The Glidden Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 20, 1947

74 N.L.R.B. 1257 (N.L.R.B. 1947)

In the Matter of THE GLIDDEN COMPANY, DURKEE FAMOUS FOODS
DIVISION, EMPLOYER and INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF FIREMEN
AND OILERS, LOCAL No. 320, A. F. OF L., PETITIONER
Case No. 9-R-2659.-Decided August 00, 1947
Mr. Donald D. Horton, of Cleveland, Ohio, and Messrs. Martin A.
Beck and George F. Atkinson, of Louisville, Ky., for the Employer.
Messrs. Charles W. Anderson and Harold R. Colvin, for the Peti-
tioner.
Mr. T. A. Finnegan, of Akron, Ohio, for the Intervenor.
Miss Frances Ste ye, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition 1 duly filed, hearing in this case was held at Louis-
ville, Kentucky , on June 10, 1947, before Allen Sinsheimer , Jr., hear-_
ing 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
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
The Glidden Company, an Ohio corporation, operates numerous
plants throughout the United States. At its Durkee Famous Foods
Division, Louisville, Kentucky, which is the only plant involved
herein, it is engaged in the business of refining and manufacturing
vegetable oil and vegetable shortening.
The Employer purchases annually for this plant raw materials
valued at more than. $1,000,000, of which more than 50 percent is
shipped from points outside Kentucky. Sales of its finished products
are valued annually at more than $1,000,000, of which more than 50
percent is shipped to points outside Kentucky.
1 The petition and other papers were amended at the hearing to show the correct name
of the Employer.
74 N. L. R. B., No. 205.
1257
1258 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
H. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the American
Federation of Labor, claiming to represent employees of the Employer.
International Chemical Workers Union, herein called the Inter-
venor, is a labor organization affiliated with the American Federation
of Labor, claiming to represent employees of the Employer.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Employer refuses to recognize the Petitioner as the exclusive
bargaining representative of employees of the Employer until the Peti-
tioner has been certified by the Board in an appropriate unit.
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 parties agree that all production employees, including watch-
men and janitors, but excluding the combustion engineer, firemen, coal
passers, coal unloaders, refrigeration engineers, maintenance employ-
ees, truck drivers, office and clerical employees, chemists, technicians
and laboratory employees, stock keeper, chief engineer, chief chemist,
supervisor of the hydrogenation department, superintendent, assistant
superintendent, foremen, and all other supervisory employees, con-
stitute an appropriate bargaining unit. The Petitioner and Intervenor
would include, and the Employer exclude, janitresses. The parties
disagree as to the status of Ed Zibart.
There are two janitresses who work in the Employer's office. They
are under the supervision of the office manager and are paid on a
weekly basis. One of the janitresses also cleans some laboratory equip-
ment. Since these employees are manual employees and one of them
performs some work in the laboratory, we shall include janitresses in
the unit of plant production workers.
The Petitioner contends that Ed Zibart is a supervisory employee
and, as such, should be excluded from the proposed unit. The Em-
ployer and the Intervenor disagree. Zibart is classified as a Class A
Operator in the refinery. He is sometimes assigned as crew leader
with two or three men, but it is clear that he does not direct their
work. His pay and status is the same as that of other Class A Opera-
THE GLIDDEN COMPANY 1259
tors, six of whom are employed by the Employer and are included as
production employees by agreement of the parties in the unit. Inas-
much as the record does not reveal any supervisory duties on the part
of Zibart, we find that he is a production worker and, as such, shall
include him in the bargaining unit.
We find that all production employees 2 at the Employer's Louis-
ville, Kentucky, plant, including janitors and janitresses, but excluding
the combustion engineer, firemen, coal passers, coal unloaders, refrig-
eration engineers, maintenance employees, truck drivers, office and
clerical employees, chemists, technicians and laboratory employees,
stock keeper, chief engineer, chief chemist, watchmen,3 supervisor of
the hydrogenation department, superintendent, assistant superintend-
ent, foremen, and all other supervisory employees, constitute a unit
appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the mean-
ing of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
The Employer urges that it would not be to the best interests of the
production workers to permit them to be represented by the Petitioner,
inasmuch as the latter is primarily a craft and not an industrial labor
organization. The Petitioner admits to membership the employees
concerned herein, and has represented similar classifications of em-
ployees in other plants. Accordingly, we find no merit in the Em-
ployer's contention .4
Employee Dave Mills spends approximately 90 percent of his time
reconditioning barrels in the Employer's cooper shop and 10 percent
of his time as a relief fireman. His pay is that of a cooper. In Case
No. 9-R-2452, a prior representation proceeding, the Board directed
an election among maintenance employees, including firemen at the
plant, wherein Mills, as a relief fireman, was deemed eligible to vote.
The Petitioner contends that Mills is for this reason ineligible to
participate in the election among employees in the unit found' appro-
priate herein. We find no merit in this contention. Mills clearly has
an appreciable interest in the working conditions under which he
spends approximately 90 percent of his time, and his participation in
the earlier election as a relief fireman does not deprive him of a vote
at this time in selecting a bargaining representative with respect to his
major employment .5
2 Including Class A Operator , Ed ^ibart.
3 Although the record raises no issue respecting the unit placement of watchmen , we shall
exclude them as guards from the bargaining unit
* Matter of Wilson & Co ., Inc., 61 N . L R B 617.
2 Matter of Swift and Company, 58 N. L R B 657, 661.
1260 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
DIRECTION OF ELECTION 6
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the
purposes of collective bargaining with The Glidden Company, Durkee
Famous Foods Division, Louisville, Kentucky, 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 Ninth 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 Section IV, above, who were employed
during the pay-roll period immediately 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 em-
ployees who have since quit or been discharged for cause and have
not been rehired or reinstated prior to the date of the'election, to deter-
mine whether they desire to be represented by International Brother-
hood of Firemen and Oilers, Local No. 320, A. F. of L., or by
International Chemical Workers Union, A. F. of L., for the purposes
of collective bargaining, or by neither.
CHAIRMAN HERZOG took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Direction of Election.
6 Any participant in the election herein directed may, upon its prompt request to, and
approval thereof by , the Regional Director , have its name removed from the ballot.