95 N.L.R.B. 1024 (N.L.R.B. 1951)

Phelps Dodge Refining Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsAug 8, 1951

95 N.L.R.B. 1024 (N.L.R.B. 1951)

1024 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD PHELPS DODGE REFINING CORPORATION and AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR , PETITIONER . Case .No. 33-RC-9253. August 8, 1951 Decision and Order Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Byron E. Guse, 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-mem- ber panel [Members Houston, Murdock, and Styles]. 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 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 Employer is engaged in the electrolytic refining of copper at its plant located at El Paso, Texas. The Petitioner seeks a unit com- posed of the employees connected with the Employer's power depart- ment. The Employer and the Intervenor, International Union of Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers for itself and on behalf of Local 501, contend that the unit sought by the Petitioner is inappropriate and that the only appropriate unit is the over-all production and mainte- nance unit. The Intervenor has represented the production and main- tenance unit since 1942 and has had collective bargaining contracts covering this unit since 1944. There are 27 employees in the power department in 7 job classifica- tions : 7 electricians, class A; 2 electricians, class B; 5 electrician help- ers; 6 station operators; 1 day boilerman; 5 shift boilermen;. and 1 laborer. The electricians, class A and B, and the electrician helpers do general electrical maintenance, repair, and construction. No ap- prenticeship is required, and the Employer has no fixed program for advancement. The electricians work throughout the plant, except for 1 electrician, class A, who is permanently assigned with a helper to the casting building, and 1 electrician, class A, who is permanently assigned with a helper to the tank house. The station operators work in the powerhouse, where they control and adjust the electrical switch- board load as required. The boilermen work in the casting depart- ment on waste heat boilers, which generate steam for process use; 95 NLRB No. 180. ACME QUALITY PAINTS, INC. 1025 no electricity is generated in the Employer's plant, all the ey ectricity used being purchased. The laborer does janitorial work in the pow- erhouse. He and the station operators are the only employees in the unit sought who do their work in the powerhouse. Upon the entire record, we perceive no justification for severing from the existing production and maintenance unit this group of employees who have heterogeneous skills and functions, and who work in different buildings in widely separated areas. Accordingly, we find that the proposed unit is inappropriate and we shall, therefore,. dismiss the petition herein.' Order IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition herein be, and it hereby is; dismissed. 1 Cf. Scovill Manufacturing Company, 75 NLRB 1266. ACME QUALITY PAINTS, INC. and UNITED GAS, COKE AND CHEMICAL WORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO, PETITIONER. Case No. 7-RC-1295: August 8,1951 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 W. A. Reinke, 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 [Members Houston, Reynolds, and Styles]. ' 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. The Employer and Local 12222, District 50, United Mine Work- ers of America, herein called the Intervenor, contend that a collective bargaining contract effective from June 1, 1950, to May 31, 1952, is a bar to this proceeding. The Petitioner contends that the contract cannot. operate as a bar because of schism in the membership of Local 12222. I The petition and other formal papers are amended to show the correct name of the Employer. 95 NLRB No. 124.