W. R. Grace & Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 6, 1958

120 N.L.R.B. 1338 (N.L.R.B. 1958)

1338 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
grievances , labor disputes , wages, rates of pay , hours of employment , and conditions
of employment and to completely disestablish it as such representative.
As previously found , Respondent 's conduct in executing the May 1 , 1956, recog
nition agreement and thereafter the 1956 contract constituted unlawful assistance to
Local 530. This contract has been a means whereby Respondent has utilized the
unlawfully dominated and supported Local 530 to frustrate self-organization and
to defeat genuine collective bargaining by the employees . The Trial Examiner,
therefore , recommends that Respondent cease and desist from giving effect to said
contract or to any renewal , extension , modification , or supplement thereof. Nothing
herein shall be taken to require Respondent to vary the wages , hours,, seniority, and
other substantive features of its relations with the employees , themselves , which
Respondent has established in performance of the said contract or any revision,
extension , renewal , or modification thereof.
The unfair labor practices found to have been engaged in by Respondent are
of such a character and scope that in order to insure the employees here involved
their full rights guaranteed them by the Act it will be recommended that Respondent
cease and desist from in any manner interfering with, restraining , and coercing his
employees in their right to self-organization.
Upon the basis of .the foregoing findings of fact, and upon the entire record in
the case, the Trial Examiner makes the following:
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. Miscellaneous Woodworkers Local No. 530, United Brotherhood of Carpenters
and Joiners of America, AFL-CIO, and Los Angeles County District Council of
Carpenters are labor organizations within the meaning of Section 2 (5) of the Act.
2. By dominating and interfering with the administration of Local 530 and by
contributing support to it, Respondent has engaged in and is engaging in unfair
labor practices within the meaning of Section 8 ( a) (2) of the Act.
3. By entering into and giving effect to the 1956 contract with Local 530 and
the Council, which contract was executed in violation of the Act, Respondent has
engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section
8 (a) (1) of the Act.
4. By interfering with , restraining , and coercing its employees in the exercise of
rights guaranteed by Section 7 of the Act, Respondent has engaged in and is
engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8 (a) (1) of the
Act.
5. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair labor practices affecting com-
merce within the meaning of Section 2 (6) and ( 7) of the Act.
[Recommendations omitted from publication.]
Grace Chemical Company, Division of W. R. Grace & Co.' and
International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Ship Build-
ers, Blacksmiths, Forgers and Helpers, AFL-CIO, and Interna-
tional Chemical Workers Union , AFL-CIO, Petitioners. Cases
Nos. 33-RC-1099 and 32-RC-1100. June 6, 1958
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
Upon separate petitions duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the Na-
tional Labor Relations Act, a consolidated hearing was held before
John E. Cienki, 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 these cases to a three-
member panel [Chairman Leedom and Members Bean and Fanning].
I The Employer 's name appears as corrected at the hearing.
120 NLRB No. 166.
GRACE CHEMICAL COMPANY 1339
Upon the entire record in these cases, the Board fords :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the Act.
2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent certain em-
ployees of the Employer.
3. Questions affecting commerce exist 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.
4. The Petitioner in Case No. 32-.RC-1099, referred to herein as
the Boilermakers, seeks a unit of maintenance employees. The Peti
tioner in'Case No. 32-RC-1100, referred to herein as the Chemical
Workers, seeks a unit of production and maintenance employees. The
Employer maintains that only a production and maintenance unit is
appropriate.2 -There is no history of collective bargaining at
this plant.'
The Employer is engaged, at the plant here involved, in producing
anhydrous ammonia and urea through a complex chemical operation
requiring extremes in temperature and pressure, and almost perfect
vacuums. The gases, chemicals, and other materials used in this proc-
ess are enclosed in pressure valves, reactors, autoclaves, and other
types of pipes and vessels, and are not seen or handled by employees,,
unless there is a breakdown, until the end of the operation, when urea,
in dry forms is produced and bagged. This is a continuous flow opera-
tion, running'24 hours a day, 365 days a year, except when repairs or
adjustments are necessary.
There are five departments in the plant: (1) industrial relations;
(2) technological; (3) purchasing and storage; (4) chemical control
and research; and (5) production. The head of each department re-
ports to the plant manager. The production department, the only
one here -involved, is divided into three groups: (1) ammonia pro-
duction; (2) urea production; 4 and (3) maintenance. There are_
about 65 employees in the maintenance group, and about 165 in the:
entire production department.- The manager of the production de-,
partment determines departmental wage rates and personnel policies,
which are substantially the same for all three groups. Each of the
three groups has separate immediate supervision.' The supervisory
2 In its brief and in a motion to correct record filed after the hearing, the Employer-
sought to amend the record in certain respects . The Chemical Workers joined the
Employer in this motion, and filed a brief in support thereof. The Boilermakers filed an
opposition to the_ motion. In the absence of agreement by the parties , the requests to,
amend the record are denied. The _ proposed changes, in any event, would not alter our
conclusions herein.
8 The plant in question , generally referred to as the Memphis plant, is located in,
Woodstock, Tennessee , a suburb of Memphis.
The boilerhouse employees are part of the urea production group, are under the same
supervision, and receive the same wage rates. New employees sometimes begin in the
boilerhouse and later transfer to the urea group.
5 At the time of the hearing, there was no urea group head , and the department manager
was functioning as head -of that- group in addition to his other duties.
1340 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
hierarchy over the maintenance group consists of a superintendent,
an assistant superintendent, and, under him, six maintenance super-
visors. Of the latter, 1 is a master mechanic, 1 is assigned primarily to
the ammonia group, and 1 is assigned primarily to the urea group.
The maintenance supervisors supervise teams of about 5 or 6 mechanics.
On some shifts, and on weekends and holidays, no maintenance super-
visors are at the plant, the mechanics coming under the supervision of
the operations manager at such times.
The operators in the ammonia and urea production groups spend
about 35 percent of their time in the control room, where they control,
adjust, and record pressures and temperatures, and about 65 percent
in the operating area, testing by sight, touch, and smell for leaks or
malfunctioning of any, part of the process. When an operator ob-
serves a relatively minor mechanical defect, he may adjust it himself
or report it to his supervisor. There are tool boards in the operating
areas for use of the operators, and, in addition, the operators carry
a few small tools. They may also borrow some tools from the mainte-
nance toolroom. In the course of their work, the operators perform
some maintenance repair functions and also, at times, sweep their
areas or perform other janitorial tasks. During a partial or complete
shutdown, operators may be assigned to work under maintenance
supervision. The more difficult and complex maintenance work, how-
ever, is performed by the maintenance mechanics.'
All the employees in the maintenance group are classified as main-
tenance mechanics rather than by craft designations. Familiarity
with the unique operation of this plant, rather than skill in particular
crafts, is required in the maintenance work. The Employer, in hiring
maintenance employees, does not require that they be craftsmen. They
do not serve an apprenticeship or receive craft training on the job,
but it takes about 2 years to progress from a helper to a maintenance
mechanic classification. All the mechanics are required to perform
more than one kind of maintenance work, and exercise their primary
skills only about 15 percent of their time. They carry out about 90
percent of their maintenance work in the operating areas. While
there, the mechanics, like the operators, are on the alert for leaks as
the production process is extremely sensitive and some of the gases are
highly explosive, flammatory, or toxic. On occasion, the mechanics
make some minor repairs in an operating area under operating
supervision.
The mechanics, however, do not watch the control board. Their
maintenance duties, many of which are never performed by the op-
erators, are carried out almost entirely under maintenance supervision.
In this group are major repairs, hooking up motors, running new
instruments, pipe fitting, and machinist work. The maintenance tool-
Some major maintenance jobs are contracted out by the Employer.
GRACE CHEMICAL COMPANY 1341
room, • contains large equipment such as lathes, hydraulic presses,
milling machine,, sanding equipment, and handling crane, which are
used by the maintenance mechanics but not by the operators. Al-
though there is testimony by the Employer ' that transfers are
"allowed" between operators and mechanics, the record does not reveal
the frequency with which such transfers, if any, have been made.
It is manifest that the maintenance work performed by the main-
tenance mechanics constitutes their normal, routine job assignments,
and that they spend most of their working time in the performance
of such maintenance work under separate maintenance supervision.
We are therefore convinced that these employees are a homogeneous
group possessing mutual employment interests which are sufficiently
separate and distinct from those of the production employees to permit
their establishment in a separate unit where, as here, there is no col-
lective-bargaining history on a broader basis.' It is true, as the Em-,
ployer and the Chemical Workers contend, that there is some
overlapping in the duties of the maintenance and production groups,
and that they work in close cooperation and proximity. The homo-
geneity of the -maintenance employees is not impaired, however, by
the facts that they work largely in production areas and on production
machinery;," work at times in close coordination with operators; 9
perform some. production tasks ; 1° have the same wage scales and
fringe benefits as the operators; 11 are not craftsmen but exercise
various maintenance skills;12 or that transfers may occur between
production and maintenance employees; 11 or that combined pro-
duction and maintenance units may have been established at other
plants of. the Employer, 14 or at other plants in the industry: 5
We find, therefore, that the maintenance employees may constitute
a separate appropriate unit if they so desire.16 It is also clear, and
we find, that the production and maintenance unit requested by the
Chemical Workers,may be appropriate. And, finally, we find that if
the maintenance employees desire separate representation, as deter-
7 Dierks Paper Company , 120 NLRB 290; Chrysler Corporation, 119 NLRB 1312
Olin Mathieson Chemical Corporation, 117 NLRB 1441; Magma Copper Company, 115
NLRB 1; East Texas Pulp & Paper Company, 113 NLRB 539; American Can Company,
112 NLRB 509; E. I. DuPont de Nemours & Company, 111 NLRB 649.
$ Dierks Paper Company , supra; cf. North American Aviation, Inc., 115 NLRB 1090,
1094.
0 E. 1. Du Pont de Nemour8 and Company, 117 NLRB 1048; Monsanto Chemical Com-
pany, 102 NLRB 273.
10 East Texas Pulp & Paper Company, supra, at p. 543.
"Magma Copper Company , supra, at p. 3; National Gypsum Company, supra.
10 Olin Mathieson Chemical Corporation, supra, at p. 1443; Magma Copper Company,
Supra.
13 National Gypsum Company, supra, at p. 1008.
14 National Gypsum Company, supra.
15 Heublein, Inc., 119 NLRB 1337.
1s Accordingly , we hereby deny the motion contained in the Employer 's brief that the
Boilermakers ' petition be dismissed with prejudice on the ground that the maintenance
unit is inappropriate. .
1342 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR 'RELATIONS BOARD
mined in the elections directed herein, a unit of production employees
may also be appropriate.'' Accordingly, we shall make no final unit
determinations at this time, but shall direct that the questions concern-
ing representation be resolved by separate elections among the follow-
ing groups of employees at the Employer's Memphis; Tennessee, plant :
(a) All employees in the maintenance group, including mainte-
nance mechanics A and B, helpers, and laborers," but excluding all
production employees, office clerical employees, professional em-
ployees, watchmen and guards, the master mechanic, and all other
supervisors as defined in the Act.
"(b) All employees in the ammonia and urea production groups,
including chief operators,19 operators A, B, and C, and laborers, but
excluding all employees in the maintenance group, office clerical em=
ployees, professional and technical employees, watchmen and guards,
and all supervisors, as defined in the Act. -
If 'a majority of the employees in the maintenance voting group
'select the Boilermakers as their representative, they will -be taken to
have indicated their'desire'to constitute a separate bargaining unit,
and the Regional Director conducting the election is instructed to
issue a certification of representatives to the Boilermakers for such
unit,'which the Board, under these circumstances, finds to be appro-
priate for the purposes of collective bargaining., And'in that event,
should a majority of the employees in the production voting group
select the Chemical Workers as their representative, the Regional
Director is instructed to issue a'-certification of representatives to the
Chemical: Workers 'fora unit- of production - employees, `which the
Board, under "these circumstances, finds to be appropriate=for the pur-,
poses of collective bargaining.- On the other hand, if' a majority in
the maintenance voting group do ' not select 'the Boilermakers, the
ballots of the employees in the maintenance group will be pooled with
those of the employees in the, production group 20 If the Chemical
Workers achieves a majority of the vote's in the pooled group,- the
Regional Director is instructed to, issue a certification of representa-
tives to that labor organization for a'unit of production and mainte-
nance employees, :which the Board, in such circumstances, finds to be
an appropriate' unit for the purposes of collective bargaining.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.] .
17 Although the Chemical Workers, took - the position that , only a combined production
and maintenance unit , is appropriate , it expressed in its briefa desire to participate in any
election or elections directed by the Board.
18 Laborers are assigned to both the production and the,maintenance groups.
10 The parties agreed and we find that chief operators are not supervisors within the
meaning of the Act.
' '20 If the ballots are pblled ,^ they are to be, tallied , in the following manner , votes for
the union seeking a separate unit of, maintenance employees shall be counted as valid votes,
but neither for nor against the union seeking to represent the more comprehensive i.nit,;
all other votes are to be accorded their face value , whether for representation by the union
seeking the comprehensive group or for no union.