F. W. Sickles Co.

In the Matter of F. W. SICKLES COMPANY, EMPLOYER and ENGINEER- ING AND ARCHITECTURAL ASSOCIATION , LOCAL NO. 112 OF THE INTER- NATIONAL FEDERATION OF TECHNICAL ENGINEERS , ARCHITECTS, AND DRAFTSMEN'S UNION , AFL, PETITIONER Case No. 1-R-3749.Decided January .31, 19.1,9 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS Upon a petition duly filed, hearings 1 were held before a hearing ,officer of the National Labor Relations Board. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearings are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.2 Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor Relations 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 this case, the Board finds : 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. 2. The labor organization named below claims to represent employ- ees of the Employer. 3. A 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. The Petitioner requests a unit of all the Employer's technical em- ployees, including production engineer, cost estimators, experimental instrument and model makers, mechanical engineers, detailers, tool designers, draftsmen, layout and check men, quality control engi- neers, laboratory technicians, senior radio engineers, junior radio 'The first hearing in this case was held on June 24, August 5, and August 6, 1947. Pursuant to an order , dated March 24. 1948 , a reopened hearing was held on May 4, 1948. On November 10, 1948, the parties to this proceeding entered into a stipulation certain matters might be received in evidence that 2 At a second hearing in this ease held at Springfield , Massachusetts, on May 4, 1948, the Employer moved that the petition be dismissed unless the Petitioner provided new evidence of interest because nearly a year had elapsed since the date of the original peti- tion we find no basis in this contention to warrant depaiting from our usual policy of holding that a petitioner' s showing of interest is an administrative matter not open to collateral attack Matter of O D Jennings d Company, 68 N L R B 516. * Chairman Herzog and Members Houston and Gray. 81 N. L. R. B., No. 67. 390 F. W. SICKLES COMPANY 391 engineers, radio engineering assistants , tool draftsmen, time-study engineers, manufacturing methods engineers , supervising general duty clerk, methods clerks, general duty clerks, specifications writers, and blueprint operators , but excluding office and clerical employees, supervisors , and all other employees of the Employer. The Employer is a Massachusetts corporation engaged in the bus- iness of manufacturing and selling radio parts and their components. The Employer employs approximately 1,700 employees , and has a con- tract with the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (AFL ) covering all hourly paid production and maintenance em- ployees. The employees sought by the Petitioner in the instant case are the employees in the engineering departments who have not pre- viously been represented in any unit. The Employer contends generally that the unit is inappropriate be- cause it includes employees in several independent departments, and that each department should constitute a separate appropriate unit. The Employer also makes various contentions with respect to the in- clusion and exclusion of certain classifications of employees, and these contentions will be dealt with later in this decision. With respect to Employer's first contention that employees of all the engineering departments should not be included in one unit, the record discloses the following facts. The Employer's engineering operations are carried on in several departments . The work done in each of these departments represents a step in the progress of a radio part to the final point where it can be turned over to the manu- facturing division for mass production in the factory. A part is originally developed in the research and development department where a model is finally made. The model of the part is turned over to the manufacturing methods department , and this department ana- lyzes the part to determine how it can be produced efficiently and economically in mass production . The specifications department, working with the results achieved by the manufacturing methods de- partment, prepares working plans and detailed drawings of the part for use by the manufacturing division. If, at a later time , there is a re- quest for a change in the specifications of the part , the specifications department consults the manufacturing methods department before making the change. The quality control department decides whether a particular material specified for use in the manufacture of the part is actually suitable, but this department must consult the manufactur- ing methods department before making any change in the type of ma- terial specified. Because the Employer sells most of its merchandise from samples, it maintains a model development department where such samples are made, and , in the making of these samples , the model 392 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD development department must frequently consult both the specifica- tions department and the manufacturing methods department. At various stages in the development of a part, it must be tested to deter- mine whether or not it meets certain prescribed tolerances and often special testing equipment must be made for the testing of a particular part. This work is done by the test equipment department. The production engineering department is made up of engineers drawn from the other engineering departments and selected for their detailed knowledge of the work of the departments involved in the develop- ment of the part. The function of this department is that of "trouble shooting" when any difficulty arises with respect to one of the Em- ployer's products. On the basis of the above facts and the record as a whole, it appears that the various engineering departments are closely interrelated. There is some interchange of employees and a great deal of inter- dependence as to functions. We find no justification for establishing a separate unit for each department, and accordingly, we agree with the Petitioner that the appropriate unit consists of employees of all the engineering departments in a single unit. With respect to the individual classifications of employees sought by the Petitioner, the Employer contends, contrary to the contention of the Petitioner, that the classifications discussed below are profes- sional employees within the meaning of Section 2 (12) (a) and (b) of the amended Act and should, therefore, be placed in a separate voting group to comply with Section 9 (b) (1) of the amended Act. If it is decided that any of the disputed classifications are profes- sional employees, the Petitioner seeks to represent them in the same unit with the technical employees, if such professional employees vote in favor of such inclusion. Manufacturing methods engineers These employees work in the manufacturing methods department and are charged with the duty of determining how a new part developed by the research and develop- ment department may be manufactured in mass production in the Employer's plant. First, the job in question must be broken down into simple operations and sequence sheets prepared showing the appropriate sequence of manufacturing operations. If it is deter- mined that special tooling is required for the part, the designing of the tool is turned over to a tool designer who prepares drawings and designs the tool. Finally, the methods engineers "methodize" the job by going out into the particular department or departments where the article is to be manufactured and working with the foremen who will be in charge of the manufacture of the article. The methods engineer should have substantial practical experience, usually as a F. W. SICKLES COMPANY 393 foreman in the manufacturing plant, since this department is designed to perform a service which helps the factory produce a particular product cheaply and economically, and enables the foremen to devote more of their time to supervisory work. Plants which do not main- tain a methods department depend upon their foremen and superin- tendent to carry out the work of methods engineers. The work does not require any substantial amount-off knowledge of an advanced type in a field of science or learning customarily acquired by prolonged courses of specialized study in institutions of higher learning. At the time of the hearing, two methods engineers employed by the Em- ployer had college degrees in engineering, and six of the engineers were only high school graduates with some additional technical ,education. All of these engineers had had considerable previous experience either with this Employer or with employers in related industries. The usual line of promotion to the job of methods engi- neer is from the job of foreman in the manufacturing plant. In view of the above facts, we find, contrary to the contention of the Employer, that the methods engineers are at most highly skilled technical employees and are not professional employees within the meaning of the amended Act. Tool designer: This employee also works in the manufacturing methods department. He designs special tools which may be re- quired for the manufacture of a new part. He must be able to meet the engineering requirements for the manufacture of radio and radar parts, consult and advise with respect to the specifications and manufacturing processes, and work from engineer's drawings and sketches. He must have a thorough knowledge of the plant's manufacturing operations and keep informed concerning any changes. He is required to have considerable technical knowledge of mechanics and some training in higher mathematics. A tool designer requires a long period of practical experience in order to develop the requisite skills for his work. It does not appear that the work done by this employee meets the requirements of Section 2 (12) (a) or (b) of the amended Act, and we conclude that he is a highly skilled technical -employee and not a professional employee. The production engineers: The production engineering depart- ment was set up just prior to the hearing in this case, and it was not known at that time what all its functions would ultimately be. It was thought that certain responsibilities formerly vested in other depart- ments would be transferred to this department, and the department's personnel, consisting of six production engineers, was recruited from other engineering departments. The most important requirement for employment in this department was a thorough knowledge of the 394 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Employer's products. The engineers were to act as "trouble shooters," representing the engineering department as a whole, and eventually having a good deal of contact with the Employer's customers. The Employer introduced in evidence a job description for senior pro- duction engineer which indicated that the chief function of this posi- tion would be to act as liaison between engineering methods, and quality control, to insure the expeditious handling of any design and specification change recommendations which would normally arise during a preliminary introduction of a new product into production. On the occasion of customer complaints, the production engineer would be consulted by members of the quality control department and would initiate and direct corrective action. This employee is expected to contact directly any individuals or groups from whom he believes the most expeditious and complete disposition of a situation may be obtained. He must leave a thorough knowledge of the construc- tion, operation, and maintenance of plant equipment, and a good background of training and practical experience in production, radio, engineering, methods and mechanics. The job description states that a production engineer should have a college degree plus at least 1 year of practical experience in the Employer's plant or in a similar plant, or in the alternative, he should have some technical training plus 3 years of experience in the Employer's plant or in a similar organization, or any other suitable combination of formal training and practical experience. Only one employee from this department testified at the hearing and the record contains no testimony concern- ing the experience or qualifications of the other five engineers in this department. Kazimer Alnelisko testified that he had been in the Employer's employ for 11 years, 2 years as a solderer, and 9 years in various other departments not specified. This witness conducted his own radio business for 3 years and was in the Army for some time. His salary as a production engineer was $60 a week. The record does not contain sufficient evidence to enable us to find this position to come within the definition of a professional employee, and we shall, therefore, not include production engineers in the separate voting group of professional employees. Senior radio engineers: Senior radio engineers are employed in the research and development department, the test equipment laboratory department, model development department, and the specifications section.' The duties and responsibilities of the senior radio engineers 3 At the hearing, the Petitioner contended that some of the senior radio engineers were supervisors No conclusive testimony concerning their supervisory duties was introduced, and subsequent to the hearing, in a stipulation signed on November 9 and November 10, 1948 , the parties agreed that none of the job classification included in Petitioner's unit request were supervisory. F. W. SICKLES COMPANY 395 vary, depending upon the department in which they are working. In the research and development department their work is creative and is concerned with the design and development of new products. This department is not concerned with mass production problems, although care is taken to insure that the article being developed can be manufactured on a mass production basis. The senior radio engineer in this department is required to be familiar with scientific subjects relating to radio, radar, and electronics. By study and research he must keep fully informed on new theories, materials, and experimental work in these fields. His work is predominantly intellectual and var- ied; it involves a consistent exercise of discretion and judgment; and the output cannot be standardized in relation to any given period of time. The work requires knowledge of the advanced type referred to in Section 2 (12) (a) of the amended Act. At the time of the hearing, there were two senior radio engineers in the research and development department. One was a high school graduate who had taken special courses at Pratt Institute. He was hired in 1935 by the Employer as a laboratory technician and had progressed through the positions of technician, engineering assistant, and junior radio engineer, to his present position of senior radio engineer. The other senior radio engineer was hired in 1937 as a sample maker and pro- gressed through the positions of engineering assistant, quality control engineer, and junior radio engineer. We find that the senior radio engineers with the research and development department are profes- sional employees. The test equipment department employed one senior radio engineer. The function of the test equipment department is to design and make testing equipment, to test the various products manufactured by the Employer, and also to maintain and service the Employer's testing equipment throughout the plant. Inasmuch as this department is concerned with the creation and development of new equipment, the senior radio engineer might have to possess the same qualifications as the senior radio engineer in the research and development depart- ment. However, the record contains insufficient information concern- ing the duties and responsibilities of this employee to warrant our finding him to be a professional employee 4 Accordingly, we shall include him in the voting group of technical employees and allow him to vote subject to challenge. If the tally of ballots indicates that his vote is determinative of the result of the election, we shall make a further investigation to determine his exact status. 4 The stipulation filed by the parties reveals that the individual occupying this position at the time of the hearing was a high school graduate who had had additional special courses of an unspecified nature He had owned his own radio service business, was hired in 1934 by the Employer as a radio technician, and was later promoted to his present position. 396 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD The model development department employs one senior radio en- gineer. This department manufactures samples to be used by the Employer in the sale of his merchandise. Samples are also made to meet a customer's specifications on a special order. Many of the em- ployees in this department were originally employed in the factory proper and were promoted to this department because of their high skill and long experience as production workers. This department is actually a production unit on a very small scale, and is considered by the Employer as a sort of training ground for the rest of the en- gineering organization. The one senior radio engineer in this depart- ment had been an electrician, a refrigerator tester, a sample maker, and a production engineer. He was hired by the Employer in 1936. It does not appear that the work of the senior radio engineer in the model development department meets any of the requirements of the definition of a professional employee contained in the amended Act, and we shall not include this classification in the voting group of pro- fessional employees. The specifications section employs five senior radio engineers. The function of this department is to prepare working plans and detailed drawings of intricate parts and assemblies from sketches, notes, or models, and to assist in putting the article into manufacture on a mass production basis. Blueprints must be made of the article and instruc- tions prepared as to the materials to be used. The engineers must be able to interpret the drawings, sketches, and specifications of the re- search department or of the Employer's customers. They must have a sound knowledge of higher mathematics and electrical and mechani- cal engineering. The senior radio engineers in this department are expected to guide the activities of the other employees in the section. such as blueprint operators, specification writers, detailers, and drafts- men, but do not act as supervisors within the meaning of the amended Act. Four of the five senior radio engineers in this department are graduates of institutions of higher learning and have specialized in engineering subjects.' It would appear, and we find, that the work of the senior radio engineers in this department meets the requirements of the definition of a professional employee in Section 2 (12) (a) of the amended Act, and we shall accordingly include these engineers in a separate voting group of professional employees. Junior radio engineers: Junior radio engineers are employed in the research and development department, the test equipment department, the model development department, the specifications department, and 6 One of the senior radio engineers in this department was a graduate of Yale University in electrical engineering with additional work at M I. T : two others were graduates of Renssalaer Polytechnic Institute in electrical engineering and another graduated from Williams College with additional courses in radio. F. W. SICKLES COMPANY 397 the short order department, which is a subdivision of the specifications department. In general, the junior radio engineers are expected to possess the same basic qualifications as the senior radio engineers and their work corresponds to the work of the senior radio engineers in the department in which they work. The normal line of progression for junior radio engineers is to the position of senior radio engineer. Accordingly, we find that those junior radio engineers who are em- ployed in departments where we have found senior radio engineers to be professional employees are likewise professional employees, i. e., junior radio engineers in the research and development department, and the specifications departments We shall include these junior radio engineers in the professional voting group. We shall include the junior radio engineers in the model development department, the short order department, and the test equipment department, in the voting group of technical employees. Experimental instrument and model maker: The Employer employs two experimental instrument and model makers, one in the re- search and development department and one in the test equipment laboratory section. This employee does experimental work in design- ing, redesigning, developing and testing various kinds of fixtures, jigs, tools, instruments, machines, and models as the need arises in any de- partment of the plant. He works under the supervision of the chief mechanical engineer and may assign jobs to the toolroom laboratory or other workers who furnish him with routine assistance. This em- ployee must know the mechanics of tool making, be familiar with tools, machines, gauges, and the instruments necessary for his work. He must know shop mathematics and be able to figure angles and distances exactly. He must have a thorough practical knowledge of the nature of metals, and be able to harden, temper, grind, and lap them. He must also know how to work with plastics. His work may range in com- plexity from the designing of a simple wooden jig handle to an intricate precision tool, radio chassis, or complicated machine to be used in any one of the many operations of the plant or in a new and untried manu- facturing process. He must have a wide knowledge of manufacturing procedures and standard materials. His work is both manual and mental. To a large degree his work is creative and requires some scien- tific and technical knowledge. He should have several years of prac- tical experience as a skilled tool and die maker. Neither of the ex- perimental instrument and model makers in this plant had completed high school. One had been a tool maker and machinist, and the other 6 Inasmuch as we are placing the senior radio engineer in the test equipment depart- ment in the voting group of technical employees and are allowing him to vote subject to challenge, we shall accord the same treatment to the junior radio engineers in the test equipment department. 398 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD had been a sheet metal worker. It appears that this position requires a very highly skilled craftsman, but we do not find that the work is of a professional nature within the meaning of the amended Act. Layout and cheekinan: The Employer employs one layout and check- man in the research and development section. This employee checks the work of detailers and tracers to locate errors and help them solve any difficult problems. Ile assists the chief electrical or mechanical engineer to develop designs to mcet the customers' requirements, and advises on specifications and manufacturing processes. He must be able to lay out a design front engineers' suggestions, notes, or sketches. He should have considerable technical knowledge of radio, some me- chanical engineering background, some training in higher mathema- tics, and a thorough knowledge of manufacturing operations in this industry. The particular individual employed in this position was a high school graduate with 3 years of special engineering studies in ad- dition. He had had previous experience as a tool designer, machine designer. and tool and gauge designer. It would appear that this posi- tion calls for a highly skilled technician, but that the work is not pro- fessional within the meaning of the amended Act. Experimental tool maker: The Employer employs one experi- mental tool maker in the research and development department. The record contains no testimony with respect to the duties and qualifica- tions of the experimental tool maker. The parties stipulated that the individual employed in this position had had 1 year of high school, had been hired in 193), without previous experience, and had progressed through the positions of draftsman and tool maker. There appears to be no justification in the record for the Employer's contention that this employee is a professional employee within the meaning of the amended Act. Quality control engineer: The Employer employs two quality con- trol engineers in its quality control department. The job description produced in evidence by the Employer indicates that this employee should have a college degree and at least 1 year of practical experience in a plant similar to the Employer's, or in the alternative, some technical training plus 3 years of experience in a plant similar to the Employer's. The quality control engineer is responsible for observ- ing and reporting upon product quality in the various production departments of the Employer's manufacturing division. His work may be initiated by a customer's complaint or by requests for analysis from other departments of the Employer. He is required to have a knowledge of the construction, operation, and performance of plant equipment, and to have a good background of practical engineering experience in radio manufacture. He must understand the techniques F. W. SICKLES COMPANY 399 of statistical analysis and be able to install and operate a quality con- trol system with the necessary control charts. One of the individuals holding this position with the Employer was a high school graduate with 2 years at Boston University in the accounting field. He later attended a Springfield Trade School and training schools conducted by Philco and R. C. A. The other quality control engineer was a graduate of Massachusetts State College, with a major in mathematics and physics. He later completed 1 year of electrical engineering at Pennsylvania State College. It does not appear that the work of the quality control engineer meets the requirements of the definition of a professional employee in the amended Act. Mechanical engineer: The Employer employs two mechanical engi- neers in the research and development department. This engineer designs and develops special equipment and machines for the manu- facture of company products. He also designs new radio products. He is required to know higher mathematics and the principles of radio, radar, and electricity. He must work independently and his work is of a creative nature. One of the two employees in this classifi- cation was a high school graduate with 2 years at Northeastern Uni- versity, specializing in mathematics, mechanics, machine design, and meteorology. He was hired by the Employer in 1932 and held posi- tions of tester, foreman, methods engineer, and finally mechanical engineer. The other mechanical engineer had received 2 years of high school work and was hired by the Employer in 1930. He has worked as a laboratory technician, draftsman, designer, and finally mechanical engineer. It appears that this classification meets the requirements of the definition of professional employees in the amended Act, and we shall include mechanical engineers in the voting group of pro- fessional employees. The parties were originally in dispute with respect to the inclusion or exclusion of certain clerks in the engineering department. It was finally stipulated that the general duty clerks were clerical employees and not technical and should, therefore, be excluded from the unit found appropriate. The parties also agreed that methods clerks were technical employees. The remaining disagreement relates to blueprint machine operators which the Employer contends are clerical employees and should be excluded from the unit. The Petitioner contends that these employees are technical employees and should be included in the unit. The blueprint machine operator performs a series of manual or machine operations, exposing, developing, washing, and drying blue- prints. While not a highly skilled technician, his work and interests bear sufficient relation to those of the other technical employees in the engineering department to warrant his inclusion in the same unit. 400 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD The parties are in dispute with respect to the inclusion or exclusion of time-study engineers. The Employer contends that these engineers are confidential and managerial employees and should not, be included in any unit. The Petitioner contends that four time-study engineers should be included in the unit of technical employees. These time- study engineers make studies on the production floor to determine the base rate for an operation, which rate, modified by certain allow- ances and checked by research in the Employer's files, determines the base pay of the production piece rates operator. The time-study en- gineer is empowered to refuse to time a job which he believes is not being performed in the prescribed sequence or where he decides that the operator is not giving a satisfactory demonstration. The depart- ment foreman need not be present during the time study and the foreman's approval of the rates set is not necessary under the collec- tive bargaining agreement between the IBEW and the Employer. Written time studies may be spot checked by the head of a depart- ment, but frequently prices are placed on a job before the study has been so reviewed. When grievances arise concerning the base rate of an operation, a time-study man may be called as a witness during the discussion of the grievance for the purpose of developing the facts involved in setting the piece rate. As a result of their studies, the time-study engineers may recommend changes in a particular opera- tion for the benefit of the Employer. Under the collective bargaining agreement between the IBEW and the Employer, the Employer re- serves the right to adjust piece-work rates and no provision is made for approval by the union except that, in the event the union protests the rate, the Employer, after 45 days in which he may establish the fairness of the rate, agrees to submit the new rate to arbitration if no agreement is reached. Upon the basis of the entire record, we find that these time-study engineers are professional employees within the meaning of the amended Act and not managerial employees as contended by the Employer. There is nothing in the record to indicate that these en- gineers act in a managerial capacity. We shall accordingly include the time-study engineers in the separate voting group of professional employees hereinafter established.7 ' Matter of Detroit Harvester Company, 79 N L R B 1316. In that case we also held that there was nothing in the amended Act to prevent the time-study employees from being represented by the same labor organization currently representing production employees. In the instant case, the labor organization seeking to represent the time-study engineers is affiliated with the labor organization representing the production employees. While Board Member Gray would not place time-study engineers in any voting group for the reasons set forth in the dissenting opinion in the Detroit Harvester case, he deems himself bound by the majority opinion in that case. F. W. SICKLES COMPANY 401 The parties are in agreement that the remaining classifications in the Petitioner's unit request, and not discussed in detail herein, are technical employees and may be included in the unit to be found ap- propriate. We shall direct that separate elections be held in the following groups and shall defer our determination as to the scope of the unit until the results of these elections have been ascertained. 1. All manufacturing methods engineers, methods clerks, tool draftsmen, draftsmen, tool designers, production engineers, blueprint machine operators, detailers, specifications writers, junior and senior draftsmen, laboratory technicians, experimental instrument and model makers, radio engineering assistant, layout and check man, experi- mental tool maker, quality control engineer, senior radio engineers in the model development department and the test equipment depart- ment, and junior radio engineers in the model development depart- ment, the short order department, and the test equipment department, but excluding general duty clerks, cost estimators, the supervising gen- eral duty clerk, supervisors, and all other employees. 2. All senior and junior radio engineers in the research and de- velopment department and the specifications department, time-study engineers and mechanical engineers, excluding all supervisors. DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining with the Employer, elections by secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than 30 days from the date of this Direction, under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Region in which this case was heard, and subject to Sections 203.61 and 203.62 of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 5, as amended, among the em- ployees in the voting groups set forth in paragraph numbered 4, above, who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of this Direction of Elections, 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 discharged for cause and have not been rehired or rein- stated prior to the date of the election, and also excluding employees on strike who are not entitled to reinstatement, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented, for purposes of collective bargain- ing, by Engineering and Architectural Association, Local No. 112 of the International Federation of Technical Engineers, Architects, and Draftsmen's Union, AFL.