The Detroit Edison Co.

In the Matter of THE DETROIT EDISON COMPANY , EMPLOYER and VERNER MARSHICK , PETITIONER and LOCAL 223, UTILITY WORKERS OF AMERICA , CIO, UNION Case No. 7-RD-46.-Decided June 22,1949 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon a petition for decertification duly filed, hearing in this case was held before Harold L. Hudson, hearing officer. The hearing offi- cer's ruling made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. 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 the three-member panel [Chairman Herzog and Members Reynolds and Murdock]. Upon the entire record in the case the Board finds : 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.' 2. The Petitioner is an employee of the Employer and alleges that the Union is no longer the representative, as defined in Section 9 (a) of the Act, of the employees designated in the petition. The Union is a labor organization recognized by the Employer as the exclusive bargaining representative for the employees, among others, designated in the petition. 3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa- tion of certain employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. 4. The Petitioner requests decertification for the employees of the production laboratory. These employees are classified by the Em- ployer as coal analysts, and are hereafter referred to as such. The ,Union opposes the petition upon the ground that it has bargained effectively for the coal analysts as part of the production unit since 1 The Employer is a New York corporation maintaining its office and principal place of business in Detroit, Michigan It purchases annually more than 2,000,000 tons of coal valued in excess of $4,000,000 from points outside the State of Michigan Upon similar facts the Board has heretofore found the Employer to be engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. See Matter of Detroit Edison Company, 74 N. L. R. B. 1051. 84 N. L. R. B., No. 58. 477 ,r - 853396-50-vol 84-34 ' 478 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 1946 and that they are an appropriate part of the production unit at the Delray power plant. The Employer takes no position in the matter. In 1943, as the result of a consent election, the Union was certified as the bargaining representative of all employees of the' production department employed at the Employer's Delray power plant, in Detroit, Michigan, excluding, among others, employees of the produc- tion laboratory. In 1946, the Union petitioned the Board for certifica- tion as bargaining representative of all employees of the production laboratory at the Delray plant. The matter was resolved by' the Employer voluntarily recognizing the Union as bargaining represent- ative of such unit of laboratory employees. Thereafter, the Employer and the Union agreed to include the coal analysts in the unit previously certified for the production employees at the Delray power plant. The Employer employs five coal analysts in its production labora- tory,2 under the supervision of the technical engineer,' who is also in charge of the instrument repair group of the' he Delray power plant. Although the work of the coal analysts brings them in contact with employees in many divisions of the Employer, there is no interchange between coal analysts and other groups of employees. Positions for the job of coal analyst are usually filled from the group of instrument men, because the work of the coal analyst calls for a degree of famili- arity with various types of scales and gauges. Promotions for coal analysts are limited to the grades of technical clerk or senior coal analyst. The job description for coal analysts calls for a knowledge of elementary chemistry and physics and the ability to use the slide rule as well as to compute results of tests and analyses where empirical formulas are involved. The coal analyst is thereby further distin- guished from production employees in that his work is not entirely of a physical nature. The work of the coal analyst is primarily concerned with the testing and analysis of coal, ash, fuel oil, and furnace-refuse samples in order to determine not only physical and thermal characteristics, where called for, but also the ultimate chemical compositions of such mate- rials and to furnish a check on the efficiency of power plant operations. It is clear from the description of the skills exercised by and the knowledge possessed by the coal analysts and the laboratory proce- dures which they must follow in the performance of their work, that their work is of a technical nature. In view of the foregoing circum- 2 The Employer also maintains a research laboratory which is separate and distinct from the production laboratory. Both laboratories are located on the site of the Delray plant. L Prior to representation by the Union and the establishment of the job classification of senior coal analyst, coal analysts were separately supervised . Similarly they were paid on a weekly basis instead of hourly as at present. THE DETROIT EDISON COMPANY 479 stances, we believe that the coal analysts are technical employees, who may, notwithstanding a history of collective bargaining on a broader basis, constitute a separate unit for the purposes of collective bargain- ing, and may therefore properly be the subject of a decertification petition.' Accordingly, we shall direct an election by secret ballot to be held among the employees in this group. If the employees in this voting group do not select the Union, the Union will be decertified as to them; if on the other hand they select the Union, they will be taken to have indicated their desire to be included in the unit with the produc- tion employees. DIRECTION OF ELECTION As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the pur- poses of collective bargaining, an election by secret ballot shall be con- ducted 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 employees in the voting group described in paragraph numbered 4, above, who were em- ployed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of this Direction of Election, including employees who did not work dur- ing said pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation or tempo- rarily laid off, but excluding those employees who have since quit or been dicharged for cause and have not been rehired or reinstated 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 by Local 223, Utility Workers of America, CIO. 4 Matter of American Smelting and Refining Company, .80 N. L. It. B. 68. See also fatter of Phillips Chemical Company. 83 N L It. B 612; Matter of Gardner-Denver Company, 82 N. L. R. B. 201.