Pennsalt Chemicals Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Oct 24, 1957

119 N.L.R.B. 128 (N.L.R.B. 1957)

128 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ledger employees, employment department employees,14 the depart-
mental accountant and the internal 'auditor in the accounting depart-
ment, the cost and repair accountant, and-the assistant manager of the
timekeeping department; but excluding employees represented by the
Petitioner and Local 13, salaried- plant clerical employees, the part-
time model foodshop clerk, office janitors, the livestock driver, and
the head livestock driver, the temporary stenographer in the canned
meats sales division,'-' the full-time model foodshop clerk; secretaries
to the office manager, plant manager, plant sales manager, and plant
superintendent ; time-study engineers, salesmen, the nurse, buyers,
confidential employees, professional employees; the managers of the
accounting, claims and bookkeeping, purchasing, transportation,
credit, disbursements, shipping and billing and IBM, timekeeping,
insurance, casualty, and safety, and the industrial engineering depart-
ments; the assistant manager of the insurance, casualty, and safety
department, the assistant managers of the industrial engineering,
accounting, and auditor of the disbursements departments, the pay-
master, guards, and all supervisors as defined in the Act.
[Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication.]
u While the record fails to disclose whether the cashiers , private ledger , and employment
department employees are confidential , managerial or supervisory , it appears from their
categories that they are office clericals , and, accordingly , we include them in the unit
despite the agreement of the parties to exclude them. Ohrbach's Inc., 118 NLRB 231,
footnote 1. However, because of the absence of evidence with respect to their duties,
nothing in this decision shall be deemed to affect the parties ' right to challenge any of
the above -described categories for such reasons.
15 See footnote 13, supra.
Pennsalt Chemicals Corporation and Chauffeurs, Teamsters Local
#236, International Brotherhood of Teamsters , Chauffeurs,
Warehousemen and Helpers of America, AFL-CIO, Petitioner
Pennsalt Chemicals Corporation, Petitioner and International
Association of Machinists, Local Lodge No. 1969, AFL-CIO and
International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Ware=
housemen and Helpers of America , Local #236, AFL-CIO.
Cases Nos. 9-RC-3202 and 9-RM-157. October 24, 1957
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon separate petitions duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the Na-
tional Labor Relations Act, a consolidated hearing was held before
Thomas M. Sheeran, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings
made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby
affirmed.
119 NLRB No. 4.
PENNSALT CHEMICALS CORPORATION 129
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 [Members Rodgers, Bean, and Jenkins].
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 organizations involved claim to represent certain em-
ployees of the Employer.'
3. IAM moved at the hearing to dismiss the petition in Case No.
9-RM-157 on the ground that no question concerning representation
exists in the unit set forth therein. IAM represents, under a con-
tract executed July 2, 1957, a unit of the Employer's production and
maintenance employees, excluding laboratory employees, plant clerical
employees, and storeroom employees. The unit set forth in the Em-
ployer's petition includes the production and maintenance employees
and the categories who are excluded from the existing unit. However,
at the hearing the Employer stated that it seeks an election not in the
overall unit set forth in its petition, but only among the unrepresented
employees to determine whether they wish to be added to the existing
unit. In view of IAM's indication at the hearing of its interest in
adding these employees to the existing unit and our finding below
that they may be appropriately added to it, the motion to dismiss is
denied. Accordingly, we find that questions affecting commerce exist
concerning the representation of employees of the Employer within
the meaning of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. Teamsters seeks an election in a residual unit of the unrepre-
sented laboratory technicians, plant clericals, and storeroom employ-
ees. The Employer contends that this unit is inappropriate because
of IAM's willingness, noted above, to add these employees to its
existing unit. However, the unwillingness of an incumbent repre-
sentative to add residual employees to an existing unit is not a pre-
requisite to finding a residual unit appropriate. Accordingly, as
these employees appear to be all the unrepresented plant employees
and are clearly excluded from the existing unit, we find that they may
constitute an appropriate residual unit, or may be appropriately
added to the existing unit .2 Accordingly we will make no final unit
determination at this time but will direct a self-determination election
in a voting group of the unrepresented employees to ascertain their
desires.
There remain for consideration the storeroom clerk, the storekeeper,
the shipping clerk, and the engineering clerk, whose placement in the
'International Association of Machinists , Local Lodge No. 1969, AFL- CIO, intervened
in Case No . 9-RC-3202 on the basis of an adequate showing of interest.
' Sealtest, Ohio Division of the National Dairy Products Corporation , 117 NLRB 1628;.
Yale and Towne Manufacturing Company, 112 NLRB 1268.
476321-58-vol. 119-10
130 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
voting group is in dispute. The storeroom clerk acts as secretary to
the purchasing and stores supervisor, performing various clerical
duties. He is located with the supervisor in an office adjacent to the
Employer's storeroom which is in a separate building and apart from
the main office. His office is also adjacent to the office of the material
control clerk who also performs clerical duties and whom all parties
concede should be included in the voting group. We find, contrary
to the Employer's contention that he is a plant clerical rather than
an office clerical employee. However, he initiates minor purchase
orders for repetitive items needed by the Employer, and may pledge
the Employer's credit, but to an extent that witnesses at the hearing
were unable to specify. Accordingly, as the record does not establish
whether the extent to which he pledges credit is sufficient to constitute
him a managerial employee, we will permit him to vote subject to
challenge!
The storekeeper is in charge of four material handlers who,. as
their classification suggests, handle materials coming into and leaving
the storeroom. He assigns work to them, is authorized to grant them
time off, attends management meetings, and has authority to make
recommendations concerning changes in status of the material han-
dlers which are given "first" weight. We find that he is a supervisor,
in accordance with the Employer's contention, and will exclude him
from the unit. The shipping clerk works under the supervision of
the service supervisor and performs a number of clerical duties with
respect to the shipment of products from the Employer's plant. We
perceive no reason for distinguishing this employee from the process
clerks, who also perform clerical duties, under the supervision of the
service supervisor and other area supervisors and whom the parties
would include in the voting group. Accordingly, he is included in
the unit.
The engineering clerk works directly for the chief plant engineer.
Half of his time is spent in drafting and the remainder is devoted to
the maintenance of blueprint files and the compiling and computing
of technical records and reports. The employee in this classification
has taken engineering courses which were necessary for him to qualify
for his job. We find under the circumstances that he is a technical
employee.' As it does not appear that there are any technical em-
ployees in the voting group 8 or in the existing unit, and as the
Employer opposes his inclusion, we shall exclude him. Accordingly,
we shall direct an election in the following voting group :
8 See Swift & Company, 115 NLRB 755: 1Ve.ctern Electric Company, Incorporated,
100 NLRB 420.
4 La Pointe Machine Tool Company , 109 NLRB. 514.
5 The laboratory technicians , whom all parties would include in the unit, perform routine
and repetitive tests for purposes of quality control. No special training is required for
this job. These employees do not appear to 1+e technical employees.
PLANT CITY WELDING AND TANK COMPANY 131
All laboratory 'technicians, storeroom employees and plant clerical
employees at the Employer's Calvert City, Kentucky, plant, including
laboratory technicians, junior laboratory technicians, the material
control clerk, material handling clerks, shop clerks, process clerks,
the toolroom clerk, and the shipping room clerk, but excluding the
storekeeper, the engineering clerk, professional employees, all other
employees, guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act.
If a majority of the employees in the voting group vote for
Teamsters, they will have indicated their desire to constitute a separate
appropriate unit, and the Regional Director is instructed to issue a
certification of representatives for Teamsters for such unit, which the
Board under the circumstances finds appropriate for the purposes of
collective bargaining. If a majority of the employees in the voting
group vote for IAM, they will be taken to have expressed their desire
to become part of the IAM's present unit, and IAM may bargain for
them as part of such unit. If a majority of the employees in the
group vote for neither, they will be deemed to have expressed their
desire to remain unrepresented.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted'from publication.]
Plant City Welding and Tank Company and International Broth-
erhood of Boilermakers , Iron Ship Builders , Blacksmiths,
Forgers and Helpers, AFL-CIO, Petitioner. Case No. 12-.RC-
30. October 24,1957
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND CERTIFICATION
OF REPRESENTATIVES
Pursuant to a Decision and Direction of Election,' dated June 21,_
1957, an election by secret ballot was conducted on July 19, 1957, under
the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Twelfth
Region, among the employees in the unit found appropriate in the
above-mentioned Decision. Thereafter, a tally of ballots was fur-
nished the parties, showing that out of 81 voters casting valid ballots,
46 voted for the Petitioner, 34 voted against the Petitioner, and 1 cast
a challenged ballot.' On July 24, the Employer filed objections to the
conduct of the election and to conduct affecting the election.
In accordance with the Board's Rules and Regulations, the Regional
Director conducted an investigation of the Employer's objections and
on August 22, 1957, issued and duly served upon the parties his report
on objections, in which he recommended that the objections be over-
1118 NLRB 280.
2 The challenged ballot was insufficient to affect the results of the election.
119 NLRB No. 2.