Union Carbide & Carbon Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Feb 21, 1952

98 N.L.R.B. 270 (N.L.R.B. 1952)

270 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
front `the tbniafo packing unit. The Employer contends that the s'tu-
dents should be included.
A large number of employees working on the tomato-packing opera-
tion are high school and college students. A substantial number of
them return from season to season. The high school students usually
leave their employment to resume school about the 10th of Sep-
tember. The college students work until about the 25th of Sep-
tember, near the end of the packing season. A number of the col-
lege students thereafter work on late afternoons and Saturdays until
the very end of the season. The students usually begin to work early
in the packing season. They receive the same rates, work the same
hours, are subject to same conditions of employment as the other
employees, and in general appear to possess interests in common with
all the others engaged in the Employer's tomato-packing operations.°
We shall include them in the unit.10
We find that all employees employed in the handling and packing of
tomatoes at the Employer's packing sheds at or near Watsonville,
California, including students, but excluding office clerical employees,
truck drivers, guards, all other employees, and all supervisors as de-
fined in the Act, constitute a unit ' appropriate for the purposes of
collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
5. As the Employer's packing-shed operations are seasonal in na-
ture, we shall direct that the election be held at or about the approxi-
mate seasonal peak, on a date to be determined by the Regional Direc-
tor, among the employees in the appropriate unit who are employed
during the payroll period immediately preceding the date of the
issuance of notice of election by the Regional Director 11
[Test of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this
volume.]
B Unlike the Employer's lettuce-packing employees, those engaged in packing tomatoes
are drawn from local sources
10Cf Gerber Products Company , 93 NLRB 1668 . See also National Torch Tip Company,
93 NLRB No 61, National Cash Register Company, 95 NLRB 27
11 Imperial Garden Growers, supra
CARBIDE & CARBON CHEMICALS DIVISION , UNION CARBIDE AND CARBON
CORPORATION and INTERNATIONA L BROTHERHOOD OF FIREMEN AND
OILERS, LOCAL 320, AFL, PETITIONER . Cases Nos . 9-RC-1323 and
9-RC-1324. February 21, 1952
Decision and Direction of Election
Upon separate petitions duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the Na-
tional Labor Relations Act, a consolidated hearing was held before
98 NLRB No. 41.
CARBIDE & CARBON CITEMICALS DIVISION 271
Leonard S . Kimmell, hearing officer . Tlie ' 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
Act.
2. The labor organizations i involved claim to represent certain
employees of the Employer.
3. The Employer and the Intervenor urge their current contract as
a bar to this proceeding . The Petitioner contends that the contract
is not a bar on the ground , among others , that it was executed at a time
when the Employer had not employed a representative personnel
complement.
The Employer is engaged in the manufacture of chemical com-
ponents used in the production of synthetic rubber, at the Louisville,
Kentucky, plant involved herein . This plant is owned by and
operated for the United States Reconstruction Finance Corporation,
Office of Rubber Reserve. Production at the plant commenced on or
about July 1, 1943. Thereafter , in 1944 and 1945, following Board
certifications ,2 the Employer executed separate collective bargaining
agreements with each of the intervening labor organizations , except
the Trades Council and the Carpenters , covering the employees within
their respective units . The employees involved in the present case,
consisting ' mainly of the Employer's production workers, were cov-
ered by an agreement with Local 930 of the Operating Engineers,
which agreement was to extend for 1 year , effective January 31, 1945,
and contained a 60-day automatic renewal clause. No notice to
terminate was given at any time.
In October 1945 operations at this plant ceased as the result of
an order by the Government and the Employer mallltalned the plant
in a standby condition until it was ordered reactivated in September
1950. The personnel complement , which numbered about 313 em-
ployees While the plant was at peak operation , was reduced to an
average of 16 employees during the standby period.3
I The Louisville Building and Construction Trades Council , AFL, intervened on behalf
of itself and the following labor organizations on the basis of their cnrient contract with the
Employer : International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 930, AFL; International
Association of Journeymen Plumbers and Steam Fitters, Local 522, AFL; International
Brotherhood of Electrical Workeis, Local 369 , AFL; Inteinational Brotherhood of Boiler-
makers lion Ship Builders , Welders and Helpers , Local 40, AFL , International Union of
Operating Engineers, Local B-181, API, : Brotherhood of Painters, Decorators and Paper
Hangers Local 118, AFL, Inteinational Union of Coninion Laborers. Local 576, AFL, and
Falls City Carpenters District Council, The United Brotherhood of Carpenteis and Joiners
of America, AFL These labor organizations are collectively ieferied to heieiii as the
Intervenor.
2Car bide and Carbon Chemicals Coipoi ation , 56, NLRB 778, 57 NLRB 783.
3These 16 employees were pin idiily plant maintenance employees
272 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Shortly after the plant was ordered reactivated, the Employer began
negotiations with the labor organizations which formerly represented
its employees and a joint contract was executed, effective October 10,
1950, to November 1, 1952, covering the employees formerly repre-
sented by those unions 4 An amendment to this contract, designated
as a "stipulation," was executed on October 31, 1950, to revise the wage
schedule and, on August 21, 1951, the contract was again amended to
adjust the wage scale and to revise the temporary progression sched-
tiles, subject to approval by the Wage Stabilization Board.5 When
the existing contract was executed on October 10, 1950, there were only
13 employees G employed in the plant, and 43 employees were employed
at the time of the first amendment. Actual production began on Janu-
ary 1, 1951, with about 146 employees.
At the time of the second amendment to the contract on August 21,
1951, there were approximately 350 employees, not over 10 percent of
whom were employed in the plant prior to its shutdown. The number
of employees increased to approximately 450 at the time of the hearing,
which is the anticipated normal complement at the plant. The Em-
ployer received the Petitioner's representation claim on August 21,
1951, after the execution of the second amendment. The petitions
were also filed on that date.
As indicated above, the basic contract between the Employer and
the Intervenor, urged in bar, was executed on October 10, 1950, before
the actual beginning of production at the reopened plant, at a time
when the Employer had not yet recruited a complement of employees
with job functions representative of its present work force. Moreover,
most of the employees are new employees. A contract which becomes
effective under these circumstances cannot operate as a bar.' Although
a representative number of employees was employed at the time of the
second amendment of the contract on August 9-1, 1951, such amendment
did not constitute the execution of a new contract 8 and does not operate
to correct the infirmity of the basic contract. Accordingly, we find
that no bar exists to a determination of representatives at this time.
We find that a question affecting commerce exists concerning the
representation of employees of the Employer within the meaning of
Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4The pasties to this contract were the Employer and the previously recognized separate
representatives "acting collectively through" the Trades Council. The separate representa-
tives as well as the Tiades Council signed the contract.
6 The Carpenters , which was certified as representative of the carpenters , niillwiights,
and helpers, on April 30, 1951, and which was party to a separate contract embracing, by
reference , most of the teims of the October 10 , 1950, contract, as amended , became a
signatory of the August 21, 1951 , s tipulation
6 Classified as two janitors , a boilermaker , two electricians , four laborers, three pipe-
fitters , and a stores clerk.
° Cf. Decca Records , Inc (B) nnsivick Radio Corporation ), 93 NLRB 819 ; Sheets d
Mackey, 92 NLRB 179.
8 See hor n Mannfactui ing Company, Inc , 83 NLRB 1177.
BROWN WOOD PRESERVING COMPANY, INC. 273
4. Substantially in accord with the agreement of the parties, we find
that, the following employees of the Employer at the Louisville,.Ken-
tucky, plant, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collec-
tive bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act:
All boiler operators, water plant operators, firemen, coal handlers,
and all other employees engaged in the operation of the boiler room,
and all production employees such as chemical operators, chemical
operators (alcohol), laboratory analysts, laboratory samplers, stores
clerks, yard clerks, safety inspectors, and shipping clerks, excluding
plant maintenance employees, janitors, crane bulldozers and heavy
equipment operators, light truck drivers, office and professional em-
ployees, guards, and. supervisors as defined in'the Act.°
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this
volume.]
`This is essentially the unit in which the Operating Engineer's was previously certified
(Carbide and Carbon Chemicals Corporation, 57 NLRB 783).
BROWN WOOD PRESERVING COMPANY, INC. and J. A. LEDBETTER, J. A.
WALLACE, MARION COPRICH, C. J. WILSON, CECIL NALLS AND ARCHIE
WILSON, PETITIONERS and UNITED GAS, COKE AND CHEMICAL WORK-
ERS Or AMERICA, CIO. Case No. 10-R-.0?. February 21, 1952
Decision and Direction of Election
Upon a petition for decertification duly filed, a hearing was held
before Morgan C. Stanford, hearing officer. The hearing officer's
rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are
hereby affirmed.
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 [Chairman Herzog and Members Houston and Styles].
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 Petitioners, employees of the Employer, assert that the Union
is no longer the bargaining representative, within the meaning of
:Section 9 (a) of the Act, of the employees designated in the petition.
The Union, a labor organization, was certified on October 24, 1950,E
as the bargaining representative of the Employer's employees involved.
herein.
Case No. to-RC-862.
M NL ll No. 93.