The Bunker Hill Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 21, 1967

165 N.L.R.B. 730 (N.L.R.B. 1967)

730 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL
The Bunker Hill Company and United
Steelworkers of America, AFL-CIO,
Petitioner and International Brotherhood
of Boilermakers , Iron Ship Builders,
Blacksmiths, Forgers & Helpers, Local
Lodge No. 242, AFL-CIO, Petitioner and
Local Union 73, International Brotherhood
of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO and Local
Lodge No. 1425, International Association
of Machinists & Aerospace Workers,
AFL-CIO, Petitioner . Cases 19-RC-4093,
19-RC-4094, 19-RC-4098, and 19-RC-4105.
June 21,1967
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION
BY CHAIRMAN MCCULLOCH AND MEMBERS BROWN
AND JENKINS
Upon separate petitions duly filed under Section
9(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, as
amended, a consolidated 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. The Employer, the Intervenor, and
all of the Petitioners except the Steelworkers have
filed briefs which have been duly considered by the
Board.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
Act, the Board has delegated its powers in
connection with this case to a three-member panel.
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board
finds:
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within
the meaning of the Act and it will effectuate the
purposes of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein.
2. The labor organizations involved claim to
represent certain employees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists
concerning the representation of certain 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.
A. The Parties' Requests
The Boilermakers, in Case 19-RC-4094, the
Machinists, in Case 19-RC-4105, and the Electrical
Workers, in Case 19-RC-4098, respectively, seek to
sever from the established production and
maintenance unit, the following separate groups of
employees: (1) all maintenance mechanics, helpers,
and apprentices at the zinc plant, mine, smelter, and
concentrator, excluding underground maintenance
mechanics and drill doctors; (2) all auto mechanics,
body and fender repairmen, auto painters, auto
electricians, frame and front-end repairmen, diesel
Mallinckrodt Chemical Works, Uranium Division, 162 NLRB
387
LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
mechanics, lube and tire repairmen, and all helpers
and apprentices of the above employed in the
garage; and (3) all instrument department repairmen
and their apprentices and helpers, and all electrical
powerhouse operators in the smelter powerhouse.
The Steelworkers, in Case 19-RC-4093, seeks an
election in the overall production and maintenance
unit currently represented by Northwest Metal
Workers Union, Intervenor herein. It does not,
however, oppose the foregoing severance petitions
and has stated on the record that if the Board directs
elections on the severance petitions it does not wish
to appear on the ballots in such elections.
The Employer and the Intervenor, Northwest
Metal Workers Union, Independent, oppose each of
the above-described severance requests. They
contend that under the recently established
standards in the Mallinckrodt case' no warrant
exists for carving out any of the requested units from
the established production and maintenance unit.
For reasons set forth below, we agree.
B. Bargaining History
The history of bargaining among the employees
here involved dates back to 1942. It was initially
established on the basis of a comprehensive unit
embracing all of the Employer's production and
maintenance employees. In 1950 and in 1964 the
Board directed craft severance elections among
certain employees of Employer. As a result,
Electrical Workers acquired a certification for
electricians in 1950, Boilermakers, for boilermakers
and blacksmiths in 1964, and Machinists, for
machinists also in 1964.2 However, all of the
employees sought to be severed in the instant
proceedings have been continuously represented as
part of the production and maintenance unit.
C. The Employer's Operations
The Employer is engaged, at Kellogg, Idaho, in the
mining of lead, zinc, and silver and the refining and
processing of these ores. It employs approximately
1,700 employees at these operations, about 1,450 of
whom are currently represented as part of the
production and maintenance unit.
These operations, although functionally divided
into several departments corresponding to the
various distinct phases through which each of these
ores is ultimately processed, are nevertheless highly
integrated in nature. Ores, upon their removal from
the mines, are transported to the Company's
concentrator which separates the lead from the zinc
and disposes of the waste rock. The lead and zinc
distillates are then conveyed by rail to the
Company's lead smelter and zinc plant. At the
smelter the concentrated lead is exposed to a
2 See The Bunker Hill Company, 146 NLRB 331
165 NLRB No. 85
THE BUNKER HILL COMPANY
pyrometallurgical process which produces refined
lead and other allied metals. A similar result is
obtained at the zinc plant by the application of
electrolysis to the zinc concentrate. This process,
consisting essentially of roasting, releases gases
which are then passed through a sulphuric acid plant
at the zinc refinery. The sulphuric acid so processed
becomes an ingredient of phosphoric acid prepared
at a separate plant a short distance from the zinc
refinery. The refining process is not a perfect one.
As a result of less than absolute efficiency, there is
an interchange of zinc produced at the lead smelter
with lead produced at the zinc plant. In addition to
this exchange, the silver produced at the zinc plant is
refined at the smelter.
The undisputed evidence establishes, and we find,
that a curtailment of production at either or both of
the mines would shortly lead to a companywide
shutdown, and, moreover, that the cessation of ore
processing at the concentrator would bring to a
standstill all production activity at the lead smelter
and the zinc plant.
D. The Functions, Skills, and Interests of the
Employees Here Sought to be Severed
With the possible exception of the four
powerhouse operators who are part of the group
sought by the Electrical Workers, all of the
employees herein sought to be severed are engaged
in maintenance and repair work. Some of them are
craftsmen, and some are not. Their particular
functions and skills, the extent to which the
continued normal operation of the production
process is dependent upon the performance to the
assigned functions of the employees, and other
relevant factors are described more fully below in
the detailed separate consideration of each of the
severance petitions.
1. Case 19-RC-4094: The employees requested by
the Boilermakers
The Boilermakers proposes the severance of
approximately 67 employees engaged as
maintenance mechanics, helpers, and apprentices at
four separate locations, viz, the mine, the zinc plant,
the smelter, and the concentrator. It would exclude
all maintenance mechanics engaged in underground
operations and those employed above ground in the
mine surface plant who are known as "drill doctors"
or floor or bench mechanics. The Boilermakers has
indicated that it desires to represent the requested
employees as part of the craft unit of boilermakers
7 See The Bunker Hill Company, supra, 146 NLRB at 333-336
In its brief , Boilermakers expresses its willingness to include the
underground maintenance mechanics as part of its proposed unit
in the event the Board determines that they have a community of
interests with the above -ground employees specifically sought
here In the prior proceeding , where the Boilermakers expressly
sought to include the underground mechanics, we pointed out that
731
and blacksmiths it currently represents. It contends,
among other things, that most of these employees
perform substantially the same kind of work tasks as
do the boilermakers it now represents, and use the
same kind of tools and equipment.
The employees in question constitute the same
group of above-ground maintenance mechanics that
the same union in the 1964 proceeding asked us to
sever along with boilermakers and blacksmiths as
part of a single-craft unit.3 We there denied the
request on the grounds, among others, that such
mechanics were under different supervision from
boilermakers and blacksmiths, performed a
different kind of work, and exercised different skills.
We also noted that, unlike the blacksmiths and
boilermakers, these employees had an informal
rather than a formal apprenticeship program. The
record here shows that there has been no substantial
change in the duties of these employees since the
date of our earlier decision. Although they are now
under a 4-year formal apprenticeship program, that
program is not the same as the one under which
boilermakers are apprentices.
It is thus obvious that the same considerations
that led us to reject, in 1964, the requested
combination of maintenance mechanics with the
craftsmen boilermakers and blacksmiths, are
equally applicable now. Accordingly, we find no
merit in the Boilermakers claim that maintenance
mechanics share with boilermakers and blacksmiths
such a substantial community of interest as
appropriately to warrant their joinder in the same
unit.
We are also persuaded that such separate
community of interests as the maintenance
mechanics may enjoy by reason of differences
between their skills and training and those
possessed by other production and maintenance
employees would not, in the circumstances of this
case, warrant our now affording them an opportunity
to change their mode of representation. The
functions they perform are in major part integrated
with those of production employees; they involve the
correction and prevention of mechanical
breakdowns in approximately 8,000 machines
utilized in the production process and located
throughout the complex of the Employer's
operations. Approximately 95 percent of this work is
performed at the location of the machines, and in
performing it the mechanics come into direct
contact with production personnel. Maintenance
mechanics assigned to the concentrator, moreover,
have the same supervisor as production personnel.
they performed work different in character and under different
conditions and different supervision from that done by above-
ground maintenance mechanics , boilermakers, and/or
blacksmiths In any event , we do not deem the inclusion of the
underground mechanics , or their exclusion , to be a critical factor
in the disposition of the Boilermakers petition herein
732 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
There is no evidence that the special interests of
maintenance mechanics have been inadequately
served by their representation as part of the
production and maintenance unit to which they have
continuously been attached for the past 25 years.
Indeed, the record shows that under the most recent
contract negotiated by the incumbent production
and maintenance union, the maintenance mechanics
receive hourly wage rates and other benefits that are
virtually identical to those of the boilermakers now
represented by the Boilermakers. Moreover, since
1960, a number of executive offices of the incumbent
and of its governing board have been filled by
maintenance mechanics.
Finally, the record reveals that Boilermakers has
no contracts with, and does not represent any
maintenance mechanics of, other employers in the
mining industry in the Pacific Northwest area. Nor
does it appear that it has traditionally devoted itself
to representing this particular craft.
For all the foregoing reasons, we find no sufficient
basis under our applicable standards for combining
the requested maintenance mechanics with the
boilermakers and blacksmiths now represented by
the Boilermakers, or for now setting apart the
maintenance mechanics in a separate unit after their
25-year history of bargaining as a component part of
the production and maintenance unit. Accordingly,
we hereby dismiss the petition in Case 19-RC-4094.
2. Case 19-RC-4105: The employees requested by
the Machinists
Machinists seeks to sever the approximately 12
employees classified as auto mechanics, their
helpers and apprentices, servicemen, and tire
repairmen.4 All of these employees are assigned to
the transportation department where other
employees classified as truckdrivers, garage
warehousemen, and heavy equipment operators are
also assigned. All transportation department
employees are commonly supervised by a
transportation supervisor. All of them report daily to
the garage for work assignment, and all use the same
dry and change room facilities.
The auto mechanics are under a 4-year
apprenticeship program approved by the United
States Department of Labor. Their primary work
functions entail the repair and maintenance of the
Employer's 160 pieces of variously powered
combustion engine equipment and vehicles which
include not only trucks and passenger cars, but also
railroad diesel engines and highly specialized
forklifts, front-end loaders, cranes, power shovels,
and caterpillars. The Employer uses this equipment
4 Machinists defined the unit as including also the following job
classifications which the Employer does not in fact maintain auto
body and fender repairmen, frame and front-end repairmen; auto
painters , and electricians ; diesel mechanics , and lubemen The
work functions these alleged classifications describe are
performed by employees in the classifications set out in the text.
to move and transport ores, materials, finished
products, and field personnel on a day-to-day basis
throughout its mining and processing complex. In
general, auto mechanics have no regular assignment
or fixed stations, but are dispatched from the garage
as needed to the points of vehicular failure. In
performing their work, auto mechanics use both
their own and the Company's tools. They must
identify and understand the functions of such
components of motorized equipment as steering
mechanisms, fuel, ignition, and braking systems,
axels, frames, and front ends. The Employer
provides them with manuals and blueprints of many
of its vehicles as aids.
The servicemen have no apprenticeship program.
Their work is similar in nature to that of a typical
service station attendant, except that it is here
usually performed in the field rather than in the
garage. Servicemen lubricate and refuel the
equipment which the auto mechanics are required to
repair, clean air filters, and repair tires. Most
servicemen moved into their positions from lower
rated truckdriver jobs as a result of bidding for
openings as they occurred. There is no established
line of progression from servicemen to any other
jobs.
As is clear from the foregoing, the unit proposed
by the Machinists is but a segment of a departmental
group of employees who are under common
supervision and who share the same facilities.
Plainly, the servicemen are not identifiable as
members of any craft group, and their job interests
are more closely related to departmental employees
whom the Machinists does not seek to represent
than to the auto mechanics with whom it proposes to
combine them in a separate unit.
The status of auto mechanics as a separate
identifiable group of craftsmen may be conceded.
But, as we have indicated in the recently decided
Mallinckrodt and related cases which set forth our
current severance policies, we do not regard craft
identity as alone a sufficient ground for carving out a
small segment of workers from an established
production and maintenance unit. In this case we
find numerous factors militating against the
requested severance. Among them are that auto
mechanics perform nearly all their work in areas
which bring them into close contact with other
production personnel, that they are but a segment of
a commonly supervised departmental grouping of
employees, and that their work efforts are of critical
importance to the maintenance of continuity in the
highly integrated and transportation-dependent
operation of the mining complex.
In the discussion herein, our use of the terms "auto mechanics"
will refer also to those who are auto mechanics' helpers and
apprentices, and our use of the term "servicemen" will include
tire repairmen There appears to be only one individual in the
latter classification
THE BUNKER HILL COMPANY 733
There is also other evidence indicating that such
special interests as auto mechanics may have in
common by reason of their craft identity have to a
substantial extent been subordinated to the broader
community of interests they share with other
employees in the existing production and
maintenance unit. Thus, under the bargaining
contracts covering the production and maintenance
unit of which the auto mechanics are now a part, all
personnel within the unit enjoy common seniority
rights on both a plant and departmental basis,
allowing auto mechanics to "bump" into production
jobs in the event of layoff. Moreover, the record fails
to demonstrate prejudice to any cognizable special
bargaining interests they may possess by their
inclusion in the production and maintenance unit. In
fact, the record shows that their hourly rates of pay
closely approximate those received by the skilled
machinists whom the Machinists currently
represent, and that they receive identical
insurances, vacation, pension, and other fringe
benefits.
In light of all the foregoing circumstances,
including the 25-year history of bargaining, the close
functional integration of auto mechanics in the
Employer's operations, the community of interests
they share with other production personnel, and the
absence of any compelling countervailing
considerations, we find that the interest to be served
by maintaining the stability of the existing
bargaining unit of approximately 1,450 employees
outweigh the interests that might be served by
affording the approximately 12 or less auto
mechanics an opportunity to be represented as a
separate unit.5 We conclude, accordingly, that the
unit proposed by the Machinists in Case
19-RC-4105 is inappropriate, and we hereby dismiss
the petition in that case.
3. Case 19-RC-4098: The employees sought by the
Electrical Workers
The Electrical Workers severance request
embraces 11 employees, 7 of whom are rated as
instrument repairmen (a group including leadmen,
journeymen, specialists, helpers, and apprentices)
and 4 of whom are classified as blowerhouse or
powerhouse operators. The record is unclear as to
whether the Electrical Workers seeks to add all or
some of these employees to the unit of skilled
electricians for which it currently bargains with the
Employer, or whether it seeks to represent them as a
separate unit. In proposing the severance of the
blowerhouse operators, the Electrical Workers
claims that the employees perform tasks akin to
those of the generator operators it now represents as
part of the craft unit of skilled electricians. In
proposing the severance of the instrument
repairmen, it identifies these employees as a distinct
group of skilled craftsmen, and alleges that their
work functions closely resemble, and are but an
extension of, work functions performed by
electrician craftsmen whom it has traditionally
represented.
The record shows that the smelter blowerhouse
operator job has historically been filled by physically
incapacitated employees. Most of those presently in
these jobs have come out of the production unit.
Although located in a separated area of the smelter,
the blowerhouse operators share change facilities
with the rest of the smelter work force. They have no
apprenticeship program. In the execution of their
assigned tasks they have no contact with instrument
repairmen or electricians. Contrary to the Electrical
Workers claim, blowerhouse operators do not
perform tasks like those of the generator operator
whom it represents at the zinc plant. The equipment
for which the generator operator is responsible is
predominantly electrical, whereas the equipment
operated by the smelter blowerhouse operator
consists of a mechanical compressor and blower
which makes only small use of electricity as a source
of power. The compressors and blowers channel air
under high pressure into the production area of the
smelter. The air is generated by synchronous motors
activiated by a switch gear and distribution system
within the powerhouse. The operators watch the
compressors and blowers for overheating. They also
oil them, take hourly readings from their gauges,
and, in the event of an interruption in the operation,
bring the compressors and blowers to a halt. They
perform none of the maintenance and repair work on
this equipment. Indeed, such work is done by
maintenance mechanics and sometimes by
machinists, but not by electricians.
It is clear therefore that blowerhouse operators
need little if any knowledge of the principles of
electrical or electronics theory to properly perform
their job responsibilities, and that they exercise no
craft skills. Indeed, in the 1950 proceeding in which
this same Union sought to sever these individuals as
part of the skilled electricians craft,6 we denied their
request on findings-equally applicable here-that
they possess no craft identity and that their
community of interest lies with production
personnel.
The instrument repairmen are, concededly,
skilled craftsmen. They are responsible for the
maintenance and repair of the process control
instruments and valves (some of which are
5 We have not overlooked Petitioner's qualification as a
traditional representative of the auto mechanics ' craft However,
it does not confine itself to representation of the special interests
of this craft Indeed, at the instant plant it represents members of
the separate machinists craft
We note, also, that Machinists adduced evidence establishing
that it has two contracts covering auto mechanics groups at other
mining companies in the area We do not deem this evidence
sufficient to establish an industry pattern of bargaining supportive
of the Machinist' s position here.
6 See Bunker Hill and Sullivan Mining and Concentrating
Company, 89 NLRB 243,249.
734 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
electrically operated and some of which are
pneumatic and hydraulic devices), the gas
combustion equipment, and the communications
system. All of the equipment which they maintain
and repair is essential to the efficient and continued
operation of the Employer's mining and processing
complex. The work they perform on gas equipment
is intimately related to the production process itself,
as a significant proportion of the Employer's heat-
producing equipment burns natural gas as fuel. The
instrument repairmen have no specific plant
assignments, but move throughout the Employer's
operations to the point of difficulty. They are
supervised by the instrument and combustion
engineer and have their own shop.
Contrary to the claim of the Electrical Workers
herein, the tasks which instrument repairmen
perform are substantially different in character from
those performed by skilled members of the
electricians' craft and require the exercise of skills
not ordinarily possessed by electricians. Instrument
repairmen are under an apprenticeship program
different from that maintained for electricians. And,
as above indicated, much of the work they are called
on to do does not involve electrically operated
equipment. In those instances where the
instruments they repair are electrically operated,
their tasks and those of electricians are wholly
distinguishable.' Thus, an electrician's function is to
bring or restore electrical power to the meter or
instrument, while that of the instrument repairman
is to repair or keep the meter or instrument in proper
working condition. In brief, where the electrician's
function ceases, the instrument repairman's begins.
Because the latter's work is unique, he possesses
many tools not found in the electrician's repair kit.
It does not appear from the evidence that the
Electrical Workers has devoted itself to representing
the special interests of instrument repairmen such
as those here sought. Nor does it appear that the
Electrical Workers have any contracts in the mining
industry covering such employees.
Indeed, in a number of cases, we have expressly rejected
contentions that electricians and instrument repairmen should be
combined in the same unit See, e.g , E I Dupont DeNemours and
Co (May Plant, Camden, S C.), 162 NLRB 413, Colgate-
Palmolive Company, 120 NLRB 1567.
9 An election eligibility list, containing the names and
addresses of all the eligible voters, must be filed by the Employer
with the Regional Director for Region 19 within 7 days after the
date of this Decision and Direction of Election The list may
initially be used by the Regional Director to assist in determining
The requested instrument repairmen have been
continuously bargained for as part of the production
and maintenance unit since the creation in 1953 of
that job classification. There is no showing that their
special interests have not been appropriately served
because of their representation in that unit. Indeed,
the record shows that their rates of pay are closely
comparable to those received by the skilled
electricians currently represented by the Electricial
Workers, and that their disability, health, life
insurance, vacation, and other fringe benefits are
identical.
The duties, functions, and skills of the instrument
repairmen here sought are substantially similar to
those of the instrument mechanics who were denied
severance in the Mallinckrodt case. The arguments
advanced for severance in that case also
substantially parallel those made by the Electrical
Workers in the instant case. The reasons which led
us to dismiss the severance petition for instrument
mechanics in the Mallinckrodt case are thus equally
applicable here. For these reasons, and also because
no valid basis appears for combining instrument
repairmen with blowerhouse and powerhouse
operators in a single, separate unit, we find that the
unit proposed by the Electrical Workers is
inappropriate for the purposes of collective
bargaining. We shall, therefore, dismiss the petition
in Case 19-RC-4098.
4. Case 19-RC-4093: The employees sought by the
Steelworks
The Steelworkers petition covers all employees
who are part of the established production and
maintenance unit currently represented by
Intervenor Metal Workers , and which we here find
to be a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective
bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the
Act.
[Direction of Election8 omitted from publication.]
an adequate showing of interest . The Regional Director shall
make the list available to all parties to the election when he shall
have determined that an adequate showing of interest among the
employees in the unit found appropriate has been established No
extension of time to file this list shall be granted by the Regional
Director except in extraordinary circumstances . Failure to comply
with this requirement shall be grounds for setting aside the
election whenever proper objections are filed Excelsior
Underwear Inc , 156 NLRB 1236