The McGean Chemical Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Oct 4, 1946

71 N.L.R.B. 260 (N.L.R.B. 1946)

In the Matter of THE MCGEAN CHEMICAL COMPANY, EMPLOYER and
UNITED GAS, COKE AND CHEMICAL WORKERS (CIO), PETITIONER
Case No. 8-R-9199.-Decided October'4, 1946
Mr. S. D. L. Jackson, Jr., of Cleveland, Ohio, for the Employer.
Messrs. Howard M. Metzenbaurm, William Wimmer, and Wendell
Ring'holz, of Cleveland, Ohio, for the Employer.
Mr. Sidney Grossman, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in-this case was held at Cleve-
land, Ohio, on August 2, 1946, before George F. Hayes, hearing officer.
The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from preju-
dicial 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 THE EMPLOYER
The McGean Chemical Company, an Ohio corporation, with its
principal office and place of business at Cleveland, Ohio, is engaged in
the manufacture of chemical products. During the past year, the
Employer's sales were in excess of $1,000,000 in value, of which approx-
imately 50 percent represented sales outside the State of Ohio. Dur-
ing the same period, its purchases were in excess of $500,000 in value,
of which approximately 50 percent was secured from sources outside
the State of Ohio.
The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
H. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress
of Industrial Organizations, claiming to represent employees of the
Employer.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Employer refuses to recognize the Petitioner as the exclusive
bargaining representative of employees of the Employer until the
Petitioner has been certified by the Board in an appropriate unit.
71 N. L. R. B., No. 28.
260
THE McGEAN CHEMICAL COMPANY 261
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
The Petitioner requests a unit consisting of production, mainte-
nance, and warehouse employees, excluding truck drivers, firemen,
watchmen, office workers, process men, foremen, and all other super-
visory employees. The employer does not oppose the general compo-
sition of the unit, but would include the process men.
Process men. There are six employee classifications in the produc-
tion group .' Normally, one out of three or four production employees
is a process man. The Petitioner regards the process men as sub-
foremen and therefore would exclude them from the unit as supervis-
ory employees. Process men devote the principal part of their time
to maiiual labor, and although they keep production, stock, and other
records in their respective departments, no inference of supervisory
authority can be drawn from their record-keeping functions. As
more experienced and skilled employees, they may instruct new em-
ployees, but such functions are also exercised by the process helpers
and at times by A laborers, both of which categories the Petitioner
would include. Inasmuch as the evidence does not show that the
process men may hire or discharge other employees or that they
make effective recommendations regarding changes in their status, we
shall include them in the unit.
We find that all production, maintenance, and warehouse employees,
including process men, but excluding truck drivers, firemen, watchmen,
office workers, foremen, and all or any other supervisory 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 collec-
tive bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
During the week ending May 4, 1946, following the Petitioner's
request for recognition, the Employer discharged 60 employees in
accordance with their seniority status. The Petitioner maintains that
these employees were temporarily laid-off and therefore have not lost
their employee status for the purposes of the election, and furthermore
that the lay-off was discriminatory. The uncontradicted evidence
shows that the discharges resulted from a cessation of the Employer's
'The production employee classifications are as follows- processman, process helper,
A laborer , B laborer , C laborer, and D laborer . At the time of the hearing, there were
about 77 production employees in the plant, of which 22 were pro •ess men.
262 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
operations because of a coal shortage and a discontinuance of several
departments which were not restored when the Employer later resumed
its normal operations. At the time of their separation, the employees
in question were specifically notified that their services had been termi-
nated. Only about five were subsequently rehired, but they were re-
garded as new employees. Other than its bare assertion that the lay-
off was discriminatory, no formal unfair labor practice charges were
filed by the Petitioner with the Board. Upon these facts, we are of
the opinion that there is no merit to the Petitioner's contention and
that those employees who were separated from the Employer's pay
roll during the week ending May 4, 1946, and were not subsequently
rehired and employed during the eligibility period adopted herein, are
not entitled to participate in the election hereinafter directed.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives fbr the
purposes of collective bargaining with The McGean Chemical Com-
pany, Cleveland, Ohio, 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 Re-
gional Director for the Eighth 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 Reg-
ulations-Series 4, among the employees in the unit found appropri-
ate 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 per-
son 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 the United Gas, Coke and Chemical
Workers (CIO), for the purposes of collective bargaining.