Phillip Morris & Co. Ltd., Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 25, 1948

79 N.L.R.B. 56 (N.L.R.B. 1948)

'In the Matter of PHILIP MORRIS & Co. LTD., INC., EMPLOYER and
INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS, LODGE No. 10, PETI-
TIONER
Ca-se No. 6-RC-28.-Decided August 25,1948
DECISION
AND
ORDER
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.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board finds:
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the
National Labor Relations Act.
2. The labor organizations involved claim 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, under the following
circumstances :
The Petitioner seeks to- represent approximately 50 machine ad-
justers and machine fixers 1 at the Employer's 5 tobacco plants in
Richmond, Virginia, serving these employees as a bargaining unit
from an existing 5-plant production and maintenance unit of 2,400
employees, currently represented by Tobacco Workers International
Union, Local No. 203, AFL, herein called the Intervenor. The Inter-
venor opposes this severance, predicating its opposition principally
upon three grounds : (a) that a currently existing agreement bars the
1 The terms adjuster and fixer are used interchangeably, although the term adjuster is
generally applied to those employees who maintain the machines in the stemmeries , and the
term fixer is generally applied to those employees who maintain machines in the cigarette
and smoking-tobacco plants Hereinafter , except as particularly noted, the term fixer will
be used to describe both categories.
79 N. L. R. B., No. 10.
56
PHILIP MORRIS & CO. LTD., 'INC. 57
)resent proceeding; 2 (b) that fixers are not true craftsmen and con-
sequently may not appropriately be subject to craft severance; and
(c) that the interests of fixers lie with those of production workers
with whom they have been joined in a single unit over an 11-year
history of collective bargaining. The Employer takes no position on
the unit issue.
Fixers are closely allied with two other categories of plant em-
ployees, (1) production machine operators, and (2) machinists in
the machine shop. These are included, respectively, in the existing
production and maintenance unit and in the existing machine-shop
unit.3
Fixers are responsible for maintaining, repairing, and adjusting a
line of automatic machines used in the manufacture of tobacco prod-
ucts and are run by machine operators. New parts for these machines
are, however, tooled and inserted by machine-shop employees. While
the machinists are for the most part headquartered in the machine
shop, fixers are not confined to any particular area in the plant apart
from production machine operators.
The general working conditions of machine operators and fixers are
alike. Fixers are drawn from the most efficient machine operators
who demonstrate mechanical skill, and, in the event of a reduction in
fixer personnel, the fixer, under present contract conditions, may return
to his job of operator. There is, however, no interchange between
fixers and machinists, who have bargained since 1941 in separate bar-
gaining units.
Fixers, as such, serve a 21-month apprenticeship before they earn
the maximum rates as fixers. Adjusters, as distinguished from fixers,
serve a 3-year apprenticeship before they obtain the maximum rate
as adjusters 4 The Employer, however, asserts that 3 years is the
time necessary for a fixer to reach optimum efficiency. A machine
operator undergoes a 4- to 5-week training period, but does not attain
maximum efficiency on the machine until about 2 years thereafter.
Machinists, on the other hand, in the machine shop undergo a regular
4-year apprenticeship.
2 The Inteivenor contends that the collective-bargaining agreement entered into between
the Employer and the Intervenor on February 14, 1945, and amended November 5, 1945, to
expire January 31, 1949, is a bar to this proceeding In view of our dismissal on the
ground that the unit sought by the Petitioner is inappropriate, we find it unnecessary to
resolve the contract-bar issue.
8 These two bargaining units were established as a result of consent elections conducted
by the Regional Director on April 25, 1941. From 1937 to the date of the consent elections,
production and maintenance employees at the Employer's Richmond plants, including ma-
chine-shop employees, bargained as a single unit
' The difference in the apprenticeship is alleged to be due to a "bargaining advantage"
obtained for fixers which was, for some reason undisclosed by the record, not obtained for
adjusters
'58 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL • LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
The fixer's mechanical skill relates strictly to the maintenance of
automatic tobacco machines of which he is an expert operator. The
skills of a journeyman machinist are not so narrowly applicable.
Neither the fixer nor the machinist can do the other's work. Each is
regarded by the Employer as equally skilled in his respective sphere
of activities.
From the foregoing facts, it appears that fixers are comparable to
set-up men in other industries. They may make some use of the tools
in the machine shop, but they make no machine parts. They primarily
fix or adjust production machines so that the machines operate prop-
erly in the production of tobacco products. Fixers are thus closely
related to machine operators and necessary to the continued operation
of their machines. In the event of a reduction in fixer personnel,
fixers traditionally revert to their former jobs as operators. Ap-
prentice training for fixers is not on a formal basis as it is for machin-
ists. Although the machine operator may become a fixer after a 21-
month training period, the Employer maintains that 3 years is the
time necessary for a fixer to reach top efficiency as such.
• In an earlier representation proceeding involving the Employer's
fixers, the Petitioner herein sought to sever fixers from the production
and maintenance unit, which included machine operators, and to
represent fixers as a part of its existing machine-shop unit. The
Board, although finding that "the fixers have a sufficient degree of
skill and cohesiveness to constitute a separate unit along craft lines,"
nevertheless denied the severance and dismissed the petition, basing its
decision in part on the further finding that "the fixer is in origin a
machine operator and may revert to that status." 5
On the basis of the present record, we are of the opinion that the
fixers sought by the Petitioner do not constitute a sufficiently segre-
gated craft group to warrant, in view of the long and successful his-
tory of collecting bargaining on a plant-wide basis, severing them
from the existing unit of production and maintenance workers, with
whom they have bargained jointly since 1937. Accordingly, we find
the proposed unit inappropriate.
ORDER
Upon the basis of the entire record in this case, the National Labor
Relations Board hereby orders that the petition filed in the instant
matter be, and it hereby is, dismissed.
5 Matter of Philip Morris t Co., Ltd., Inc., 70 N . L. R. B. 274, 279.