American Cyanamid Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsMay 5, 1964

146 N.L.R.B. 1415 (N.L.R.B. 1964)

AMERICAN CYANAMID COMPANY 1415 American Cyanamid Company 1 and Sheet Metal Workers Inter- national Association , AFL-CIO, Petitioner . Case Alo. 1-RC- 506. May 5, 1964 DECISION AND ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION OF CERTIFICATION On December 31, 1957, the Acting Regional Director for the First Region issued a Certification of Representatives in the above-entitled proceeding, in which the Petitioner was certified as the bargaining representative for a unit of the Employer's production and mainte- nance employees, including truckdrivers and laboratory employees, at its plant located on Dale Street, Sanford, Maine. Thereafter, on September 6, 1963, the Petitioner and its Local 515 filed a motion to amend and clarify the certification so as to include in the bargaining unit the production and maintenance employees at the Employer's new facility located in Sanford Industrial Estates, Sanford, Maine, some 3 miles from the main plant. In support of its motion, the Petitioner contends that the new plant, hereinafter referred to as Industrial Park plant, is an accretion to the existing unit because there are approxi- mately 225 employees in the bargaining unit at the main plant and at present only about 35 at Industrial Park; that most of the supervisors and some of the production workers at Industrial Park were trans- ferred from the Dale Street plant; that the manager of manufactur- ing for the building products division, Harry Rohde, is in charge of both plants; that Industrial Relations Manager William May and his assistant, Earl Theriault, are in charge of personnel in both plants; and that the same office, located at Dale Street, prepares both payrolls. On September 20, 1963, the Employer filed a motion to dismiss the Petitioner's motion alleging, inter alia, that: its two Sanford plants are geographically separated; there has been no employee interchange between the two plants; the manufacturing processes utilized at the two plants are entirely different; there is separate and distinct supervi- sion at Industrial Park; the wages, working conditions, and fringe benefits are also different; and the Industrial Park employees would be denied the right to self-determination if the new plant was found to be an accretion to the present unit. On October 24, 1963, the Board referred the matter to the Regional Director for the First Region for the purpose of conducting a hearing on the issues raised by the parties. Ahearing was held on December 5 and 6, 1963, before Hearing Officer George F. McInerney. The Hearing Officer's rulings are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. 1 The name of the Employer , formerly "Wasco Chemical Co., Inc.," appears as amended by Board Order dated October 24, 1903. 146 NLRB No. 164. 1416 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS 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 [Chairman McCulloch and Members Fanning and Jenkins]. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds : The record shows that the American Cyanamid Company is a Maine corporation engaged in the manufacture of cherriicals and allied prod- ucts at its plants in Sanford, Maine, and at other plants throughout the United States. On or about May 1, 1961, it purchased the assets of the Wasco Chemical Company and continued to operate the plant. The 1-year contract which was due to expire on March 1, 1964, between Local 515, organized and chartered by the International following its certification, and American Cyanamid Company covered only the Em- ployer's plant located at No. 1 Dale Street, Sanford, Maine. The prior contract, which had been entered into on August 8, 1961-after the purchase of the Wasco plant-and' which expired on March 1, 1963, had contained a clause specifically making the contract ap- plicable to employees at all of Employer's plants in Sanford, Maine, operated by it during the term of that agreement. The clause was eliminated at the Employer's insistence, after it informed the Union that it would not give in even if the Union struck. The Union seri- ously considered striking over the issue but did no do so. This was be-, fore the Employer began operations at its Industrial Park facility. . The Employer's Building Products Division has 3 plant locations, namely, Cambridge, Massachusetts, where there are about 12 unrepre- sented production and maintenance employees; and the aforemen- tioned Dale Street and Industrial Park facilities in Sanford, Maine. Each plant has its own plant manager who reports directly to the head of. the division and also to the functional managers of manufacturing and labor relations. However, for the present, Rohde is also serving as acting plant manager at Industrial Park. At the Dale Street plant, approximately 75 percent of the production is devoted to skylights known by the trade name "Skydomes." Fifteen percent of the total production at that plant is acrylic decorative .sheet and the remaining, 10 percent of its productive capacity is devoted to the manufacture.-.Of acrylic flat sheet. The process used at the Dale Street plant involves the removal of an inhibitor from the basic product known as monomer which is then combined with various additives and a mixture pre- pared. Then follows heating of the material in ovens, a process called "polymerization." The sheeting which results is called "Acrylite." At the new Industrial Park plant, which cconunenced operations on or about August 1, 1963, the Employer manufactures acrylic sheet not distinguishable to the naked eye from the sheeting produced.at Dale Street. However, the acrylic sheet at that plant is subjected to a formulation and cycle treatment in the polymerization process that is entirely different and produces a product with certain superior - AMERICAN CYANAMID COMPANY 1417 qualities. The Employer manufactures this product under a licensing agreement with an English firm. The Employer is bound to complete confidence with respect to the secret process and chemical formulas. In this connection it should be noted that the licensing agreement restricts the sale of material made at this plant to the United States, whereas Dale Street products may be sold anywhere in the world. In addition, the Employer is required to pay a royalty for every pound or square foot of its product at Industrial Park. As briefly mentioned above, there is completely separate and distinct 'immediate supervision at the two plants. The only interchange which has taken place.involved the use of four technicians and some main- tenance employees from the Dale Street plant to help set up the machinery and to start up the processes at the new plant. With re- spect to transfers, the record shows that certain supervisory personnel formerly employed at the Dale Street plant are now employed at In- dustrial Park. Also, four production and. maintenance employees formerly employedÂ°at the Dale Street plant are now working at Indus- trial Park. However, the record supports the Employer's claim that the four former Dale Street plant employees were not transferred at the behest of the Employer, but applied for jobs at Industrial Park, and were hired solely because they met the hiring standards at that plant. These employees had either been laid off at Dale Street, or had voluntarily left employment at that plant. In only one instance was there no apparent break in employment between jobs in the two plants. The record shows some continuing use by the Industrial Park plant of the services of the machine, electrical, sheetinetal, and car- penter shops at Dale Street, along with some subcontracting of work requiring similar'skills to outside firms. Although hiring is done on a direct basis at Dale Street where all applicants are interviewed but given no tests by the Employer, the interviewing and hiring for Industrial Park has always been done through the Maine Employment Security Commission. A company representative assisted the Commission in the initial screening, which was then followed by a battery of-tests given to the promising appli- cants. The same procedure is still followed. Whereas all the new employees at Industrial Park are required to be high school graduates, or the equivalent, there is generally no such requirement at Dale Street. Although payrolls for both plants are made up or prepared in the accounting department at the Dale Street location and Friday is the regular payday for both plants, the two payrolls and accounting func- tions are considered by. the' Employer to be separate and distinct. Likewise the wage scales are different with four labor grades at. Dale Street ranging from $1.32 to $2.07 an hour, and eight labor grades at Industrial Park ranging from $1.42 to $2.37 an hour. Job classifica- 0 1418 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL -LABOR- RELATIONS BOARD tions also differ somewhat at the two plants. Each plant keeps sep- arate cost, personnel; and production records. Each plant has.a differ- ent post office box as well gas a different telephone number since there is no central. switchboard. The two plants also have different vacation programs and there is a slight difference in their holidays. At Dale Street, a person must be employed 30 days to qualify for holiday pay, but there is no length of service required at Industrial Park. The layoff procedure is ap- plied plantwide at Dale Street, whereas its application at Industrial Park is strictly on a departmental basis. At Dale Street, an employee promoted from the bargaining unit to a supervisory position is not allowed to continue his seniority, but in a similar situation at Indus- trial Park he would continue to accumulate seniority. The insurance programs, too, are different at each of the plants. Both plants do enjoy the same. pension program, but the layoff procedures vary somewhat. From all of the foregoing, it appears that there is little or no inter- dependence between the two plants in Sanford. The process used at Industrial Park is novel and completely different from that utilized. at Dale Street. The equipment and physical layout at each plant are, different. Job classifications vary somewhat, and wages and fringe benefits for employees are also different. Likewise, the two plants are serviced by different personnel arrangements with hiring done at In- dustrial Park through the assistance. of a State agency. Employees. at each plant are under separate immediate supervision, and there has not been any employee interchange. There is no contractual provision calling for the inclusion of the employees in the Industrial Park plant in the existing bargaining unit. Indeed, bargaining history tends to support a conclusion that the price of agreement on the latest contract for the existing unit was the elimination of all language which would, support the Union's position that the new plant is merely an accretion to the contract unit.- On the basis of the foregoing, we conclude that the employees at Industrial Park are not an accretion to the existing unit at Dale Street; that they are a clearly identifiable group with a separate community of interests from the employees in the Dale Street plant; and that they constitute a separate appropriate unit.' Accord- ingly, we shall deny the Petitioner's motion to amend and clarify- certification. [The Board denied the motion.] 2 See Cities Service Oil Company , 145 NLRB 467 , Chrysler Corporation (Ho-Par Building), 134 NLRB 454 ; Buy Low Supermarket , Inc., 131 NLRB 23. Cf . The Boeing Company, 144 NLRB 382.