Shell Chemical Corp.Download PDFNational Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsFeb 23, 194981 N.L.R.B. 965 (N.L.R.B. 1949) Copy Citation In the Matter of SHELL CHEMICAL CORPORATION ( SHELL POINT PLANT), EMPLOYER and INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF BOILERMAKERS, IRON SHIPBUILDERS AND HELPERS OF AMERICA, FOR AND ON BEHALF OF SUBORDINATE LODGE No. 513, A. F. orAL., PETITIONER Case Nos. 20-RC-331, 20-RC-332, and 20-RC-363.-Decided February 23,1949 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS Upon petitions' duly filed, an order consolidating the above cases was issued on September 30, 1948. A hearing was held on the consol- idated cases at San Francisco, California, on November 4, 1948, before a hearing officer of the National Labor Relations Board. The hearing officer's rulings 2 made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. At the hearing, the Intervenor moved to dis- miss the proceeding upon various grounds .3 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-man panel consisting of the undersigned Board Members. * 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 Petitioner is a labor organization, and claims to represent employees of the Employer. ' The Petitioner amended its three petitions at the hearing so that it now claims as helpers only those employees who, for the past 6 months or more, have been regularly assigned to helping the boilermakers , welders. or tinsmiths for "a majority of their time " 2 Oil Workers International Union, C. I. 0., herein called the Intervenor , was permitted to intervene , since it claims that its current contract with the Employer is a bar to the proceeding. S The Intervenor moved to dismiss all three petitions on the grounds : ( 1) that the Intervenor was certified by the Board on December 31, 1937, as bargaining representative for the employees involved herein ; ( 2) that the Board did , on August 23, 1948, dismiss a petition by the Petitioner to obtain certification for the employees in question in a single unit; ( 3) that the units sought in the instant proceeding are inappropriate ; and (4) that the Intervenor currently has a valid contract with the Employer which acts as a bar to the present case . For the reasons stated herein, we shall deny the Intervenor's motion to dismiss. .Reynolds , Murdock, and Gray. 81 N. L. R. B., No . 148. 965 966 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 3. Questions affecting commerce exist 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 4. The appropriate units; the determination of representatives: The Petitioner seeks three separate units, composed of: (1) boiler- makers; (2) welders; and (3) tinsmiths, including in each instance craft helpers who have been assigned regularly for the past 6 months or more for a majority of their time to the boilermakers, welders, and tinsmiths, respectively. The Employer takes no position with respect to the proposed unit. The Intervenor contends that the three proposed units are inappropriate,5 in view of the Employer's history of collective bargaining covering a broader unit including the craft em- ployees sought herein. In December 1937, the Board certified the Intervenor e as the collec- tive bargaining representative for the production and maintenance em- ployees of the Employer, exclusive of machinists 7 and electricians a Such unit embracing the employees now sought by the Petitioner has been bargained for by the Intervenor since 1938. In February 1948, the Petitioner filed a petition to obtain certification, in a single unit, of the employees involved herein, which petition was dismissed.9 In dismissing such petition, the Board found that the unit sought therein appeared to be a multi-craft grouping of employees with different skills, which grouping lacked the homogeneity and cohesion requisite for an appropriate unit. Thus, the present three petitions constitute a new and different approach by the Petitioner to problems already considered by the Board in the above-mentioned case.10 Inasmuch as we have already found in that case that the employees sought herein are highly skilled craftsmen and are clearly distinguishable from 4 We find that the Intervenor ' s current contract with the Employer is no bar, since this contract by its express terms provides that nothing therein shall be deemed to prejudice any determination which the Board may make concerning the petitions filed herein. Matter of Allis-Chalmers Manufacturing Company, 73 N. L R B 784 We also find that the Board's prior certification of the Intervenor is no bar, since such certification is more than a year old. Matter of Trueman Fertilizer Company, 81 N. L. R. B ., No. 13; Matter of Acme Boat Manufacturing Company , Inc., 76 N L. R. B. 441. 'In view of our findings herein, we shall deny the Intervenor 's motion to dismiss on the ground that the units sought are inappropriate. 6 Matter of Shell Chemical Company, 4 N L R. B. 259. T Currently being bargained for by the International Association of Machinists. 8 Currently being bargained for by the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers. 9 Matter of Shell Chemical Corporation , 79 N. L R . B. 35. The Intervenor 's motion to dismiss the three present petitions , based' upon the Board's dismissal of the prior proceeding, is denied , inasmuch as the dismissal of the prior proceeding for a single unit does not preclude the filing of the present petitions for three separate units. The Intervenor's further motion to incorporate in the present proceeding the record in such prior case is denied, since the Board takes judicial notice of its own proceedings . See Matter of Tin Processing Corporation , 80 N. L. R. B 1369, and cases cited therein 10 Matter of Shell.Chemical Corporation , footnote 9, supra. SHELL CHEMICAL CORPORATION 967 other employees in the maintenance department, and since the present record discloses that there has been no change in the duties performed by the employees in question since our prior finding, we believe that such employees, excluding helpers," may, if they so desire, constitute three separate units for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act. However, the Board will make no unit determination until it has further ascertained by separate elections the desires of the employees in the voting groups enumerated below. If, in these elections, a major- ity of the employees in any voting group select the Petitioner, they will be taken to have indicated their desire to constitute a separate bargaining unit. We shall direct that separate elections by secret ballot be held among employees at the Employer's Shell Point Plant, at Shell Point, Cali- fornia, within each of the following voting groups, excluding, in each instance, helpers and all other production and maintenance employees, clerical employees, guards, professional employees and supervisors as defined by the Act : Group 1. All welders. Group 2. All boilermakers. Group 3. All tinsmiths. DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining with the Employer, elections 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 Twentieth Region, and sub- ject to Sections 203.61 and 203.62 of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 5, as amended, among the voting groups described in paragraph numbered 4, above, who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of this Direction of Elections, including employees who did not work during said pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation or temporarily 11 The helpers claimed by the Petitioner are assigned out of a general helpers pool for use by various craft groups A shift rotation prevents any helper from being assigned to any particular craft for his entire working time . There are frequent transfers of helpers among the various craft groups There is no form of appenticeship through which a helper to a particular craft group can advance to journeyman status. Where there are frequent transfers of helpers between various crafts, the Board has found, as it does herein, that the interests of the helpers are not so related to those of the journeymen as to warrant their inclusion in craft bargaining groups. See Matter of Standard Oil Company of California, 79 N. L. it. B. 1466; Matter of United States Potash Company, 77 N. L. it. B. 947; Matter of General Petroleum Corporation , 77 N. L . it. B 1380. 968 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 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 the purposes of collective bargaining , by Inter- national Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Shipbuilders and Help- ers of America , for and on behalf of Subordinate Lodge No. 513, A. F. of L., or Oil Workers International Union, CIO, or neither. Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation