Ralston Purina Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsSep 26, 1949

86 N.L.R.B. 107 (N.L.R.B. 1949)

In the Matter of RALSTON PURINA COMPANY, EMPLOYER and, INTER- NATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS, LOCAL No. 6 AND 6-At A. F. L., PETITIONER Case No. 17-RC-465.-Decided September 26, 1949 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before William J. Scott, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. The Inter- venor, at the hearing, moved to dismiss the petition on the grounds that no evidence was submitted to show that the Employer's firemen desire to be represented by the Petitioner 1 and that the union sought is inappropriate. For the reasons stated hereinafter, the motion to dis- miss is denied. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member panel [Chairman Herzog and Members Houston and Murdock]. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds : 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations 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 employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9^ (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. 4. The appropriate unit : The Petitioner seeks to represent the Employer's operating engi- neers and apprentice operating engineers 2 at its plant in Kansas City,. Missouri. The Employer and the Intervenor contend that the em- ' we have frequently held that the showing of interest is an administrative matter for- determination by the Board and not subject to collateral attack. Matter of Stokely Foods, Inc., 78 N. L. R. B. 842; Matter of O. D. Jennings & Company, 68 N. L. R. B. 516. 2 Apprentice operating engineers are classified by the Employer as firemen. 86 N. L. R. B., No. 23. 107 108 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD ployees sought to be represented by the Petitioner should no t be severed from the existing unit of production and maintenance employees.3 The Employer, a Missouri corporation with its principal place of business in St. Louis, Missouri, manufactures products for animal consumption in plants throughout the United States. We are here concerned only with the Kansas City, Missouri, plant which manufac- tures feed and feed mixtures. The unit sought by the Petitioner is, in effect, a unit of boiler room employees, including four operating engineers and two firemen. These employees maintain their headquarters in the boiler room, located in one of the plant buildings and separated from the remainder of the plant by walls. The engineers are responsible for the efficient opera- tion of the steam generating plant and the maintenance and repair of lines and equipment related thereto. The firemen work under the direction of and assist the engineers in the performance of their duties. The boiler room operates three daily 8-hour shifts,4 7 days a week. Each engineer works a 5-day week with one engineer on duty on each :shift. The fourth engineer relieves the other three on their days off. The two firemen work the 8 a. m. to 4 p. m. and the 4 p. m. to 12 p. m. :shifts respectively. No fireman is on duty on the 12 p. m. to 8 a. m. .shift. Unlike most of the other plant employees, the engineers work 8 hours continuously, eating their lunch on the job; they do not par- ticipate in the production work of the Employer's operations, receive -a higher rate of pay than the other production or maintenance em- ployees, and do not participate in the Employer's plant-wide seniority plan.5 The engineers are licensed as Class A stationary operating engineers in accordance with the requirements of a city ordinance. A 5-year apprenticeship is required to qualify for such a license. Al- though the boiler room employees are under the common supervision of the maintenance foreman, who also supervises other maintenance .employees, this has led to no appreciable interchange between the two .groups. In opposing the severance of these employees the Employer and the Intervenor contend that the interests of the boiler room employees are intimately related to those of the production and maintenance -employees because : (1) most of the steam manufactured in the boiler room is utilized in processing the Employer's finished products; (2) 3 The Intervenor, American Federation of Grain Millers, Local Union No. 16, AFL, as a -result of a consent election (Case No. 17-R-595 ), has represented the employees at this plant since 1943 in a single production and maintenance unit which included the employees herein sought . The most recent contract expired August 1, 1949. 4 8 a. m. to 4 p . m. ; 4 p. m. to 12 p. m. ; and 12 p. m. to 8 a. m. Because of their skill and qualifications, engineers exercise seniority rights among themselves only. This is not true , however, as to the firemen. In the event of a lay-off, other production and maintenance employees could exercise their plant seniority to "bump" -a fireman. RALSTON PURINA COMPANY 109 some of the boiler room employees do maintenance work throughout the plant with other maintenance employees ; and (3 ) maintenance employees at times work in the boiler room. We do not agree . While it is true that the Employer uses steam to dry and condition grain, soybeans , and mixed feed , this does not estab- lish such a degree of integration between the production process and the work of the boiler room employees as to warrant denying separate representation to this group .6 As to the interrelationship between boiler room and other employees , the maintenance work of the engi- neers in the plant is mostly in connection with the repair and mainte- nance of equipment and pipe lines connected or related to the genera- tion or conveyance of steam emanating from the boiler room, and it is clear that the boiler room employees spend a substantial portion of their time in the boiler room.? When maintenance employees come into the boiler room to work it is usually in connection with the pellet grooving and pipe threading machines which are'installed in the boiler room for their use.8 On these occasions the maintenance employees confine their activities to their own work and the engineers perform their own functions. In view of the foregoing and contrary to the contention of the Employer and the Intervenor ,' we are of the opinion that the em- ployees in the boiler room constitute an identifiable , functionally coherent group having a community of interest , who are of a type we have generally held 10 may, if they so desire , constitute a unit appro- priate for the purposes of collective bargaining. 6 Matter of Western Condensing Company, 85 N. L. R. B. 981 ; Matter of C. A. Swanson and Sons, 81 N. L. R. B. 321. This is to be distinguished from the case in which power produced in the boiler room is a component part of the end product, e. g., Matter of Lynn Gas and Electrio Company, 78 N. L. R. B. 3. T The engineer on the 8 to 4 shift spends approximately 4 hours a day away from the boiler room ; the engineer on the 4 to 12 shift goes into the plant on emergency cases only ; the engineer on the 12 to 8 shift and the two firemen, spend all their time in the boiler room. 8 On one occasion sheet metal workers , due to lack of space in the tin shop , used the boiler room in which to erect a "dust collector ." The metal used , however, was not fabri- cated in the boiler room. I In their briefs , the Employer and the Intervenor attempt to show a similarity between the unit herein sought and proposed units which we found to be inappropriate in Matter of Columbia Packing Company , 80 N. L . R. B. 211 ; Matter of Corn Products Refining Company, 80 N. L. R. B . 362 ; and Matter of The Borden Company, 83 N. L. R. B. 765. The facts and circumstances of the cases cited, however , distinguish them from the present case. Unlike the unit sought herein, the unit in the Columbia Packing case included mechanical mainte- nance men in addition to engineers and firemen . In the Corn Products case, the units sought overstepped craft and/or departmental lines and the employees sought did not share common skills . And in the Borden case, a majority of the employees in the proposed unit were general maintenance employees who also frequently performed production work. Cf. also Matter of Monsanto Chemical Company, 80 N. L. R. B. 1675. 11 Matter of National Licorice Company, 85 N. L. R. B. 140 ; Matter of Dallas-Fort Worth Brewing Company, 84 N. L . R. B. 681 ; Matter of Hawley cf Hoops , Inc., 83 N . L. R. B. 371 ; Matter of Jacobson Mfg. Co., 82 N. L. R. B. 1404; Matter of Wilson and Co., Inc., 80 N. L. R. B. 1466. 110 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Wilbur Fleming. This employee is a helper assigned to assist the :engineer on the day shift in the maintenance of pipes, traps, and regulators outside the boiler room. He is not licensed as an engineer and does not perform firemen duties. In accordance with the agree- ment of the Petitioner and the Intervenor we shall exclude this em- ployee from the unit. We find that all operating engineers and firemen excluding office, clerical, and production employees, maintenance employees other than the engineers and firemen, professional employees, salesmen, guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act, may constitute a unit appro- priate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning .of Section 9 (b) of the Act. However, we shall make no final unit ,determination at this time, but shall first ascertain the desires of these ,employees as expressed in the election hereinafter directed. If the majority vote for the Petitioner, they will be taken to have indicated their desire to constitute a separate bargaining unit represented by the Petitioner 11 If they vote for the Intervenor, they will be taken to have indicated their desire to remain part of the larger unit repre- sented by the Intervenor. DIRECTION OF ELECTION As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the pur- poses of collective bargaining with the Employer, an election by secret .ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than 30 days from the date of this Direction, under the direction and super- vision of the Regional Director for the Region in which this case was -heard, and subject to Sections 203.61 and 203.62 of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations, among the employees in the voting group described in paragraph numbered 4, above, who were :employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of this Direction of Election, including employees who did not work during said pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation or temporaily laid off, 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, and also excluding employees on -strike who are not entitled to reinstatement, to determine whether they desire to be represented, for purposes of collecive bargaining, by Inter- national Union of Operating Engineers, Local No. 6 and 6-A, A. F. L., or by American Federation of Grain Millers, Local Union No. 16, A. F. L., or by neither. "The Petitioner is composed of two Locals. Local 6 which admits the operating engi- neers into membership and Local 6-A which admits apprentice engineers. If the Petitioner 'wins the election herein directed, both Locals will be certified jointly, and the Employer will have the right to insist on dealing with them as the joint representative of the single ,unit. Matter of LaSalle-Crittenden Press, Inc., 72 N. L. R. B. 1166.