Corn Products Refining Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jan 17, 1945

60 N.L.R.B. 92 (N.L.R.B. 1945)

In the Matter Of CORN PRODUCTU REFINING COMPANY and INTER-
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS, A. F. OF L.
In the Matter Of CORN PRODUCTS REFINING COMPANY and INTER-
NATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF FIREMEN, AND OILERS, LOCAL #8,
A. F. OF L.
In the Matter Of CORN. PRODUCTS REFINING COMPANY ant l'
BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, LOCAL B-34,
A. F. OF L.
In the Matter of CORN PRopucTU REFINING COMPANY and INTER-
NATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS, LOCAL #8, A. F. OF L.
Cases Nos. 13-R-.576 to 13-R-0579 incl'u4ve.Decided January
17, 1945
Miller, Westervelt, Johnson cC Thomason,, by Messrs. Frank T.
Miller and Homer W. Keller, of Peoria, Ill., for the Company.
Messrs. P. L. Siemiller and A. E. Dig gins, of Chicago, Ill., for the
TAM.
Mr. John Casserly, of Peoria, Ill., for the Firemen and Oilers.
Mr. S. H. Preston, of Peoria, Ill., for the IBEW.
Cllr. E. R. Cabin, of Peoria, Ill., for the Operating Engineers.
Mr. G. D. Weiny,.of Keokuk, Iowa, and Mr. Robert H. Allison, of
Pekin, Ill., for the Federal.
Miss Frances Lopinsky, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
ORDER
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon petitions duly filed by International Association of Machinists,
A. F. of L., herein called the IAM, International Brotherhood of Fire-
men and Oilers, Local #8, A. F. of L., herein called the Firemen and
Oilers, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local B-34,
A. F. of L., herein called the IBEW, and International Union of Oper-
ating Engineers, Local #8, A. F. of L., herein called the Operating
Engineers, alleging that questions affecting commerce had arisen
60 N. L. R. B., No 18.
92
CORN PRODUCTS REFINING COMPANY 93
concerning the representation of employees of Corn Products Refining
Company, Pekin,. Illinois, herein called the Company, the National
Labor Relations Board - provided for an appropriate hearing upon
due notice before David Karasick , Trial Examiner . Said hearing was
held at Pekin, Illinois, on November 2 and 3, 1944. The Company, the
IAM, the IBEW, the Firemen and Oilers, the Operating Engineers
and American Federation of Grain Processors Council, Federal Labor
Union #18851, herein called the Federal, appeared "and participated.
All parties were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to examine and
cross-examine witnesses , and to introduce evidence bearing on the
issues.
At the hearing, the Company moved the dismissal of the petitions
for the reasons that a contract existing between the Company and
the Federal -is a bar to a present determination of representatives, and
that the units requested by the petitioners are inappropriate. For
reasons hereinafter given the motion is hereby granted . The Trial
Examiner 's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial
error and are hereby affirmed. All parties were afforded an oppor-
tunity to file briefs with the Board.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Corn Products Refining Company is engaged in the manufacture,
sale, and distribution of food and food products in the United States
and foreign countries. The principal products sold by the Company
are starch , syrup, sugar , vegetable oils, and cattle feed. The principal
raw materials used by the Company are corn, cane sugar, chocolate,
lumber, paper , cardboard , and package materials . The Company
operates plants and warehouses at Argo,and Pekin , Illinois, and at
Kansas City , Missouri . It also maintains and operates various plants
in foreign countries. Only the plant at Pekin, Illinois is directly in-
volved in this proceeding.
During the year 1943, the Company purchased for use at its Pekin
plant, raw materials valued in excess of $5,000,000, over 75 percent of
which was sold and shipped by the Company to points outside Illinois.
The Company is presently engaged in war production, approximately
20 percent of its output going to the various armed forces and being
shipped under Lend-Lease arrangements . The remainder goes to
various prime contractors and to the general public.
The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
94 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
II. TILE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
International Association of Machinists, International Brotherhood
of Firemen and Oilers, Local #8, International Brotherhood of Elec-
trical Workers, Local B-34, and International Union of Operating
Engineers, Local #8, and American Federation of Grain Processors
Council, Federal Labor -Union #18851, are labor organizations, affili-
ated with the American Federation of Labor, admitting to member-
ship employees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTIONS CONCERNING REPRESENTATION THE ALLEGED APPRO-
PRIATE UNITS
The IAM contends that all machinists, blacksmiths, welders, pump-
men under the supervision of the machine room foremen; toolroom
attendants, and sweepers employed by the Company constitute an
appropriate unit for collective bargaining. The Firemen and Oilers
would represent employees of the Company in a unit consisting of
boiler room employees, firemen in the refinery and in the feed house,
and plant oilers who work throughout the plant. The IBEW claims
all electricians employed by the Company, including electrical motor
oilers. The Engineers would represent all employees within its trade
jurisdiction who work in the powerhouse, the tracks, cranes, and fire
protection department, the Mazein building and the boilerhouse.
The Company contends that the only appropriate unit for represen-
tation of its employees is plant-wide. The Federal takes the posi-
tion that craft-wide and plant-wide units are equally appropriate
for bargaining on behalf of the Company's employees, depending
upon the desires of the employees involved. It desires to represent
all employees of the Company, unless certain employees prefer repre-
sentation by the craft organization having-jurisdiction over them.'
The Company bases its contention that only a plant-wide unit is ap-
propriate for bargaining on the premise that the custom in the wet
milling industry (in which it is engaged at both Argo and Pekin)
and in all its own plants, is to bargain upon a plant-wide basis, and
that such custom arose of necessity because of the close integration
and interrelation of duties of employees in wet milling plants.
To, sustain its contention, the Company adduced the following
facts : The Company's production operations constantly require a
great deal of maintenance. All employees who perform maintenance
' Cf. Matter of International Shoe Company, 49 N. L. R B 73 ; Matter of Westinghouse
Electric it Mfg. Go , 49 N . L It. B. 4,45; Matter of General Foods Corporation , 54 N. L. It. B.
596; Matter of Allied Mills , Inc, 57 N L It . B. 304, wherein the federal , union or other
A. F. of L affiliate involved ceded jurisdiction to the craft organizations and declined to
continue to represent members of the crafts.
CORN PRODUCTS REFINING COMPANY 95
functions are under the ultimate supervision of the Plant Master
Mechanic, whose responsibility is confined to the maintenance depart-
ment. They work in maintenance shops under the direction of craft
foremen or throughout the plant under the direction of Division
Master Mechanics who are maintenance supervisors responsible to
the Plant Master Mechanic for maintenance in their respective di-
visions. Despite the marked separation in supervision and function
between production and maintenance employees, however, the two
groups are closely integrated. Maintenance employees are sometimes
assigned permanently to a certain production building, in which case
they report directly to that building instead of to their maintenance
shop. Vacancies in jobs are filled by bidding, the qualified man with
seniority receiving the job. Bids can be made across craft or depart-
mental lines. Production workers may bid for maintenance jobs
and vice versa. The Company employs a pool of workmen, called
the "extra board" who are employed to supplement any group of
maintenance or production workers in need of an extra hand.
Within the maintenance department, itself, there is an integration
of the crafts. As above stated, bids for jobs can be made across craft
lines. The full complement of maintenance employees is retained only
during the day. On the second and third shifts, the Company employs
a skeleton force in the maintenance department; one electrician, one
machinist, and one journeyman of each craft. These acts as a crew,
the specialist taking charge of a job within his craft, the others, or as
many as are necessary, acting as his helpers. All of the skilled work-
men rotate in doing shift work. The lack of clear demarcation along
craft lines is emphasized by the scope of the units requested by the
petitioners. With the exception of that claimed by the IBEW, these
proposed units overstep craft and/or departmental lines, comprising
heterogeneous groups of employees, inappropriate bases for bargain-
ing units irrespective of other factors involved herein. For example,
the employees requested by the JAM share common supervision but
not common skills; the employees requested by the Firemen & Oilers
perform similar functions, but some are definitely production em-
ployees, some definitely maintenance; those whom the Engineers seeks
to represent likewise include a variety of production and maintenance
employees whose interests are shared by the persons with whom they
work and not by each other.
From the above, it appears that the Company's contention of func-
tional integration and interrelation of interest among all its production
and maintenance employees is well-founded. The Company's position
is further bolstered by the history of bargaining between the Company
,96 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
and the Federation, which, for 4 years, has been on a plant-wide basis,2
and the history of bargaining in the wet milling industry generally,
which seems to have followed the same pattern.' We find, therefore,
that the units requested by the petitioners herein are inappropriate.
We further find that no question concerning representation has arisen
in an appropriate bargaining unit within the meaning of Section 9
(c) of the Act. Accordingly, we shall dismiss the, petitions.
ORDER
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and the entire record
in the case , the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that
the petitions for investigation and certification of representatives of
,employees of Corn Products Refining Company, Pekin, Illinois, filed
by International Association of Machinists , A. F. of L., International -
Brotherhood of Firemen and Oilers , Local # 8, A. F. of L., Inter-
national Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local B--34 and Inter-
national Union of Operating Engineers ; Local #8, A. F. of L ., be, and
the same hereby are, dismissed.
2 The said history is based upon a formal, written contract which has been renewed from
year to year since November 1940. in accordance with its terms In this respect the facts
of the instant case differ materially from those in Matter of Coin Products Refining Com-
pany, 51 N L R B 1324, concerning the Argo Plant, wherein bargaining had been too
informal to warrant its being given conclusive weight in the determination of the unit
issue.
2 See Matter of A. E Staley Manufacturing Company , 31 N L R. B 946.