Monsanto Chemical Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Feb 11, 1949

81 N.L.R.B. 625 (N.L.R.B. 1949)

In the Matter of MONSANTO CHEMICAL COMPANY , EMPLOYER, and
INTERNATIONAL CHEMICAL WORKERS UNION 7 AFL, PETITIONER
Case No. 10-RC-368.-Decided February 11, 1949
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before a hearing
officer of the National Labor Relations Board. The hearing officer's
rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are
hereby affirmed.,'
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.*
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the National Labor Relations Act.
2. The labor organization named below claims to represent em-
ployees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of employees of the Employer, within the meaning of Section
9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The appropriate unit :
The Employer operates approximately 17 plants located in 13
States. At its Monsanto, Tennessee, plant, with which we are solely
concerned herein, the Employer is engaged in the mining and process-
IAt the hearing the Employer moved to dismiss the petition on the grounds that (a) no
fair and impartial investigation of the question concerning representation was made, (b)
the petition was defective on its face in that it made no numerical showing of substantial
interest , and (e ) employees in the unit proposed have shown no interest in the Petitioner.
The hearing officer overruled this motion , and permitted the Petitioner to amend its petition
to show the number of employees supporting the petition to be "approximately 180" in
place of the word "substantial ." Section 203 . 57 of National Labor Relations Board Rules
and Regulations-Series 5, as amended, requires that all motions to dismiss petitions be
referred by the hearing officer to the Board . However, inasmuch as we have consistently
held that the question of whether or not a Petitioner has made a sufficient prima facie
showing of interest is solely a matter of administrative procedure and is not subject to
direct or collateral attack, we find that the hearing officer 's ruling was not prejudicial, and
hereby affirm it. Matter of Amos Molded Plastics , Division of Amos Thompson Corporation,
79 N. L. R. B., 201.
* Chairman Herzog and Members Houston and Gray.
81 N. L. R. B., No. 109. 625
626 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ing of phosphate matrix. Its mining operations are carried on in 2
mines known as the Estes Bend Mine and the Dark's Mill Mine, lo-
cated approximately 11/2 miles and 121/2 miles, respectively, from the
plant. The Employer also owns several thousand acres of mineral
reserves and carries on prospecting operations in areas located 25
to 30 miles from the plant. The Employer employs approximately
480 employees in its mining and processing operations, including
approximately 22 employees engaged in prospecting work. There
is no history of collective bargaining to bear upon the appropriateness
of the unit sought herein.
The parties are generally agreed that all production and main-
tenance employees engaged in the mining and processing of phosphate
at the Employer's plant and mines, situated at or near Monsanto,
Tennessee, excluding office and clerical employees, guards, profes-
sional employees, and all supervisors, constitute an appropriate unit.
They disagree, however, with respect to the inclusion of prospecting
employees; they also disagree as to the supervisory status of pro-
duction leadmen, yard leadmen,2 maintenance leadmen, electrician
leadmen, prospecting leadmen, and the mine foreman.
Prospecting employees.-These employees are engaged, under the
supervision of prospecting leadmen, in prospecting for phosphate.
They do not report to the plant but are picked up in town and are
transported by bus or truck to the particular area where prospecting
operations are to be carried on. They are governed by the same
personnel policy, and participate in employee benefits on the same
basis, as the Employer's other mine employees, although they do not
generally use any of the plant facilities used by the other employees
in the proposed unit. They are paid on the same basis as the pro-
duction and maintenance employees, but, unlike the latter group who
are paid in the plant, prospecting employees receive their pay checks
from their leadmen due to the fact that they may be away from the
plant for long periods of time. On occasions prospecting employees
are promoted from the prospecting crews into the mines or plant.
Under all the circumstances, we believe that the interests of the pros-
pecting employees are sufficiently identifiable with those of the Em-
ployer's production and maintenance employees to warrant their
inclusion in a unit already wide in geographical scope. Moreover,
no other union seeks to represent these employees. We shall, there-
fore, include them in the unit.
Leadmen.-The Employer contends that production leadmen, yard
leadmen, maintenance leadmen, and electrician leadmen are supervisors
2 The record shows that there are three yard leadmen, two of whom are classified on
the Employer's pay roll as service leadmen.
MONSANTO CHEMICAL COMPANY 627
and should be excluded from the unit. The record shows that the
leadmen in question are under the immediate supervision of foremen
who, in turn, report to department supervisors. They are paid on an
hourly basis, and are in charge of crews consisting of approximately
10 to 20 men depending upon the particular job to which they are
assigned. These leadmen responsibly direct the work of the members
of their crews, making and changing assignments as they see fit in
order to complete a particular job, training new men, and reporting
on the ability of their crewmen for purposes of possible reclassification
to higher rated jobs. They make recommendations with respect to
hiring, discharging, disciplining, or changing the status of men in
their crews, and, although their recommendations are subject to an
independent investigation by their supervisors, we are satisfied from
the record that these leadmen have an effective voice in personnel
matters affecting their crews. Upon the basis of the foregoing and
upon the entire record in the case, we find that the powers and duties
of these leadmen are such that they come within the Act's definition of
a supervisor. Accordingly, we shall exclude them from the unit.
The Employer would also exclude as supervisors the prospecting
leadmen and mine foremen. The prospecting leadmen 3 are classified
on the Employer's pay roll as lay-out metal welder and bulldozer
operator. They are in charge of prospecting crews numbering ap-
proximately 10 to 20 men and have complete authority to discharge
or discipline employees working under them. The mine foreman 4 is
employed at the Estes Mine. He is under the supervision of the
assistant mine supervisor and is in charge of one of the mine shifts.
He has approximately 12 to 15 men permanently assigned to him
and has essentially the same authority over his crew members as do
the prospecting leadmen. Upon the basis of the foregoing facts, we
find that the afore-mentioned prospecting leadmen and mine foremen
are supervisors within the meaning of the Act, and we shall exclude
them from the unit.
We find that all production and maintenance employees engaged
in the mining and processing of phosphate at the Employer's plant
and mines, situated at or near Monsanto, Tennessee, including pros-
pecting employees, but excluding office and clerical employees, guards,
professional employees, production leadmen, yard leadmen, main-
tenance leadmen, electrician leadmen, prospecting leadmen, mine
foremen, and all other supervisors as defined in the Act, constitute a
unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within
the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
3 The employees referred to are named Hanson and Brooks.
* The record shows that the employee referred to is named Roland and although classified
as a mine foreman is actually a leadman
829595-50-vol 81-41
628 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the
purposes of collective bargaining with the Employer, an election by
secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than
30 days from the date of this Direction, under the direction and super-
vision of the Regional Director for the Region in which this case was
heard, and subject to Sections 203.61 and 203.62 of National Labor
Relations Board Rules and Regulations - Series 5, as amended, among
the employees in the unit found appropriate in paragraph numbered 4,
above, who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately
preceding the date of this Direction of Election, 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 ex-
cluding employees on strike who are not entitled to reinstatement,
to determine whether or not they desire to be represented, for pur-
poses of collective bargaining, by International Chemical Workers
Union, AFL.