Kennecott Copper Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsJul 24, 1953

106 N.L.R.B. 390 (N.L.R.B. 1953)

39 0 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD On the basis of the entire record in this case, including the nature of the Employer's operations , the lack of separate supervision , and the absence of any recognized craft status on the part of the blockers, we are of the opinion that the interests of these employees are not sufficiently severable and distinct from those of the other production employees to warrant establishing them in a separate unit. S Accordingly, we shall dismiss the petition. [The Board dismissed the petition.] 5 The Board has consistently refused to find appropriate for collective -bargaining purposes a unit composed of a portion of production employees who are not craftsmen. See Mutual Rough Hat Company, supra. KENNECOTT COPPER CORPORATION, RAY MINES DIVI- SION and INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS, Petitioner KENNECOTT COPPER CORPORATION, RAY MINES DIVI- SION and BROTHERHOOD OF LOCOMOTIVE FIREMEN & ENGINEMEN , Petitioner KENNECOTT COPPER CORPORATION, RAY MINES DIVI- SION and INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF BOILER- MAKERS, IRON SHIP BUILDERS, BLACKSMITHS, FORGERS AND HELPERS, LODGE No. 627, Petitioner. Cases Nos. 21-RC-3014, 21-RC-3015, 21-RC-3025,21-RC-3026,21-RC- 3027, 21-RC-3030, 21-RC-3031, 21-RC-3032, 21-RC-3033, 21-RC-3052, 21-RC-3059, and 21-RC-3067. July 24, 1953 DECISION, ORDER, AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS Upon separate petitions duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, a consolidated hearing was held before Norman H. Greer, 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 National Labor Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with these cases to a three-member panel [Mem- bers Houston, Murdock, and Styles]. Upon the entire record of these cases, the Board finds: 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the mean- ing of the Act. 2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent certain employees of the Employer. 3. Questions affecting commerce exist concerning the repre- sentation of certain employees of the Employer within the mean- ing of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. 106 NLRB No. 72. KENNECOTT COPPER CORPORATION 391 4. The various Petitioners herein seek to sever from the existing production and maintenance unit a number of alleged craft units of employees at the Employer's Ray, Arizona, copper mining operations. International Union of Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers, the incumbent certified bargaining agent of these employees, and its Local 915, herein jointly called the Smelter Workers, generally oppose the establishment of the separate units sought. The Employer takes no position except that it urges that an appropriate unit be found encom- passing all machinists in the plant. In the Employer's administrative organization, the mines divi- sion , under a superintendent of mines, is divided into the under- ground department, or pit, under a general pit foreman, and the mechanical department, under an assistant mechanical superin- tendent. The mechanical department is in turn subdivided into six sections : machine shop, boiler and blacksmith shop, rip track, train service, truck repair, and crushing plant repair operation. Bargaining History In a previous proceeding in January 1952,1 the Board directed elections in 5 voting groups of the employees at the Employer's Ray mines division. Inthatcase,the Boardfound, in the absence of any serious dispute as to the composition or the craft character of the separate units sought, that the employees in 4 of these groups might constitute separate craft units, de- pending in part upon the results of the separate elections therein directed. The voting groups established consisted generally of (1) electricians; (2) operating engineers; (3) boiler- makers and blacksmiths; (4) all employees in the mechanical department; and (5) all remaining production and maintenance employees . As a result of the elections , separate respective units were found appropriate and certified of the employees in voting groups (1) and (2); these employees are not involved in the instant proceeding. However, the employees in voting groups (3), (4), and (5) selected the Smelter Workers, which was thereafter certified by the Board as the exclusive repre- sentative of all such employees in a single unit appropriate for purposes of collective bargaining. In a further proceeding in March 1952, the Board directed a severance election, 2 result- ing in the establishment of a unit generally consisting of truckdrivers and truck servicemen; these employees are not directly involved herein. The Units Sought In Case No. 21-RC-3026, International Association of Ma- chinists, herein called the IAM, petitioned for a separate unit 1 Kennecott Copper Corporation, Ray Mines Division, 97 NLRB No. 166 (not reported in printed volumes of Board decisions). - 2 Kennecott Copper Corporation, Ray Division, 98 NLRB 966. 392 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD of all welders employed at the plant. In Case No . 21-RC-3067, International Brotherhood of Boilermakers , Iron Ship Builders Blacksmiths , Forgers and Helpers , Lodge No. 627, herein called the Boilermakers , seeks to include all welders in a unit primarily consisting of boilermakers and blacksmiths. There are 11 welders employed throughout the plant , who are skilled in arc and acetylene welding. For employment at the plant they are required by the Employer to have a minimum of 3 years' experience in the trade . However , they are not under separate supervision but are permanently assigned to various sections in the mechanical department , as will be specifically described below. Under these circumstances , we find in con- formity with Board policy that the welders may not constitute a separate appropriate unit but are individually to be included in units of the particular craft groups with which they are regularly assigned to work. ' We reject , therefore , the Boiler- makers contention that all the welders be included in its requested unit ( considered immediately below ), and likewise deny the IAM ' s request for severance of this separate group. In Case No . 21-RC - 3067, the Boilermakers in its petition, as amended at the hearing, seeks a unit of all boilermakers, blacksmiths , hammer drivers , welders , the rip-track crew, the underground blacksmith , pit-bit dresser , and pit-bit helper, and all handymen , helpers , and repairmen employed in conjunc- tion with the above . Separate petitions were also filed by the IAM, in Case No. 21-RC-3032 , for a separate unit of all em- ployees in the boiler and blacksmith shop, excluding welders, and in Case No. 21-RC - 3030 for a separate unit of the rip- track crew. Employed in the boiler and blacksmith shop, under the supervision of a foreman , are ZO employees , consisting of a blacksmith , a hammerman, and 4 welders, and the remainder, boilermakers , boilermaker helpers , and a layerout . The under- ground blacksmith , pit-bit dresser , and pit-bit helper are nominally under the .authority of the mechanical department, but regularly work in the underground department under pit supervision , apart from the boiler and blacksmith shop. The pit-bit dressing operation involves the repair of certain heavy bits used in the pit, and requires skills , including the use of furnaces and an upsetting machine , which are substantially similar to those performed by blacksmiths in the boiler and blacksmith shop . We therefore find that the unit of employees in the boiler and blacksmith shop requested in the IAM's petition is inappropriate , for the reason, inter alia, that the skills of the employees sought are duplicated elsewhere in the plant. 4 The rip-track crew, for whom , as already noted, the IAM filed a separate petition in Case No . 21-RC-3030 , consists of 10 employees in the classifications of car inspector , car re- pairman, car repair helper, and lead airbrakeman . In addition 'See, e. g., Kenworth Motor Truck Corporation , 98 NLRB 277. 4See Westinghouse Electric Corporation , 101 NLRB 441. KENNECOTT COPPER CORPORATION 393 1 welder is regularly assigned to work with this crew. These emplo} -ees are separately located and supervised . They main- tain and repair the 60-ton ore cars used on the Employer's surface railroad . The record shows that car repairman is a 4-year apprenticeable trade in the State of Arizona , and that the Employer considers the skills of this trade comparable in degree to those of the welders . The Boilermakers seeks their inclusion in a unit together with the boilermakers on the ground that their work involves the handling of boiler plate. We reject this position . The evidence establishes that the heavy metal plate used on the ore railroad cars is rolled and fabri- cated exclusively in the boiler shop, and not by the rip-track crew, which merely functions to install the plate on the ore cars . In view of the foregoing evidence , we believe that the rip-track employees are a sufficiently identifiable craft group, with skills substantially unduplicated elsewhere in the plant, to constitute a separate appropriate unit, if they so choose in the election hereafter directed. We therefore find the specific unit requested in the amended Boilermakers ' petition to be inappropriate . However, as it appears in the record that the Employer ' s boilermakers per- form the traditional skills of their trade , we find that boiler- makers , boilermaker helpers , layerout , and the welders regu- larly assigned to the boiler shops may constitute a separate craft unit. Likewise , on the facts before us , we are of the opinion that a separate craft unit embracing all employees in the plant who perform blacksmith functions , ie., the blacksmith, hammerman, underground blacksmith , pit-bit dresser, and pit-bit helper , may be appropriate for bargaining purposes.6 In Case No . 21-RC-3059 , Brotherhood of Locomotive Fire- man and Enginemen , herein called the Brotherhood, seeks a separate unit of all employees engaged in railroad locomotive train service , which specifically encompasses locomotive en- gineers, brakemen, conductor -dispatcher , and conductor. The IAM, in Case No. 21-RC-3033 , petitioned for a unit of all train- crew employees , but at the hearing moved to withdraw its petition and its participation in the election , if the unit sought by the Brotherhood is found appropriate , and the train crew is not, for example , combined inaunitwith the rip-track crew. The IAM's motion is hereby granted. The Employer operates a surface -railroad system linking with the Southern Pacific Railroad. The system has 6 miles of track, 169 ore cars, and 2 diesel locomotives. It was testified that in an 8-hour shift, 4 train loads of ore are hauled from the mine to a railroad junction several miles away, and empty cars are returned to the mine. Each train load consists of about 38 ore cars. An emergency train crew is recruited by the Employer from among the rip -track employees about twice a month for 30 5 Kennecott Copper Corporation, et al. (Santa Rita and Hurley Divisions), 40 NLRB 986. 6See Kennecott Copper Corporation (Santa Rita and Hurley Divisions), supra.; Phelps Dodge Corporation, 60 NLRB 1431. 394 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD minutes to 2 hours . However , the emergency crew is limited to minor jobs within the plant premises and involves the handling of not more than 4 cars . For the past 2Z years, the time of the regular train-service crew has been exclusively occupied on the railroad , and there h4s been no interchange with the rip -track crew or with other plant employees. The train-service crew is separately located and it is supervised directly by the assistant mechanical superintendent or the assistant master mechanic . The record indicates that the employees in question have all had previous railroad ex- perience , and utilize substantially the same skills as do em- ployees on a main-line railroad . Their rates of pay are com- parable to those paid skilled craft employees in the plant. We believe that the skills , functions , and interests of the train- service crew are sufficiently diverse in degree and kind from those of the other plant employees to warrant their severance as a separate appropriate unit, if they so choose in the election hereafter directed.' An employee in the rip-track crew, Hill , was originally employed as a brakeman in a permanent capacity but was trans - ferred to rip track after he had sustained an injury which pre- vented him from working as a brakeman . After Hill substantially recovered from his disability , he was assignedbythe Employer as an emergency brakeman, which assignment has consumed about 10 percent of his time . The Employer indicated that Hill will be transferred back to his original job when a permanent vacancy arises in the position of brakeman . In these circum- stances , we find that Hill has a sufficient interest in the employment conditions of the train crew to be included in such unit for the time he spends therein , and to be eligible to vote in the election with the train crew , as well as in the rip-track crew. B In Case No. 21-RC - 3025 , the IAM seeks a unit of all machine - shop employees . The IAM also filed a petition for a unit of "all machinists " in Case No. 21-RC - 3014, which it moved at the hearing to withdraw . The motion is hereby granted. In the requested machine - shop unit , separately supervised by afore- man, are 22 employees , consisting essentially of machinists, machinist helpers , repairmen , mobile crane operator, pump mechanic , mechine drill mechanic , and laborer . There are in addition 4 welders , under the same supervision , who are regularly assigned to work with the machinists . The machine shop and the boiler and blacksmith shop share the same building , but the employees in both shops are separately stationed within the building . The record shows that the em- ployees classified as machinists, of whom there are 9 in the shop, are highly skilled craftsmen who are required by the Employer to have had apprenticeship training for a minimum 7 See Kennecott Copper Corporation (Santa Rita and Hurley Divisions), supra; Utah Copper Company and Kennecott Copper Corporation, 23 NLRB 1160. 8See Ocala Star Banner, 97 NLRB 384. KENNECOTT COPPER CORPORATION 395 period of 4 years. These machinists are the only employees in the machine shop who work on the machine precision tools, e.g., lathes , milling machines , and presses . The other em- ployees in the shop are confined to "floor work," which in- volves assembling and disassembling of machines , and work with hand tools. Machine-shop employees are occasionally assigned to various jobs of short duration outside the shop. The mobile crane operator spends substantially all his time operating the crane at different places around the plant; when not so engaged, which is infrequent, he performs "floor work" in the machine shop. The substitute for the mobile crane operator is an employee in the heavy-truck garage who was specially trained for this purpose. The work location of the machine drill mechanic, as a regular matter, is in the pit, or the underground part of the plant. The Smelter Workers contends that a unit of machine-shop employees is inappro- priate for the reason, among others , that there are machinists with comparable skills elsewhere in the plant. In this connection, the evidence discloses that there are only 2 employees employed outside the machine shop who are alleged to be machinists; (1) Treniman, classified as "machinist," in the crusing plant repair crew; and (2) Kellinsworth, classified as "shaker machinist" in the underground department. Kellinsworth works with a crew of underground mechanics , or "shaker repairmen," who are under the supervision of the curshing plant repair foreman, and whose functions consist in maintaining the fans, shaker conveyors, conveyor belts, and other underground equipment. The work of the crushing plant repair crew is described below. The record shows that both Kellinsworth and Treniman were given the classification of "machinist" by the Employer for "leadership purposes only"; that both are leadermen in their respective crews; that they actually perform the particular functions of their crews, which we find is not essentially machinist work; and that neither of these employees served an apprenticeship as machinist, or is capable of op- erating the machine precision tools of the machine shop. Consequently, we must reject the contention of the Smelter Workers. On the entire record, we believe the evidence sub- stantially supports the IAM's specific request for a machine- shop unit, based upon a craft nucleus of journeymen ma- chinists whose skills are not duplicated elsewhere in the plant.9 The fact that there may be other plant employees who perform duties similar to those of the lesser skilled employees in the machine shop, (e.g., repairmen) does not detract from the appropriateness of the unit. 10 The machine- drill operator and the mobile -crane operator are not, in our opinion, functionally a part of the machine shop, notwithstand- ing their nominal supervision by the machine-shop foreman, 9See, e. g., Western Electric Company, 103 NLRB 491: International Paper Company, 94 NLRB 483; cf. Westinghouse Electric Corporation, supra. loSee The Plomb Tool Company, 87 NLRB 134. 396 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD and should therefore be excluded from the unit. 11 Accordingly, we find that the machine-shop employees, as described in the voting group below, may constitute an appropriate unit, if they so choose in the election hereafter directed. In Case No. 21-RC-3052, the IAM seeks a separate unit of the pit-mechanic crew , consisting of a churn -drill mechanic., a shovel and drill mechanics, and his helper. These 3 em- ployees work in the underground department under the general pit foreman , who also supervises about 100 other employees. Although it appears that there has been no interchange between these and other plant employees, the functions and skills of the pit-mechanic crew are similar to those of other mechanics employed in the plant. On the present record, we are unable to find that the unit sought is justified on either departmental or craft grounds. In Case No. 21-RC-3027, the IAM seeks a separate unit of the crushing-plant repair crew, or "bull gang," consisting specifically of 16 employees in the classifications of repair- man, repair helper, and shaftman. There is also 1 welder regularly assigned to the crew. These employees maintain and repair hoists, shafts, conveyors, and the mill and crush- ing-plant equipment. In the crushing plant, there is also an operating crew of about 20 employees, not sought herein. All these employees in the crushing plant are under the crushing- plant foreman , who also supervises other plant employees. The repair crew and the operating crew share the same build- ing, although within these quarters each group is physically separate , and each performs entirely different duties. We are of the opinion that the mechanical functions and skills of the employees in the crushing -plant repair crew are not distinct from those of other mechanics employed in the plant, and that the evidence as a whole does not support the IAM's request for severance of such a unit. In Case No. 21-RC-3031, the IAM seeks a separate unit of 18 employees in the heavy-truck garage, classified as truck mechanic, truck-mechanic helper, and laborer. There are 2 welders, not specifically sought in the unit, who are regularly assigned to work with these employees . The employees in question function primarily to repair and maintain heavy trucks and caterpillars having Diesel engines , and a few caterpillars with gasoline engines . Also employed in the heavy- truck garage are 15 employees , not sought herein , who are part of the unit of truckdrivers and truck servicemen estab- lished by the Board following the election conducted in a prior proceeding. u The heavy-truck garage is separately located, and all employees employed therein are under the supervision of a foreman. In Case No. 21-RC-3015, the IAM seeks a unit of employees in the light-truck garage, consisting of a garage mechanic and garage repairman. These 2 employees maintain "Cf. The Billings and Spencer Company, 104 NLRB 928. 12Kennecott Copper Corporation, 98 NLRB 966, supra. KENNECOTT COPPER CORPORATION 397 and repair gasoline-operated automobiles and light trucks, and also perform on these vehicles the lubrication and tire- service work. They are separately located, but are directly supervised, in common with other plant employees, by the assistant master mechanic. There is no interchange between the employees in the light and the heavy-truck garages. The Board has found in numerous cases that automotive mechanics do not constitute a true craft.1' In the present case the evi- dence furnishes insufficient basis todepartfromthis precedent. Nor on the facts before us can we find that the garage me- chanics in either of the requested units otherwise constitute separable , homogeneous groups in the Employer's operations. Other mechanics in the plant, it appears, are substantially comparable to these employees in skill and function. We shall therefore deny the requested severances of the employees sought in the heavy- and light-truck garages , separately or combined. Accordingly, we shall dismiss the petitions in Cases Nos. 21-RC-3015, 3026, 3027, 3031, 3032, and 3052. The employees sought in these petitions, not otherwise included in units found appropriate herein, are part of the existing residual production and maintenance unit. In accordance with above findings, we shall direct separate elections among the employees at the Employer's Ray, Ari- zona, mines division, in the voting groups set forth below, ex- cluding from each group all guards, professional employees, and supervisors as defined in the Act: (1) All blacksmiths, including the blacksmith and hammer- man in the boiler and blacksmith shop, the underground blacksmith, pit-bit dresser, and pit-bit helper. (2) All boilermakers, including boilermaker helpers, re- pairmen, layerout, and the welders regularly assigned to work with the boilermakers. (3) All employees in the rip-track crew, including car inspectors, car repairmen, car repair helpers, lead air- brakemen, and the welder regularly assigned to work with the rip-track crew. (4) All employees in the train-service crew, including loco- motive engineers, brakemen, the conductor, and conductor- dispatcher. (5) All employees in the machine shop, including machinists, machinist helpers, repairmen, lead machinists, laborer, re- pair (compressor), pump mechanic, but excluding the mobile- crane operator, and the machine-drill mechanic. If a majority of the employees in any of the voting groups above select the IAM, Boilermakers, or Brotherhood, they will be taken to have indicated their desire to constitute separate bargaining units. The Regional Director conducting the elections is instructed , in that event, to issue a certification i$See , e. g.. Armstrong Cork Company, 97 NLRB 1057; National Container Corporation of Wisconsin, 97 NLRB 1009. 398 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD of representatives to the appropriate labor organization for each such unit. If a majority of the employees in all or any of the voting groups vote for the Smelter Workers, the Board finds that such employees in the group or groups so voting to be ap- propriately represented in the existing residual production and maintenance unit, in that event, and the Regional Director shall issue a certification of results of elections to that effect. [The Board dismissed the petitions.] [Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication.] UTILITY APPLIANCE CORP. and UNITED STEELWORKERS ,OF AMERICA, C.I.O., Petitioner UTILITY APPLIANCE CORP. and INTERNATIONAL ASSO- CIATION OF MACHINISTS, DISTRICT 94, Petitioner. Cases Nos. Z1-RC-3089 and 21-RC-3141. July 24, 1953 DECISION, ORDER, AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon separate petitions duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, a consolidated hearing was held before Max Steinfeld and Fred W. Davis, hearing officers. The hearing officers' rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board' finds: 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the mean- ing of the Act. 2. The labor organizations named herein claim to represent certain employees of the Employer.' 3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representation of employees of the Employer within the mean- ing of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. 4. The Employer is engaged in the manufacture of heating, ventilating, air conditioning, and similar appliances at its Los Angeles, California, plant. Since 1940 it has bargained jointly with the Sheet Metal Workers, the Machinists, and the Teamsters for the production and maintenance employees at the plant. Its most recent contract which expired June 30, 1953, provides: 3 '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[Members Houston, Murdock, and PetersonJ. 2 The Petitioner in Case No. 21-RC- 3089 is referred to herein as the Steelworkers. The Petitioner in Case No. 21-RC-3141 is referred to herein as the Machinists. The Intervenors, Sheet Metal Workers International Association, Local 371, AFL, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers, Local 598, AFL, and International Union of Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers, CIO, are referred to herein respectively as the Sheet Metal Workers, the Teamsters, and the IUE. The motions of the Teamsters and the IUE to withdraw from the proceeding are hereby granted. s This was the only contract introduced in evidence at the hearing. 106 NLRB No. 68..