The Ohio Fuel Gas Co.

In the Matter of THE Or-no FUEL GAS COMPANY, EMPLOYER and UTIL-. . 1TY WORKERS UNION Or AMERICA, CIO, PETITIONER Case No. 8-R-2698.-Decided January 21, 1948 Lord, Hayward, Smith and Notnagel, by Messrs. Franklin F. Hay- ward and Leland L. Lord, of Toledo, Ohio, for the Employer. Mr. Clem Lewis, of Cleveland, Ohio, for the Petitioner. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at Toledo, Ohio, on July 31, 1947, before Ramey Donovan, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. After the close of the hearing, the Employer moved to dismiss the petition on the grounds that (a) the record fails to disclose that the Petitioner has been designated by any employees, and (b) the rec- ord contains no evidence that the bargaining unit is appropriate. The motion to dismiss the petition is hereby denied, because (a) the`Board neither requires nor permits evidence of representation to be adduced in such cases,' and (b) as indicated in Section IV, infra, the evidence is sufficient to support the unit finding made. 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-man panel consisting of the undersigned Board Members.* 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 Ohio Fuel Gas Company, a public utility, is an Ohio corpo- ration engaged in the production and distribution of natural and manufactured gas within the State of Ohio. The Employer annually ' Matter of 0 D Jennings J Company, 68 N. L. R . B 516; Matter of Mascot Stove Com- pany, 75 N. I. R B 427 ` Chairman Herzog and Members Murdock and Gray. 75 N. L. R . B., No. 115. 975 976 , DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD uses products valued in excess of $1,000,000, of which approximately 25 percent represents shipments to its plants from points outside the State of Ohio. We find that the Employer is engaged in commerce within the mean- ing of the National Labor Relations Act.2 II. 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 Iuut. We find that a question affecting commerce exists concerning the rep- resentation of employees of the Employer, -within the meaning of Sec- tion 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT The Petitioner seeks a unit of all office and clerical employees in the Employer's Toledo Division,3 including clerks, secretaries and typists, sales department personnel, messengers, and telephone operators, but excluding confidential secretaries, technical and professional employ- ees, and supervisors. At the hearing, the Employer refused to take any position as to the inclusion in, or exclusion from, the unit of any particular job classification. A list of the office and clerical job classifications contained in the Toledo Division was furnished by the Employer and admitted into evidence. There is'neither contention nor evidence that the duties of the employees to be included in the unit do not correspond to their job titles, which are those of office and clerical employees. The unit sought by the Petitioner is customary in industry generally, including the utility industry 4 Accordingly, we find that all office and clerical employees of the Em- ployer in its Toledo Division, including clerks, secretaries and typists, sales department personnel, messengers, and telephone operators, but 2 Matter of The Ohio Peel Gas Company. 35 N L R B 1128,28 N L R B 667 3 The Petitioner's Local 349 presently represents the production and maintenance em- 'ployees in the Toledo Division " See Matter of American Cyanamid Company , 73 N I, R B 144 , Matter of Waehnsett Electric Company, 65 N L . R B. 1207; Matter of Bethlehem-Hingham Shipyard , Inc. 60 N. L R B 1075 : Matter of Cincinnati Gas & Electric Company , 57 N L R: B 1298, Matter of Pacific Gas & Electric Company, 49 N L R B 810. THE OHIO FUEL GAS COMPANY 977 excluding confidential secretaries, technical employees, professional employees, and supervisors as defined in the amended Act, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act. DIRECTION OF ELECTION As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the pur- poses of collective bargaining with The Ohio Fuel Gas Company, Toledo, 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 Direc- tion, under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Eighth Region, and subject to Sections 203.61 and 203.62 of Na- tional Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 5, among the employees in the unit found appropriate 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, but excluding those employees who have since quit or been dis- charged 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 rep- resented by Utility Workers Union of America, CIO.