Ralston Purina Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Sep 26, 1949

86 N.L.R.B. 107 (N.L.R.B. 1949)

In the Matter of RALSTON PURINA COMPANY, EMPLOYER and, INTER-
NATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS, LOCAL No. 6 AND 6-At
A. F. L., PETITIONER
Case No. 17-RC-465.-Decided September 26, 1949
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before William J.
Scott, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing
are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. The Inter-
venor, at the hearing, moved to dismiss the petition on the grounds
that no evidence was submitted to show that the Employer's firemen
desire to be represented by the Petitioner 1 and that the union sought is
inappropriate. For the reasons stated hereinafter, the motion to dis-
miss is denied.
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 Herzog and Members
Houston 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 labor organizations involved claim 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) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The appropriate unit :
The Petitioner seeks to represent the Employer's operating engi-
neers and apprentice operating engineers 2 at its plant in Kansas City,.
Missouri. The Employer and the Intervenor contend that the em-
' we have frequently held that the showing of interest is an administrative matter for-
determination by the Board and not subject to collateral attack. Matter of Stokely Foods,
Inc., 78 N. L. R. B. 842; Matter of O. D. Jennings & Company, 68 N. L. R. B. 516.
2 Apprentice operating engineers are classified by the Employer as firemen.
86 N. L. R. B., No. 23.
107
108 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ployees sought to be represented by the Petitioner should no t be severed
from the existing unit of production and maintenance employees.3
The Employer, a Missouri corporation with its principal place of
business in St. Louis, Missouri, manufactures products for animal
consumption in plants throughout the United States. We are here
concerned only with the Kansas City, Missouri, plant which manufac-
tures feed and feed mixtures.
The unit sought by the Petitioner is, in effect, a unit of boiler room
employees, including four operating engineers and two firemen. These
employees maintain their headquarters in the boiler room, located in
one of the plant buildings and separated from the remainder of the
plant by walls. The engineers are responsible for the efficient opera-
tion of the steam generating plant and the maintenance and repair
of lines and equipment related thereto. The firemen work under the
direction of and assist the engineers in the performance of their duties.
The boiler room operates three daily 8-hour shifts,4 7 days a week.
Each engineer works a 5-day week with one engineer on duty on each
:shift. The fourth engineer relieves the other three on their days off.
The two firemen work the 8 a. m. to 4 p. m. and the 4 p. m. to 12 p. m.
:shifts respectively. No fireman is on duty on the 12 p. m. to 8 a. m.
.shift. Unlike most of the other plant employees, the engineers work
8 hours continuously, eating their lunch on the job; they do not par-
ticipate in the production work of the Employer's operations, receive
-a higher rate of pay than the other production or maintenance em-
ployees, and do not participate in the Employer's plant-wide seniority
plan.5 The engineers are licensed as Class A stationary operating
engineers in accordance with the requirements of a city ordinance. A
5-year apprenticeship is required to qualify for such a license. Al-
though the boiler room employees are under the common supervision
of the maintenance foreman, who also supervises other maintenance
.employees, this has led to no appreciable interchange between the two
.groups.
In opposing the severance of these employees the Employer and
the Intervenor contend that the interests of the boiler room employees
are intimately related to those of the production and maintenance
-employees because : (1) most of the steam manufactured in the boiler
room is utilized in processing the Employer's finished products; (2)
3 The Intervenor, American Federation of Grain Millers, Local Union No. 16, AFL, as a
-result of a consent election (Case No. 17-R-595 ), has represented the employees at this
plant since 1943 in a single production and maintenance unit which included the employees
herein sought . The most recent contract expired August 1, 1949.
4 8 a. m. to 4 p . m. ; 4 p. m. to 12 p. m. ; and 12 p. m. to 8 a. m.
Because of their skill and qualifications, engineers exercise seniority rights among
themselves only. This is not true , however, as to the firemen. In the event of a lay-off,
other production and maintenance employees could exercise their plant seniority to "bump"
-a fireman.
RALSTON PURINA COMPANY 109
some of the boiler room employees do maintenance work throughout
the plant with other maintenance employees ; and (3 ) maintenance
employees at times work in the boiler room.
We do not agree . While it is true that the Employer uses steam to
dry and condition grain, soybeans , and mixed feed , this does not estab-
lish such a degree of integration between the production process and
the work of the boiler room employees as to warrant denying separate
representation to this group .6 As to the interrelationship between
boiler room and other employees , the maintenance work of the engi-
neers in the plant is mostly in connection with the repair and mainte-
nance of equipment and pipe lines connected or related to the genera-
tion or conveyance of steam emanating from the boiler room, and it
is clear that the boiler room employees spend a substantial portion of
their time in the boiler room.? When maintenance employees come
into the boiler room to work it is usually in connection with the pellet
grooving and pipe threading machines which are'installed in the boiler
room for their use.8 On these occasions the maintenance employees
confine their activities to their own work and the engineers perform
their own functions.
In view of the foregoing and contrary to the contention of the
Employer and the Intervenor ,' we are of the opinion that the em-
ployees in the boiler room constitute an identifiable , functionally
coherent group having a community of interest , who are of a type we
have generally held 10 may, if they so desire , constitute a unit appro-
priate for the purposes of collective bargaining.
6 Matter of Western Condensing Company, 85 N. L. R. B. 981 ; Matter of C. A. Swanson
and Sons, 81 N. L. R. B. 321. This is to be distinguished from the case in which power
produced in the boiler room is a component part of the end product, e. g., Matter of Lynn
Gas and Electrio Company, 78 N. L. R. B. 3.
T The engineer on the 8 to 4 shift spends approximately 4 hours a day away from the
boiler room ; the engineer on the 4 to 12 shift goes into the plant on emergency cases only ;
the engineer on the 12 to 8 shift and the two firemen, spend all their time in the boiler
room.
8 On one occasion sheet metal workers , due to lack of space in the tin shop , used the
boiler room in which to erect a "dust collector ." The metal used , however, was not fabri-
cated in the boiler room.
I In their briefs , the Employer and the Intervenor attempt to show a similarity between
the unit herein sought and proposed units which we found to be inappropriate in Matter of
Columbia Packing Company , 80 N. L . R. B. 211 ; Matter of Corn Products Refining Company,
80 N. L. R. B . 362 ; and Matter of The Borden Company, 83 N. L. R. B. 765. The facts and
circumstances of the cases cited, however , distinguish them from the present case. Unlike
the unit sought herein, the unit in the Columbia Packing case included mechanical mainte-
nance men in addition to engineers and firemen . In the Corn Products case, the units
sought overstepped craft and/or departmental lines and the employees sought did not
share common skills . And in the Borden case, a majority of the employees in the proposed
unit were general maintenance employees who also frequently performed production work.
Cf. also Matter of Monsanto Chemical Company, 80 N. L. R. B. 1675.
11 Matter of National Licorice Company, 85 N. L. R. B. 140 ; Matter of Dallas-Fort Worth
Brewing Company, 84 N. L . R. B. 681 ; Matter of Hawley cf Hoops , Inc., 83 N . L. R. B. 371 ;
Matter of Jacobson Mfg. Co., 82 N. L. R. B. 1404; Matter of Wilson and Co., Inc., 80
N. L. R. B. 1466.
110 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Wilbur Fleming. This employee is a helper assigned to assist the
:engineer on the day shift in the maintenance of pipes, traps, and
regulators outside the boiler room. He is not licensed as an engineer
and does not perform firemen duties. In accordance with the agree-
ment of the Petitioner and the Intervenor we shall exclude this em-
ployee from the unit.
We find that all operating engineers and firemen excluding office,
clerical, and production employees, maintenance employees other than
the engineers and firemen, professional employees, salesmen, guards,
and supervisors as defined in the Act, may constitute a unit appro-
priate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning
.of Section 9 (b) of the Act. However, we shall make no final unit
,determination at this time, but shall first ascertain the desires of these
,employees as expressed in the election hereinafter directed. If the
majority vote for the Petitioner, they will be taken to have indicated
their desire to constitute a separate bargaining unit represented by
the Petitioner 11 If they vote for the Intervenor, they will be taken
to have indicated their desire to remain part of the larger unit repre-
sented by the Intervenor.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the pur-
poses 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, among the employees in the
voting group described 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
temporaily 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 excluding employees on
-strike who are not entitled to reinstatement, to determine whether they
desire to be represented, for purposes of collecive bargaining, by Inter-
national Union of Operating Engineers, Local No. 6 and 6-A, A. F. L.,
or by American Federation of Grain Millers, Local Union No. 16,
A. F. L., or by neither.
"The Petitioner is composed of two Locals. Local 6 which admits the operating engi-
neers into membership and Local 6-A which admits apprentice engineers. If the Petitioner
'wins the election herein directed, both Locals will be certified jointly, and the Employer
will have the right to insist on dealing with them as the joint representative of the single
,unit. Matter of LaSalle-Crittenden Press, Inc., 72 N. L. R. B. 1166.