Montana Dakota Utilities Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 31, 1951

95 N.L.R.B. 887 (N.L.R.B. 1951)

MONTANA DAKOTA UTILITIES CO. 887
not under his supervision, but either denied or said he did not remember having
made the remarks ascribed to him by Liles. Although the testimony of each was
weakened somewhat on cross-examination, having observed the two on the stand
the Trial Examiner believes that Fowler did express to Liles the belief that
Kellert was liable to discharge him for his union activity, made critical com-
ments about the Union, and voiced the hope that at the election its "ears" would
be "beaten down."
The foregoing are the incidents upon which the allegations of the complaint
and the objections to the election must find support. Specifically, it has been
found that Kellert asked one employee about his union affiliation, that Hicks
questioned two employees about their union activities, and Fowler made a remark
to a fourth employee which might be so strained in interpretation as to con-
stitute a warning of discharge. These remarks by supervisors clearly passed
the bounds of permissible conduct before an election in which the employer, by
law, is required to maintain neutrality. On the other hand, it is the opinion
of the Trial Examiner that either alone or in sum they do not form a pattern
of conduct so clearly defined as to warrant a conclusion of violation of the Act
and a recommendation that an election in a plant of more than 1,200 employees
be set aside. Had it been established that the employer sought, by its wage
increase, to influence by this substantial benefit the voting desires of its em-
ployees, the isolated remarks of a few supervisors would have thereby been
colored with more serious significance. The facts show, however, that the
Respondent's counsel willingly permitted the Union to take credit for the raise,
and that the Union publicly did so.
The Trial Examiner will therefore recommend that the complaint be dis-
missed, and that the objections of the Union be overruled.
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and upon the entire record
in the case, the Trial Examiner makes the following:
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. The Respondent is engaged in commerce within the meaning of Section 2
(6) of the Act.
2. Amalgamated Meat Cutters and Butcher Workmen of North America, AFL,
is a labor organization within the meaning of Section 2 (5) of the Act.
3. The Respondent has not engaged in unfair labor practices within the
meaning of the Act, as alleged in the complaint.
Recommendations
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact, conclusions of law, and the
entire record in the case, the Trial Examiner recommends that the complaint
herein be dismissed in its entirety. It is also recommended that the objections
to election be overruled, and that the request to set aside the election of Sep-
tember 1950 be denied.
MONTANA DAKOTA UTILITIES Co. and INTERNATIONAL UNION OF
OPERATING ENGINEERS, LOCAL 913, AFL, PETITIONER. Cases Nos.
19-RC-710 and 19-RC-786. July 31, 1951
Decision and Order
Upon separate petitions duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the Na-
tional Labor Relations Act, a consolidated hearing was held before
95 NLRB No. 99.
,:88 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Howard A. McIntyre, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings
made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby
affirmed .11
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 Styles).
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer 2 is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the Act.
9. The labor organizations involved claim to represent employees of
the Employer.
3. No 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, for the following reasons:
The Petitioner seeks a unit limited to all gas production and mainte-
nance employees in the Baker, Saco, Glasgow, Fort Peck, and Wolf
Point, Montana, areas of the Employer's operations. The Employer
and the Intervenor contend that the requested unit is inappropriate
and that the only appropriate unit is the system-wide unit of both gas
and electrical employees currently represented by the Intervenor.
The Employer, an operating public utility, is mainly engaged in
producing, transmitting, distributing, and selling natural gas and
electric power throughout the northern and eastern parts of Montana,
western and south central sections of North Dakota, north central and
Black Hills areas of South Dakota, and the cities of Sheridan and
Buffalo, Wyoming. In additioR, the Employer distributes butane gas
at its operations in Crookston, Minnesota, and Missoula, Montana.
:Since about 1943, the Intervenor has represented the Employer's pro-
duction' and maintenance employees sought by the Petitioner, substan-
tially on a company-wide basis.3
As indicated above, the Petitioner seeks only those employees con-
nected with gas production and distribution in five areas in Montana.
In support of this contention, the Petitioner argues that the employees
i The Intervenor, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL, appearing on
behalf of its Locals Nos. 395, 423, 653, 758, 958, 971, 975, 988, 1050, and 1616, moved to
dismiss the proceeding on the ground that the unit sought is inappropriate. The hearing
officer referred the motion to the Board. For the reasons stated in paragraph numbered 3,
infra, the motion is granted.
2 The Employer's name appears in the caption as amended at the hearing.
B Employees in certain isolated operations, not connected with the Employer's main
pipelines, are not represented by the Intervenor as part of the more comprehensive unit.
Thus, employees in the areas of the Box Elder and Kevin Sunburst, Montana, gas fields,
and in Great Falls, Montana, are separately represented by the Intervenor ; employees at
Missoula, Montana, are represented by the Operating Engineers and Plumbers under an
oral agreement ; and the employees' at Crookston, Minnesota, are unorganized and without
representation.
The most recent contract between the Employer and Intervenor covering the broader unit
extends to June 30, 1952. This contract was not urged as a bar at the hearing.
MONTANA DAKOTA UTILITIES CO. 889
involved no longer desire to be -represented by the Intervenor; 4 that
there is a cost-of-living wage differential between Montanna and North
Dakota; and that the unit sought would not disrupt the Employer's
operations.
The record shows, however, that the Employer's natural 'gas and
electric power operations are, in general , highly integrated and inter-
dependent. Its central office -is situated in Minneapolis, Minnesota,
where major operating and labor policies are established and labor
negotiations are conducted. The electrical energy distributed by the
Employer is produced at its many generating stations and channeled
to distribution points by means of a network system of transmission
lines with which the generating plants are connected. All.points on
the line are in relatively close communication with one another
through two main dispatching offices 5 which function to communi-
cate with, and order the generation or distribution of electric energy
of, various plants of the system, thereby maintaining a constant bal-
ance of the electric load. Natural gas operations involve a continuous
process which includes production in gas fields and distribution.
through a system of pipe lines to consumers in many communities in
the different States. Employees in each phase of the gas operations
are in constant communication with employees of other phases through
headquarters of the gas production transmission department at Glen-
dive, Montana. -
It further appears that employees are often transferred from one
station to another within the main natural gas and electric power
system. Employees working on gas or electric power frequently work
together and are interchanged, and some employees perform both gas
and electrical functions e Although a slight wage differential pre-
vails between certain classifications in different areas and seniority is
on a plant-wide basis, vacation and sick leave privileges, classifica-
tions, standards of employment and other working conditions are
generally the same throughout those operations.
Under all the circumstances, including the history of collective
bargaining substantially on a company-wide basis, and the integrated
and interdependent nature of the Employer's operations, we find
* Contracts between the Intervenor and the Employer were negotiated in the past by a
committee representing the interested locals of the Intervenor . These contracts were then
submitted to the locals for ratification , the approval of a majority of all locals being neces-
sary for such ratification. The employees of the Baker area voted to reject the most
recent contract executed by the Intervenor , and the employees of Saco, Glasgow, Fort
Peck, and Wolf Point, refrained from voting on its ratification . However, a majority of
locals voted in favor of ratification.
° Located at Glendive , Montana, and Bismarck, North Dakota.
° A gas compressor station and an electric generator plant located at Baker. Montana,
are both operated by the same personnel. Also, in a number of instances, particularly in
smaller communities , gas and electrical service work is performed by the same personnel.
890 DECISIONS; OF .NATIONAL . , LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
that a unit limited to the gas employees in the five.areas requested by
the Petitioner is inappropriate for purposes of collective bargaining.z
We shall, therefore, dismiss the petition.
Order
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petitions herein be, and they hereby
are, dismissed.
7 Pacific Power & Light Co., 94 NLRB 638; Elizabethtown Consolidated Gas Company,
93 NLRB 1270 ; Public Service Company of Indiana , Inc., 91 NLRB 1151.
STANDARD LIME AND STONE COMPANY and INTERNATIONAL UNION
UNITED CEMENT, LIME AND Gypsum WORKERS' LOCAL No . 92, AFL,.
PETITIONER. Case No. 6-RC-779. July 31, 1951
Decision and Direction of Election
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
:Relations Act, a hearing was held before Joseph C. Thackery, 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 case to a three-member
panel. [Chairman Herzog and Members Reynolds and Murdock].
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is a Maryland corporation, having its principal
office and place of business in Baltimore,. Maryland. - Its plants in
West Virginia, Virginia, Ohio, Michigan, and Tennessee are engaged
in the mining, processing, and sale of limestone and have been the
subject of proceedings in which the Board has asserted jurisdiction
over the Employer.' The Employer concedes that, except for its
operations at Pleasant Gap, Pennsylvania, the only plant involved in
this proceeding, it is engaged in commerce within the meaning-of-=the
Act. At Pleasant Gap, the Employer is currently mining limestone
and eventually will produce, process, and sell limestone there. These
operations will therefore be the same as those performed at the Em-
ployer's other plants. The record further discloses that the Pleasant
I The hearing officer referred to the Board for ruling the Employer's motion to dismiss the
„petition on the grounds that: (I) Because the Employer is engaged in development and
experimental operations, and has not produced any material for sale, there is no question
affecting commerce within the meaning of the Act; and (2) that the unit sought by the
Petitioner is inappropriate in that a substantial and representative number of employees
is not presently employed at its Pleasant Gap plant. The motion to dismiss the petition is
hereby denied for the reasons hereinafter stated.
2 17 NLRB 147 (Martinsburg, West Virginia, plant ) ; 39 NLRB 538 (Knoxville , Tennessee,
plant) ; 73 NLRB 1279 (Wabash, Indiana , plant ) ; 74 NLRB 893 ( Kimballtown, Virginia,
plant).
95 NLRB No. 94.