With respect to my colleagues' assertion that these employees are
subject to "intermingling of duties" and "shifting supervision ," I rely on
the following excerpt, from the Regional Director's Decision, as a fair, in-
formed, and accurate summation of the record:
The record shows that 4 of the 5 stationary engineers at Port Mobil
primarily stand watch in the powerhouse, on rotating shifts 7 days a
week. Their duties consist of maintaining and operating high-pressure
boilers and related equipment. The 5th stationary engineer is a relief
man who, when he is not standing watch as vacation or other relief in
the powerhouse, spends 4 days a week doing repair work both in and
out of the powerhouse, on boilers, pumps, and steam and water lines
utilized in generating steam and power . He occasionally does some
additional maintenance work which is not related directly to the
power system [Emphasis supplied.]
All 4 of the stationary engineers have been licensed by the City of
New York after passing oral and written examinations taken after a
mmumum of 5 years' experience They are supervised by a licensed
stationary engineer foreman,3 do not interchange with the other
3 Although the Employer contended, both at the hearing and
in its brief, that the terminal (gauger) foremen on the night shifts
supervise the stationary engineer , it appears that such supervi-
sion mainly is limited to requests for additional power or tem-
perature changes, or for the services of the bulk helpers assigned
to the powerhouse, discussed infra, or the granting of stationary
engineers ' requests to use a vehicle to check power lines at night.
Moreover, the stationary engineers credibly testified that in case
of an emergency in the powerhouse when the stationary engineer
foreman is not present, they contact him by telephone or use
their own goodjudgment.
employees, and perform virtually no work which is not connected
with the operation and maintenance of the power system They
receive the same benefits as all other employees.
263
severance of skilled employees from more inclusive
bargaining units at some other times and in some
other cases. 16
My colleagues point to the fact that since
Mallinckrodt, they have granted a powerhouse unit
in Mesta Machine Company, 167 NLRB 99, and a
separate toolroom employees' unit in Buddy L. Cor-
poration, 167 NLRB 808. In Mesta, which was ini-
tial organization, the Board noted that no union was
seeking a more comprehensive unit than the power-
house; in Buddy L., the craftsmen sought were bar-
gaining directly with the employer so that the case
involves more nearly initial organization than
severance. I do not know what the citation of these
cases is supposed to demonstrate. It is small solace
to employees in the traditional powerhouse unit
which we have here, and other skilled craftsmen,
that the Board in two other cases, obviously distin-
guishable from this one, granted separate units.
I therefore dissent from this dismissal and would
affirm the Regional Director.
In addition to the stationary engineers , there are three bulk plant
helpers permanently assigned to the powerhouse Although these em-
ployees are not licensed , they assist the stationary engineers in blow-
ing tubes , reading gauges , oiling and greasing equipment , and doing
simple maintenance work. They leave the powerhouse at intervals to
check outside pumps and lines for the stationary engineers When the
terminal foremen need extra help, primarily in docking tankers, these
three men are temporarily assigned to assist On occasion , other bulk
plant helpers may work on a temporary day-to-day basis in the
powerhouse performing special maintenance work under the supervi-
sion of the stationary engineer foreman.
The above excerpt, I would conclude , adds up to "separate supervision"
for the five licensed stationary engineers for whom this separate represen-
tation petition was filed . It does not seem to me that requests by plant su-
pervisors for "more power," or for the temporary services of a helper, or
the grant of permission to use a vehicle , constitute supervision within the
meaning of this Act. Yet my colleagues , admitting the separate supervi-
sion of stationary engineers on technical matters at all times , characterize
the nontechnical type of contact between stationary engineers and plant
supervisors as "common supervision with other employees in other
respects on the second and third shifts " This is termed "shifting supervi-
sion" for stationary engineers , a conclusion which is untenable to me It
seems, therefore , that the dismissal of this traditional departmental unit of
powerhouse employees is actually accomplished by my colleagues under
the umbrella of "intermingling of duties " of helpers at the terminal, in
avoidance of the significant fact that the 3 helpers included in the unit by
the Regional Director are regularly assigned to the powerhouse and have
-worked at that regular assignment for 5 to 10 years.
16 See , for example , Potlatch Forests , Inc., 165 NLRB 1065 , Timber
Products Company Division of Cyprus Mines Corporation , 164 NLRB
1060.