Sefton Fibre Can Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Oct 13, 1955

114 N.L.R.B. 408 (N.L.R.B. 1955)

408 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ing contract between the Intervenor and the Employer "and-also con-
trary to "the. Employer's policy of rehiring former employees."
The Regional Director found in his. report that approximately 18
months ago the Employer laid off approximately 800 employees as a
result of a slump in its defense production; that the contract referred
to by the Intervenor provided that employees who were absent from
their employment for more than 6 months, for any reason, lost their
seniority rights; 6 and, accordingly, that the Employer was, under no
contractual obligation to rehire the laid-off employees. The Regional
Director further found that even should the Employer successfully
complete its current negotiations for new defense business, it would
need to rehire only some 70 to 80 of its 800 laid-off employees, and that
the Employer did not know which of the laid-off employees it would
rehire; In its exceptions, the Intervenor does not challenge the Re-
gional Director's findings, nor does the Intervenor show why the laid-,
off employees have a reasonable expectancy of reemployment under
the Employer's "policy." Accordingly, we agree -with the Regional
Director that -none of the laid-off employees has a reasonable, expect-
ancy of feemployment within the foreseeable future.
In view of the foregoing, we find that the Intervenor's objections
and exceptions do not raise substantial and material issues with respect
to the conduct of the election, and they are hereby overruled. As the
tally shows that a majority of the valid votes have been cast for the
Petitioner, we shall certify the Petitioner as the collective-bargaining
representative of the employees in the appropriate unit 7
[The Board certified United Steelworkers of America; CIO, as the
designated collective-bargaining representative of the employees in
the unit found appropriate.]
.The Employer took the position that all the employees who had been laid off more
than a months were permanently terminated and properly declared ineligible to vote.
7 The challenged ballots do not affect the results of the election.
Sefton Fibre Can Company and International Chemical Workers
Union, A. F. L., Petitioner - -
Sefton Fibre Can Company and Lodge 681, District Lodge 27,
International Association of Machinists , A. F. L., Petitionerr
Cases Nos. 9-RC---2495 and 9-RC-2506. October 13, 1955
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon petitions duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, and thereafter consolidated, a hearing was held before
114 NLRB No. 75. -
SEFTON FIBRE CAN COMPANY 409
Alvin Schwartz, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made
at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in these cases, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the
National Labor Relations Act.
2. The petitioning labor organizations claim to represent certain
employees of the Employer. - "
3. A question pf representation affecting commerce exists concern-
ing certain employees of the Employer, within the meaning of Section
9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The petitions herein concern employees of the Employer's Jeffer-
sonville, Indiana, plant, which is a new plant in operation since April
1, 1955. At this plant the Employer manufactures one product : cy-
lindrical fibre containers with metal tops and bottoms for Ajax
cleanser. Shortly after the Chemical Workers filed its petition for
a production and maintenance unit, the IAM petitioned for a unit of
machine shop employees. At the hearing its intervention was per-
mitted as to the overall group.
The Employer urges a production and maintenance unit, such as it
has at its Piqua, Ohio, and St. Louis, Missouri, plants, where, appar-
ently, the operation is similar.
The machine shop at the Jeffersonville plant consists of a corner of
the plant, about 100 square feet in area, having drill presses, one or
more grinders, and a lathe. Three employees work in this shop ; 1 was
hired as a die repairman and spends all of his time maintaining the
dies and keeping them in working order; 2 were hired as machinists
and spend all of their time maintaining and repairing the plant ma-
chinery, 1 on the night shift. All other maintenance work for 'the
plant, except custodial, is performed by outside contractors.. All three
of these men sought by the Machinists have their own tools of the type
customary for machinists and all of them use the equipment in the
machine shop. Occasionally they make small parts for the machinery
but there is no equipment for making dies, and complicated machin-
ery parts would be procured from the outside. They are paid 30 cents
an hour more than production employees. They. are supervisedby"the
plant supervisor, and have the same' vacation and health insurance
benefits as production workers. The record indicates that they usu-
ally report to work about an hour before production workers. There is
no apprenticeship system at the plant.
On this record, which shows that these three employees are not an
administrative department in the plant organizational setup, have no
separate supervision, and do only uncomplicated, repetitive mainte-
nance work, no basis exists on which to find them' a separate appao-'
priate unit either as a craft or a, department, and we shall therefore
dismiss the petition of the IAM. '
410 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
It was the consensus of opinion of the parties that the truckdrivers,
the plant clerical employees, the janitor, and two leadmen should be
included in the production and maintenance unit. As there is noth-
ing in the testimony taken to indicate that these inclusions are inap-
propriate, we shall include such employees. We find that the follow-
ing employees constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of col-
lective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act:
All production and maintenance employees at the Employer's Jeffer-
sonville, Indiana, plant, including machine shop employees, truck-
drivers, the plant clerical employees, the janitor, and leadmen, but ex-
cluding professional employees, office clerical employees, guards, and
supervisors as defined in the Act.
[The Board dismissed the petition in Case No. 9-RC-2506.]
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
S. D. Warren Company and Local 1015, United Paperworkers of
America, CIO , Petitioner . Case No. 7-RC-2853. October 13,1955
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a hearing was held before Herbert C. Kane, hearing
officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from
prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
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 involved claims to represent certain
employees 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 Petitioner seeks as a single unit the employees in the Em-
ployer's five laboratories, all of whom are presently unrepresented and
who have been excluded from the existing production and mainte-
nance unit. The Petitioner would also represent such employees in
any other unit found appropriate by the Board or would add them
to its existing production and maintenance unit. The Employer con-
tends that a separate laboratory unit is inappropriate; and that the
employees in three of the laboratories should be excluded as either
confidential, supervisory, or professional.
The Employer is engaged in the manufacture of clean and coated
printing paper. The employees in the papermill control and the
114 NLRB No. 77.