Crossett Chemical Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Oct 28, 1946

71 N.L.R.B. 433 (N.L.R.B. 1946)

In the Matter Of CROSSETT CHEMICAL COMPANY, EMPLOYER and INTER-
NATIONAL WOODWORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO, PETITIONER
Case No. 1.5-R-1768.-Decided October 28, 1946
Messrs. Paul Sullins, R. P. Meredith, E. M Godat, and George Al-
corn, all of Crossett, Ark., for the Employer.
Mr. Walter H. Harris, of Little Rock, Ark., and Mr. W. D. Moore,
of El Dorado, Ark., for the Petitioner.
dlr. Arvile Inge, of Houston, Tex., for the Intervenor.
Miss Irene Shriber, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at Crossett,
Arkansas , on August 29, 1946, before C. Paul Barker , hearing officer.
The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from pre-
judicial 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 TILE EMPLOYER
Crossett Chemical Company, a Delaware corporation with its prin-
cipal office and place of business in Crossett, Arkansas, is engaged
in the manufacture of wood chemical products. The annual value of
the raw materials and supplies used by the Employer is in excess of
$200,000, of which approximately 1 percent is received from points
outside the State of Arkansas. The annual value of the Employer's
finished products exceeds $200,000, of which approximately 90 per-
cent is shipped to purchasers located outside the State.
The Employer admits and We find that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
71 N L. 11 B, No. 07.
433
434 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress
of Industrial Organizations, 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
On June 22, 1946, the Petitioner requested the Employer to recog-
nize it as the collective bargaining representative of its employees.
This request was denied. On June 27, 1946, the Petitioner filed its
petition with the Board.'
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
We find, in accordance with a stipulation of the parties, that all
employees of the Employer, excluding superintendents, assistant super-
intendents, foremen, department heads, shipping clerks, timekeepers,
storekeepers, chemists, non-operative testers and meter men, master
mechanics, office employees, employees engaged in confidential capac-
ities, and all other supervisory employees with authority to hire, pro-
mote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of
employees, or effectively recommend such action, constitute a unit ap-
propriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the mean-
ing of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
We shall direct that the question concerning representation which
has arisen be resolved by an election by secret ballot, subject to the
limitations and additions set forth in the Direction.
The parties disagree as to the right of the probationary employees to
vote in the election. The Petitioner contends that probationary em-
ployees should be permitted to vote; the Employer and the Intervenor
insist that they should not be. Newly hired employees are assigned a
probationary status during the first 3 months of their employment.
' On August 2, 1945, the Employer and the A. F . of L. executed a collective bargaining
agreement for a 1-year period. The contract did not contain a renewal clause but on its
expiration , the contracting parties agreed in writing to extend its provisions for an in-
definite period pending the Board 's determination of the question of representation. None
of the parties contends that the 1945 contract or its supplement is a bar.
CROSSETT CHEMICAL COMPANY 435
Thereafter they become regular employees. All probationary em-
ployees are hired with the expectation that they will become regular
employees and normally a high percentage of them do achieve that
status. During their trial period, these employees receive the same
rate of pay as their regular colleagues and enjoy the same privileges,
including group insurance. Furthermore, the probationary period of
these employees is included in computing seniority and vacation rights.
Because these workers have a reasonable expectation of becoming
regular employees and because the conditions under which they work
are similar to those of their fellow workers, we find that they have a
sufficient interest in the present election to entitle them to a voice in
the choice of a bargaining representative. We find, therefore, that
probationary employees are eligible to vote in the election.2
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining with Crossett Chemical Company, Cros-
sett, Arkansas, 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 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 employees who have since quit or been discharged for
cause and have not been rehired or reinstated prior to the date of the
election, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented by
International Woodworkers of America, C. I. 0., or by International
Chemical Workers Union, A. F. L., for the purposes of collective
bargaining, or by neither.
2Matter of Midland National Bank of Minneapolis , 68 N. L. R. B. 580; Matter of Otto
Jung, et al., 63 N. L. R. B. 1241.