Olin Mathieson Chemical Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 18, 1957

117 N.L.R.B. 665 (N.L.R.B. 1957)

OLIN MATHIESON CHEMICAL CORPORATION 665
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.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
MEMBER MuIwocK took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Direction of Election.
'Olin Mathieson Chemical Corporation , Forest Products Division
and Off ice Employees International Union , AFL-CIO, Peti-
tioner. Case No. 15-RC1488. March 18,1957
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before John T. Lacey, hear-
ing officer. 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 Act, the Board
has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member
panel [Chairman Leedom and Members Murdock and Rodgers].
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the Act.
2. The labor organization 1 involved claims to represent certain 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) andSection2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The Employer operates five plants in West Monroe, Louisiana.
The Petitioner seeks a unit limited to laboratory employees, inspec-
tors, and timekeepers at 1 of the 5 plants, Plant No. 31, which houses
the Employer's pulp and paper mills? In the alternative, it requests
any unit at that plant which might be ' appropriate. The Employer
contends that the unit sought is too limited in scope and that the time-
keepers may not appropriately be included in the same unit with
laboratory employees and inspectors; it does not, however, contest the
appropriateness of a unit limited to employees at Plant No. 31. The
Employer currently recognizes certain unions, who did not seek to
s The status of the Petitioner as a labor organization was placed in issue by the
'Employer The record shows that the Petitioner exists for the purpose of representing
employees in all matters affecting working conditions including , inter ali s, rates of pay
and hours of employment Accordingly , we find that the Petitioner is a labor organiza-
tion within the meaning of the Act.
2 At the other four plants the paper is subject to further processing.
117 NLRB No. 102.
666 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
intervene in the proceeding, as the bargaining representatives of the
production and maintenance employees in Plant No. 31. The em-
ployees whom Petitioner seeks are not, however, included in the estab-
lished plantwide unit and there is, apparently, no bargaining history
affecting these employees.
The laboratory employees work in the pulp mill operations of Plant
No. 31 and make various tests on the wood pulp while it is being proc-
essed in order to assure proper production control. They work in
both-th6 production area and in the laboratory. Although they are
under the immediate supervision of the chief chemist and his assistant,
they are not themselves chemists, their work being largely repetitive
in nature and not requiring any special education or extensive training.
The inspectors work in the paper mill operation of Plant No. 31.
They gather certain information about production of paper for billing
and accounting purposes and data concerning ingredients that go into
processing paper. They also visually check the appearance of the
paper coming off machines to see that it is acceptable, and they are
responsible for testing of the paper during manufacture in order to
assure that production standards are met. They are under the imme-
diate supervision of the chief paper inspector.
Paper testers and their helpers perform most of the tests of paper
for the inspectors. They are presently unrepresented and the Peti -
tioner has not requested their inclusion in the unit. The testing work
they perform is not unusually difficult and some of it is performed in
the paper production areas of the plant. Like the inspectors, they are
under the immediate supervision of the chief paper inspector.
Further, it also appears that there are certain clerical employees
who work under the direction of the production manager and spend
at least a part of their time in the plant office. Their duties involve
keeping records and performing other similar work in connection with
plant production. These employees are, we find, plant clericals. The
record shows that they are currently unrepresented.
The laboratory employees, inspectors, testers, and helpers are, it
is clear, part of the Employer's production department. Their super-
vision, like that of the plant clericals, goes through the production
manager and they receive all the benefits accorded to the regular pro-
duction and maintenance employees. We find, therefore, that they
are plant employees 3 and, insofar as the present record indicates, they
and the plant clericals are the only unrepresented plant employees in
Plant No. 31.
As for the requested timekeepers, they work in the gatehouse in
Plant No. 31, which is a structure separate from the plant building.
The only other employees working in the gatehouse are certain IBM
s Eastern Corporation , 116 NLRB 329 ( paper and pulp testers).
OLIN MATHIESON CHEMICAL CORPORATION 667
machine operators . The timekeepers are under the immediate super-
vision of the head papermill timekeeper who also works in the gate-
house, while their line of supervision goes through the paymaster to
the controller , rather than to the production manager. Their work
involves comparing an employee 's timecards with the time kept for
such employee by certain foremen and preparing payrolls. They also
compile certain information for cost accounting purposes . They oc-
casionally go into the plant, but only to pick up timekeeping records
from the foreman and to distribute paychecks . Unlike the produc-
tion employees , the timekeepers are salaried and receive the employ-
ment benefits accorded office clerical employees , at least some of whom
are currently unrepresented . In view of the foregoing these employees
are clearly office clerical employees 4 and we so find.
Under these circumstances, the unit requested by the Petitioner is
inappropriate as it seeks to combine plant and office employees in one
unit .' Neither would separate units of timekeepers and of laboratory
employees and inspectors be appropriate . Thus a unit of timekeepers
alone would apparently be composed of only a minor segment of the
Employer's unrepresented office clerical employees 6 while a unit
limited to laboratory employees and inspectors does not include all
the unrepresented production and maintenance employees in Plant No.
31.7 However , a unit of the latter employees including also the paper
testers, their helpers, and the plant clericals, would, as indicated above,
include all the unrepresented plant employees and thus constitute an
appropriate residual unit. ' As the Petitioner has an adequate show-
ing of interest for such unit we shall direct that an election be held
among the following employees of the Employer who we find con-
stitute a unit appropriate for purposes of collective bargaining with-
in the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act: All laboratory employees,
inspectors , paper testers , paper tester helpers , and plant clericals em-
ployed at the Employer 's Plant No . 31, West Monroe, Louisiana, ex-
cluding timekeepers and other office clerical employees , professional
employees, all other employees , watchmen , guards, and supervisors as
defined in the Act.'
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
* Solar Aircraft Company , 116 NLRB 200 ( cost recording employees) ; J B. Faltin
Motor Transportation, Inc., 114 NLRB 1369, 1370 ( assistant paymaster).
5 Dura Steel Products Company , 109 NLRB 179, 182
9 Otis Elevator Company, 116 NLRB 262 : Solar Aircraft Company, 116 NLRB 200
7 Red Dot Foods, Inc, 114 NLRB 145, 148
B Red Dot Foods , Inc, supra, 149 We find no mei it in the Employer 's implied conten-
tion that these employees may be represented only as part of the existing production and
maintenance unit. See also Mountain States Bean Co, 115 NLRB 1208, 1210.
9In view of our disposition of this case , the Employer 's motion to dismiss the petition
on grounds of inappropriate unit is denied As we are directing an election in a unit
other than that requested by the Petitioner , the Petitioner may upon timely application
to the Regional Director withdraw its petition in this case without prejudice.