Pacific Coast Association of Pulp and Paper Manufacturers

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 1, 1961

130 N.L.R.B. 1031 (N.L.R.B. 1961)

PACIFIC COAST ASSN., PULP & PAPER MANUFACTURERS 1031
Pacific Coast Association of Pulp and Paper Manufacturers and
Amalgamated Lithographers of America , Ind., Petitioner.
Case No. 20-RC-4114. March 1, 1961
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS.
Upon. a petition duly filed under Section 9(c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Philip Bowe, 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 this proceeding to a.
three-member panel [Chairman Leedom and Members Rodgers and
Jenkins].
Upon the entire record in. this case, the Board finds :
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. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of certain employees of the Employer within the meaning of
Section 9(c) (1) and Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The Petitioner seeks to sever from.the production and main-
tenance unit a unit of all lithographic production employees em-
ployed at the plants of Fibreboard Products, Inc., at Portland, Ore-
gon, and Antioch, Stockton, and Vernon, Californ ia, including the
inkroom employees at the Portland plant .2 The Employer, Fibre-
board, and the Joint-Intervenors contend that the unit requested is
inappropriate. They assert that the. bargaining history of 26 years
for a broader unit including these, employees should preclude sever-
ance at this time. In. addition, they contend that the requested unit
lacks the cohesion, and homogeneity characteristic of a craft group.
These same issues were raised and rejected 9 years ago in a case
involving these same parties.' As to the first contention the record
1 United Papermakers & Paperworkers , AFL-CIO, and International Brotherhood of
Pulp, Sulphite and Paper Mill Workers , AFL-CIO (hereinafter called Joint-Intervenors),
intervened as the current joint bargaining 'representative of all of the Employer's pro-
duction and maintenance employees . 'Contrary to the Joint -Intervenors ' assertion that
the Petitioner is not a labor organization within the meaning of the Act because it
allegedly permits employers to be members , we find that the Petitioner, which exists for
the purpose of engaging ' in collective bargaining with employers on behalf of employees, is
a labor organization. Graham Transportation Company, 124 NLRB 960.
a Fibreboard Products, Inc., an Intervenor herein, is the only member of the Association
that employs lithographic production employees . Accordingly, the severance from the
associationwide unit of a unit of Fibreboard ' s lithographic production employees is per-
missible . See Desaulnier8 and Company; 115 NLRB 1025 , 1027. '
8 Pacific Coast Association of Pulp and'Paper Manufacturers , 94 NLRB 477 , 480-481.
The Employer and the Intervenors also object to the Petitioner's failure to take a definite
position at the hearing as to all inclusions or exclusions from the unit . In a representa-
130 NLRB No. 75.
1032 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD''
now before us does not in our opinion present any convincing reason
why we should now reverse our policy, as expressed in the earlier case
between the parties, of granting separate representation to skilled
groups of employees despite a contrary history .4 The second-conten-
tion is treated below in connection with our findings as to the scope
of the appropriate unit.
. Portland and Stockton plants: The record shows that the litho-
graphic production employees at the Portland and Stockton plants
perform true lithographic functions. The lithographic employees at
these two plants attain seniority in a progression system separate
from other printing department employees and spend the major por-
tion of their time in lithographic production work, using standard
lithographic equipment. In these. circumstances, we find that the
lithographic production employees at the Stockton and Portland
plants may constitute a separate unit if they so desire. As to the ink-
room employees, the record shows that at the Stockton plant these
employees spend less than 50 percent of their time performing func-
tions within the scope of the requested lithographic unit; the greater
portion of their time being spent in servicing the letterpresses and
rotogravure presses. As the inkroom employees at the Stockton plant
are not primarily engaged in performing functions related to the
lithographic process, we shall not include them in the voting group
hereinafter found appropriate.' As to -the inkroom employees at the
Portland plant, the record shows that they spend in excess of 50 per-
cent of their time servicing the lithographic operations. Accord-
ingly, we shall include these employees in the lithographic voting
group.
Antioch and Vernon plants: The record shows that the lithographic
employees sought by the Petitioner at these two plants are on the
same seniority and progression ladder as the letterpress employees at
these plants, and that they frequently interchange between letter-
presses and lithographic presses and exercise priority in moving from
one type of press to the other as required by fluctuations in the work-
loads. In addition, the pressmen are the only employees who oper-
tion case such as the instant case, where determination of unit inclusion or exclusion of
disputed employees depends on a detailed analysis of the transcript made at the hearing, we
do not believe that it is prejudicial for the Petitioner to refrain from stating its specific
contentions as to all inclusions and exclusions at the time of the hearing . All questions
of unit placement were fully developed at the hearing, the Petitioner subsequently defined
its unit positions in its brief, and no party has demonstrated that it was prejudiced by
the Petitioner's action.
* We find no merit in the contentions of the Employer and Intervenors with reference
to their reliance on N.L.R.B. v. Pittsburgh Plate Glass Company, 270 F. 2d 167, 'cert.
denied 361 U.S. 943 . See Lord Baltimore Press, Incorporated, 128 NLRB 334.
6 Paciflc Coast Association of Pulp and Paper Manufacturers , supra, at 481, and Denver-
Colorado Springs -Pueblo Motor Way,'129 NLRB 1184.
PACIFIC COAST ASSN., PULP & PAPER MANUFACTURERS 1033
ate-lithographic equipment at these two plants, all preparatory work
being secured either from outside shops, or from the Employer's
Stockton plant. In these circumstances, we find that the employees
who operate the lithographic presses at the Vernon and Antioch
plants do not possess the cohesiveness and the distinctive identity of
a true lithographic production unit.' Accordingly, we shall exclude
them from the unit sought by the Petitioner.'
There remains for consideration the unit placement of the artists
at the Portland and Stockton plants and the cameraman at the Stock-
ton plant. The two artists at the Portland plant are respectively
classified as combination artist-dot-etcher' and lettering artist. Al-
though it appears that the lettering artist performs functions related
to the lithographs operation, the record does not show whether he
spends a majority of his time on lithographic work. As we are there-
fore unable to determine on the record before us whether this artist
should be included in the lithographic production voting group, we
shall, permit him, to, vote subject to challenge. As the. record shows
that the artist at the Stockton plant does not spend the majority
of his time in work directly related to lithography, we shall exclude
him from the voting groups The cameraman at the Stockton plant
has heretofore been excluded from the existing production and main-
tenance unit. He is assigned to the photocomposing department where
he performs functions relating to platemaking,. a part of the litho-
graphic process. The Petitioner would include him in the lithographic
production unit. This employee may appropriately be included in
a lithographic production unit. However,, as he has been unrepre-
sented in the past, he may not be included. in the lithographic voting
group without a self-determination election,. to determine whether he
desires to become a part of. the lithographic production unit.
' We accordingly find that the lithographic employees employed at
the Employer's Stockton and Portland plants may, if they so desire,
constitute; a separate appropriate unit: We-shall not, however, make
a final unit determination at this time, but shall first ascertain the
6 See Pacific Press, Inc., 66 NLRB 458; and Desaulnier8 and Company , supra, foot-
note 2. Lithographic presses were not installed at Vernon and Antioch until 1958 and
1959 respectively , approximately 7 and 8 years after the Board 's decision in the 1951
case involving these same parties.
I As the lithographic production employees at the Portland and Stockton plants are
the only employees of the Employer engaged in true lithographic functions , the Board's
direction of a severance election herein , limited to only these two plants of the Employer,
does not conflict with the multiplant severance rule announced in General Mot-Ora Corpora-
tion, Cadillac Motor Car Division, 120 NLRB 1215.
8 As the parties stipulated at the hearing to facts, establishing that the combination
artist-dot-etcher spent the major portion of his time in lithographic production work, we
shall include him in the unit.
St. Louis Lithographing Company , 114 NLRB 24, 26, and Denver-Colorado Springs-
Pueblo Motor Way, supra.
1034 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
desires of these employees as expressed in an election hereinafter
directed.
We shall direct that an election by secret ballot be held among the
employees of Fibreboard Products, Inc., in the following voting
groups.'°
(a) The cameraman employed at the Stockton, California, plant,
excluding all other employees and supervisors as defined in the Act.
(b) All lithographic production employees including lithographic
pressmen, press helpers (feeders), winders on regular assignment to
the lithographic presses, employed at the Employer's Portland, Ore-
gon, and Stockton, California, plants, and the artists, the ink and
roll room employees and the cameraman employed at the Portland
plant, but excluding all other employees, all letterpress employees,
office clerical employees, guards, professional employees, and.super-
visors as defined in the Act.
If the cameraman in voting group (a) votes, for the Petitioner, he
will be taken to have indicated his desire to be bargained for as.part
of the lithographic production unit, providing a majority in voting
group (b) votes for the Petitioner. Accordingly, if the cameraman in
voting group (a) votes for the Petitioner and a majority of the em-
ployees in voting group (b) likewise votes for the Petitioner, they
will be. taken. to have indicated their desire to constitute a separate
appropriate unit, and the Regional Director conducting the election
directed herein is instructed to. issue a certification of representatives
to the Petitioner for the unit described above which the Board, under
such circumstances, finds to be appropriate for the purposes of : col-
lective bargaining. In the event the cameraman in voting group (a)
does not vote for the Petitioner and a majority in voting group (b).
does vote for the Petitioner we find the unit set forth above to be
appropriate, with the exclusion of the cameraman. In the event the
cameraman in voting group (a) votes for the Petitioner, but a majority
of the employees in voting group (b) does not vote for the Petitioner,
he will remain unrepresented,11 the employees in voting group (b.) shall
remain part of the existing unit, and the Regional Director will issue
u, certification of results of election to such effect.
[Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication.]
10 Although it is not clear that the Petitioner has made a sufficient showing of interest
to support an election in voting group (a), composed only of the cameraman, we have
directed an election therein and placed the Petitioner's name on the ballot as an adminis-
trative expedient. However, we hereby 'direct the Regional Director to determine the
Petitioner's interest in this matter and to hold the election only if it appears that its
interest is adequate.
11 See Sutherland Paper Company, 122 NLRB 1284; and Waikiki Biltmore, Inc ., d/b/a
The Waikiki Biltmore Hotel, 127 NLRB 82.