National Distillers Products Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 29, 1949

84 N.L.R.B. 818 (N.L.R.B. 1949)

7 2.
-In the Matter of NATIONAL DISTILLERS- PRODUCTS CORPORATION,
'-EMPLOYER and INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL
WORKERS, LOCAL-183, A. F.-L• ., PETITIONER
Case No. 9-RC-410.-Decided June 29,1949
DECISION
AND
ORDER
Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before Martin Sacks,
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-member panel [Chairman Houston, and Members
Reynolds and Murdock].
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 Petitioner, International Brotherhood of Electrical Work-
ers, Local 183, A. F. L., and Intervenor, Distillery, Rectifying and
Wine Workers International Union of America, Local 24, are labor
organizations claiming to represent employees of the Employer.
3. No 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, for the following
reasons:
The Petitioner seeks a unit composed of all electricians and their
helpers employed by the Employer at its Old Taylor, Old Crow, and
Old Grand Dad plants in Frankfort, Kentucky, excluding clerical,
office, and professional employees, all other employees under contract,
guards, and all supervisors as defined in the Act. The Intervenor and
the Employer contend that the unit proposed is inappropriate because
the employees sought are not electrician craftsmen and object to the
severence of this group from the established production and mainte-
84 N. L. R. B., No. 90.
818
NATIONAL`-DISTILLERS- PRODUCTS `CORPORATION `819
nance unit-for which= the Intervener ha's-bargained 'under2 a' series
"tif' contracts` since 1940.1
`The Employer has 1 maintenance and repair, department for-its 3
plaiits. Ili that- department, it employs approximately-50-employees
classified 'as "utility men" and"lutility helpers." These utility men
'have general knowledge 'of maintenance work as well as possess
-special aptitudes in some particular field of maintenance, such as car-
pentry, tinsmithing, ' electrical work, etc. The Old Crow and Old
Taylor plants are located about 1 mile from each other, while the Old
`Grand Dad plant is about 5 or 6 miles from the other two. Each of the
plants operates as a unit and• the utility men-in each plant are under
the supervision of a general maintenance foreman, who assigns utility
men to do work in the plant. Utility men assigned to work in one
plant usually remain at that plant. All utility men receive the same
rate of pay which incidentally is the highest hourly rate paid by the
-Employer. The electrical workers sought by the Petitioner are em-
ployed in each of the 3 plants. The general maintenance foreman
makes `the daily work assignments on the basis of the skill required
for each specific job. All the utility men perform other maintenance
=work in addition to that in the particular field in which they may
have experience. Utility men doing electrical work in one plant have
.no direct contact with other plants' utility men doing electrical work.
When one plant needs a particular tool available only at another
'plant, 'the general maintelance foreman obtains it. All tools and
supplies for electrical work are kept-in a' small electrical, shop located
in each plant.
- -The utility workers doing electrical work perform general mainte=
nance and repair work on electrical machinery located throughout
the plant to which they are assigned. Such work consists of making
electrical connections, overhauling, repairing and replacing bearings
in electrical motors, oiling, greasing and cleaning motors, replacing
ligh't bulbs and fuses, and. Installing and repairing lights.
One witness, a utility man at the Old Grand Dad plant, testified that
95 percent of his time was spent' doing electrical work. A study made
during a representative 9-week work period reveals, that actually this
The Employer and intervenor have been parties to collective bargaining ' agreements
since 1940.. They contend that their -last contract executed on May 1, 1948 , is a bar .to
this proceeding This contract was effective to May 1, 1949 , subject to automatic renewal
,unless -notice of a desire to terminate or change was given by either ' partyi60 days before
the contract' s anniversary date Such notice-of desire to change the contract was given
-by- the Intervenor on'-February 11, 1949 The-petition was filed by the 'Petitioner on
Ma'rch , 81;J949 - Tlie - Int_ervenor's notice of 'February 11 ; 1949,'', effectively 'forestalled
the automatic renewal of the contract . Accordingly, we find that the_contract is not a
bar to this proceeding Matter of Best Motor Lines, 80 N . L. R. B. 314. - " -
820 D11:C1S1ONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
employee spent-44 percent of his time performing nonelectrical work.
The other utility man doing electrical work at this same plant spent
more than 46 percent of his time working on nonelectrical jobs while
50 percent- of the utility helper's work was considered nonelectrical.
No-work study was made at;the- other two plants, but there was testi-
mony that at the Old Taylor plant the two utility men spent "a greater
.percentage" of their time in electrical work than is performed at Old
Grand Dad; the same witness testified that the percentage figure at
the Old Crow plant is "in between" the other two plants.
Among those duties classed as nonelectrical and performed by the
.disputed employees are the following: overhauling pumps in con-
densate and caustic systems, repairing spring pumps, packing oiler
room sludge pumps, repairing airlines, changing tubes in evaporators,
adjusting warehouse temperature controls, and checking warehouse
elevators.
Replacement of burnt-out electric light bulbs is regarded as elec-
trical work. One electrical worker testified that he spent from 1 to 3
hours a day in such work; another testified that such work averaged
about 11/2 hours a day. Still another witness testified that classifying
this work- as nonelectrical would reduce the electrical work
"considerably."
For purposes of seniority, promotion, and reduction, the employees
,of all three plants constitute a single division. When there is a utility
man vacancy in a plant that vacancy is posted in all three plants.
Anyone may bid on that vacancy. These job postings do contain some
indication of what type of experience is desired : a man with general
maintenance knowledge but who has particular experience in the field
in which the position has become vacant. There is no requirement
that an applicant for a utility man position be a qualified journeyman
electrician. The Employer does not have an apprenticeship program
to -train electricians. The applicant's seniority and his ability to do
the job rather than his previous classification or experience in the
department is the determinative test for filling the position. None of
the present utility men performing the electrical work are journeymen
electricians. Although at least two of these utility men have many
years of electrical experience, two others of the six utility men now
performing electrical work had no previous electrical experience before
they came on the job. The Employer has promoted general laborers
to the utility helper and utility man classifications. During a recent
lay-off a utility man whose work was mainly carpentry, accepted a
utility helper 's job and is now assisting those utility men doing
electrical work.
NATIONAL DISTILLERS PRODUCTS CORPORATION 821
All major electrical installation is done by outside contractors.
Work of the employees in question is limited to mostly maintenance
and repair with occasional installation or replacement of a small
instrument.
The present occupant of the instrument position was originally
hired as a general laborer; he became a utility man- 16 months later.
His work.is clearly different from that of other utility men. From
75 to 80 percent of his time is spent performing duties of a non-
electrical nature.
We have generally required that a small group of employees, such
as is here involved, be composed of skilled craftsmen in order to
warrant its establishment as a separate unit or its severance from a
larger unit.2 In view of the fact that the repair and maintenance
department is an integrated operating group with no. clear demarca-
tion along craft lines and the fact that the utility men doing electrical
work do not appear to be skilled craftsmen of the journeyman elec-
trician type, and that their work is not confined to electrical work,
we find that the unit sought by the Petitioner does not constitute a
homogeneous, identifiable, skilled craft group, and that it does not
on any other basis constitute a separate appropriate unit for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining.3 Accordingly, we shall dismiss the
petition herein.
ORDER
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and the entire
record in this case, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders
that the petition herein be, and it hereby is, dismissed.
z Matter of Rice-Stun Dry Goods Company, 78 N. L . R. B. 311 ; Matter of National
Carbide Corporation, 77 N L. R. B. 454; Matter of Monsanto Chemical Company, 83 N. L.
R B. 106; Matter of Schlumberger Well Surveying Corporation, 83 N. L . R. B. 375.
3 See cases in footnote 2, above -