Copolymer Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Sep 13, 1943

52 N.L.R.B. 578 (N.L.R.B. 1943)

In the Matter of COPOLYMER CORPORATION and AMERICAN FEDERATION
OF LABOR
Case No. R-5824.-Decided September 13, 1943
Mr. Harry H. Kahn, of Chicago, Ill., for the Company.
Messrs. J. K. Brignac and E. J. Bourg, of Baton Rouge, La.; for
the A. F. L.
Miss Viola James, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon petition duly filed by American Federation of Labor, herein
called the A. F. of L., alleging that a question affecting commerce
had arisen concerning the representation of employees of Copolymer
Corporation, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, herein called the Company, the
National Labor Relations Board provided for an appropriate hearing
upon due notice before Earl S. Bellman, Trial Examiner. Said hear-
ing was held at New Orleans, Louisiana, on August 12, 1943. The
Company and the A. F. of L. appeared, participated,, and were
afforded full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine
witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues. The Trial
Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial
error and are hereby affirmed. All parties were afforded opportunity
to file briefs with the Board.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Copolymer Corporation is a Louisiana corporation. Its stock is
owned by seven companies situated outside the State of Louisiana, all
of which are engaged directly or indirectly in the manufacture of
rubber and rubber products. The Company was organized for the
sole purpose of managing and operating a synthetic rubber plant
52 N. L . R. B., No. 97.
578
COPOLYMER CORPORATION 579
located at Baton Rouge, Louisiana. The plant and all of its equip-
ment are owned by Defense Plants Corporation, a subsidiary of
Reconstruction Finance Corporation, which in turn is a wholly owned
Government agency. All raw materials used in the plant and all
the finished products are owned by Rubber Reserve Company, also
a subsidiary of Reconstruction Finance Corporation. During the
first month of full production, July 1943, raw materials, consisting
principally of butadiene and styrene, exceeded $1,000,000 in value,
approximately 25 percent of which represents purchases from points
outside the State of Louisiana. Practically all of the finished product
is shipped to points outside the State of Louisiana. The Company
is a private corporation with duly authorized officers. It has its own
system of bookkeeping, and maintains a bank account in its corporate
name. It has exclusive control over the hiring and discharging of
personnel and their working conditions with the the exception of
supervisory employees whose employment is approved by Rubber Re-
serve Company. The Company pays its employees on its own checks,
keeps Social Security records for them, and carries workmen's com-
pensation insurance, although it is reimbursed for these items by
Rubber Reserve Company.
The Company contends that it is neither engaged in commerce nor
is an employer within the meaning of the National Labor Relations
Act. We find no merit in either contention.' Upon the facts stated
above, we find that the Company is engaged in commerce and is an
employer within the meaning of the Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
The American Federation of Labor is a labor organization admit-
ting to membership employees of the Company.'
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Company contends that there is no question concerning repre-
sentation because the A. F. of L. made no request for recognition prior
to filing its petition. In view of the Company's refusal at the hearing
to recognize the A. F. of L. as the exclusive bargaining representative,3
and in view of the substantial representation by the A. F. of L. of the
employees in the unit hereinafter found to be appropriate,`' we find
' See N. L. R. B. v. Fasnblatt, 306 U. S. 601. As to the contention that the Company is
not an employer within the Act, see N. L R. B. v Carroll, 120 P (2d) 457, enforcing
Matter of William H. Carroll, 29 N. L. R. B. 343; New Yor1, Mail if Transportation Co,
4 N L R B. 1066; Cosmopolitan Sitspping Company, Inc, 2 N. L R B 759; and Day it
Zimmermann, 39 N L R. B. 1313 and 41 N. L. R. B. 24
2 We find no merit in the Company's contention that the A. F of L. is not a labor organ-
ization within the meaning of the Act. Cf. Matter of Hamilton Realty Corporation, 10
N. L. R. B. 858.
3 See Matter of (lento Mfg Co, not Inc, 29 N L R B 236.
4 The Regional Director's statement, introduced into evidence at the hearing, reveals
that the A F of L submitted 58 cards, consisting of applications for membership in the
5-19875-4 4-vol 52-38
580 DECLSIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the repre-
sentation of employees of the Company, within the meaning of Section
9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The A. F. of L. seeks a unit of all maintenance and production em-
ployees exclusive of guards and office, clerical and supervisory em-
ployees. As office and clerical employees, the A. Y. of L. wishes to
exclude employees in the personnel department, typists, stenographers,
bookkeepers, paymasters, and clerks, including two clerks on the ship-
ping platform whose work is entirely clerical. The A. F. of L. also
wishes to exclude all the employees in the two laboratories, chemists,
draftsmen, and technically trained engineers,5 and the armed guards.
The Company takes the position that any attempt to-define an appro-
priate unit is premature since the processes and procedures in the plant
have not become stabilized. Although the plant has been in operation
only a short time, it is now in full production, and whether or not
there will be any substantial change in its operation is a matter of
conjecture. There appears to be no reason why an industrial type
of unit, such as that sought by the A. F. of L., would not be appropriate.
Accordingly, we find that all the maintenance and production em-
ployees of the Company at its Baton Rouge, Louisiana, plant, excluding
International Union of Operating Engineers , A. F. of L.; all the cards but 3, which were
undated, bore dates during June and July 1943; and all bore apparently genuine original
signatures . The A. F. of L. submitted 43 cards, consisting of applications for membership
in the A. F. of L., submitted on behalf of Hod Carriers and Common Laborers , Local 1177,
A. F. of L.; 21 bore dates during July 1943 and 22 were not dated ; all bore apparently
genuine original signatures . All the cards in the group of 58 and all those in the group
of 43 contained statements authorizing the A. F. of L. to represent the signers for the
purposes of collective bargaining . In addition to the cards, the Regional Director reported
that letters dated on about July 20, 1943, were submitted from officials of 5 different
A. F. of L. craft unions, each letter bearing the official seal of said union , setting forth
the names of 25 employees of the Company who are members of the respective unions ; 8
were listed as members of Steamfitters, Pipefitters and Helpers , Local Union 807; 2 were
listed as members of United Association of Journeymen , Plumbers and Gas Fitters, Local
Union 198; 4 as members of Bridge , Structural and Ornamental Iron Workers, Local Union
623; 6 as members of United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners , Local Union 1098;
and 5 as members of International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local Union 995.
The Regional Director further reported that it was impossible to determine if the per-
sons whose names appeared on the cards and in the letters were employees of the Company,
inasmuch as the Company refused to submit a list of its employees in the alleged appropriate
unit. At the hearing, counsel for the Company stated that there are approximately 400
employees on the pay roll
The Company objects strenuously to the Regional Director 's statement on the grounds
that the information contained therein is not correct , it does not offer proof of the genuine-
ness of the signatures , and it does not show that the persons whose signatures appear on the
cards and in the letters are'employees of the Company . We have repeatedly held that such
contentions are without merit. See Matter of Amos-Thompson Corporation , 49 N. L. R. B.
423; Atlas ' Powder Company, 43 N. L. It. B. 757 ; and Interlake Iron Corporation, 38
N. L. It. B. 139.
5 Technically trained engineers are, for the most part , either supervisory employees or
employed in the laboratories . As such, they are distinguished from "operating engineers"
whom the A. F. of L. would include in its unit.
COPOLYMER CORPORATION 581
office and clerical employees wherever found who devote the major
portion of their time to clerical work, laboratory employees, chemists,
draftsmen, technically trained engineers, armed guards, and all super-
visory employees with authority to hire, promote, discharge, discipline
or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees , or effectively
recommend such action , constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes
of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the
Act.
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
The A. F. of L. desires that employees in the appropriate unit who
were employed at the date of the filing of the petition shall be eligible
to vote in the election herein directed . We see no reason for departing
from,our customary, practice and shall accordingly direct that the,ques-
tion concerning representation which has arisen be resolved by an
election by secret ballot among the employees in the appropriate unit
who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding
the date of the Direction of Election herein, subject to the limitations
and additions set forth in the Direction.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National Labor
Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations
Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor Rela-
1 ions Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representatives
for the purposes of collective bargaining with Copolymer Corporation,
Baton Rouge,Louisiana, 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 Fifteenth Region, acting in this matter as agent for
the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Article III, Sec-
tions 10 and 11 , of said Rules and Regulations , 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 any who have
since quit or -been . . discharged for cause , to determine whether or not
they desire to be represented by American Federation of Labor, for the
purposes of collective bargaining.
CHAIRMAN MILLIS took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Direction of Election.