Stauffer Chemical Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 5, 1947

73 N.L.R.B. 1456 (N.L.R.B. 1947)

In the Matter of STAUFFER CHEMICAL COMPANY, EMPLOYER and Dis-
TRICTICT 50, UNITED MINE WORKERS OF AMERICA, A. F. L., PETITIONER
Case No. 3-R-1435.-Decided June 5, 1947
Mr. H. C. Van Galder, of New York City, and Messrs. P. S. Brallier
and D. M. Van Wegan, of Niagara Falls, N. Y., for the Employer.
Messrs. Elwood Moffett and Frank O'Brien, of Buffalo, N. Y., for
the Petitioner.
Mr. Melvin J. Welles, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at Niagara
Falls, New York, on January 25, 1947, before Francis X. Helgesen,
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 the case, the National Labor Relations
Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF TI(E EMPLOYER
Stauffer Chemical Company is a California corporation licensed to
do business in the State of New York. It operates a plant iii Niagara
Falls, New York, with which we are solely concerned in this pro-
ceeding. During the year 1946, the Employer purchased raw mate-
rials for its Niagara Falls plant valued in excess of $500,000, of which
approximately 20 percent was shipped to it from points outside the
State of New York. During the same period, the Employer sold fin-
ished products processed at its Niagara Falls plant valued in excess
of $1,000,000, of which more than 50 percent was shipped to points
outside the State of New York.
The Employer adinits and we find that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGAN IZATION INVOLVED
The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the American
Federation of Labor, claiming to represent employees of the Employer.
73 N L R B, No 247
1456
STAUFFER CHEMICAL COMPANY
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
1457
The Employer refuses to recognize the Petitioner as the exclusive
bargaining representative of employees of the Employer until the
Petitioner has been certified by the Board in an appropriate unit.
On June 26 , 1946, the Petitioner filed a petition for an investigation
and certification of representatives of employees of the Employer.
Subsequently , the Employer , the Petitioner, and the United Gas, Coke
and Chemical Workers of America, C. I. 0., agreed to a consent elec-
tion, to be held under Board auspices. This election was conducted
on July 18,1946, with the following results :
For District 50--------------------------------------------- 50
For the Chemical Workers---------------------------------- 6
For Neither------------------------------------------------- 85
Challenged ballots ------------------------------------------ 7
Thus, a majority of the employees voted against representation by
a collective bargaining agent. On November 15, 1946, slightly less
than 4 months after that election, the Petitioner filed its petition
herein. The Employer contends that no election should be directed
at this time because of the short period of time that elapsed between
the last election and the filing of the present petiion.
As we indicated in the Ingalls case, a serious question can be raised
by the celerity with which a petitioner which loses an election files a
new petition. But here, as in the Ingalls case, almost a year has now
elapsed since the prior election. We are of the opinion that another
election should now be directed in this case, leaving open for future
determination the question of whether the Board- should normally
entertain a petition filed so soon after the loss of a prior election con-
ducted at the request of the same petitioner.
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning
the representation of employees of the Employer, within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Employer and the Petitioner agree, and we find, that all pro-
duction and maintenance employees of the Employer at its Niagara
Falls, New York , plant, excluding clerical employees , and all super-
visory employees with authority to hire, promote , discharge , discipline,
or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees , or effectively
recommend such action , constitute a unit appropriate for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of
the Act.
'Matter of The Ingalls Shipbuilding Corporation, 73 N. L 11 B 1263
1458 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining with Stauffer Chemical Company, Ni-
agara Falls, New York, an election by secret ballot shall be conducted
as early as possible, but not later than thirty (30) days from the date of
this Direction, under the direction and supervision of the Regional
Director for the Third Region, acting in this matter as agent for the
National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Sections 203.55 and
203.56, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-
Series 4, among the employees in the unit found appropriate in Sec-
tion IV, above, who were employed during the pay-roll period imme-
diately preceding the date of this Direction, including employees who
did not work during said pay-roll period because they were ill or on
vacation or temporarily laid off, and including employees in the armed
forces of the United States who present themselves in person at the
polls, but excluding those employees who have since quit or been dis-
charged for cause and have not been rehired or reinstated prior to the
date of the election, to determine whether or not they desire to be
represented by District 50, United Mine Workers of America, A. F. L.,
for the purposes of collective bargaining.
MR. JAMES J. REYNOLDS, JR., took no part in the consideration of
the above Decision and Direction of Election.