International Harvester Co.

In the Matter Of INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER COMPANY, LOUISVILLE WORKS, EMPLOYER and LouIsvTT,T GUARDS UNION, LOCAL 15, INTER- NATIONAL GUARDS UNION OF AMERICA, PETITIONER Case No. 9-RC-457.-Decided June W,1949. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon a petition duly filed, ahearing was held before William Nai- mark, hearing officer of the National Labor Relations Board. The- hear - ing 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 National Labor Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member' panel [Chairman Herzog and Members Houston and Murdock]. 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 the guards employed by 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. 4. The Petitioner seeks certification as the exclusive bargaining representative of all the guards employed at the Employer's Louis- ville, Kentucky, plant. The Employer contends that its guards are employees whose interests are so closely allied with management that they cannot properly form part of a bargaining unit, and that the petition should therefore be dismissed. These guards, however, per- form only the usual monitorial duties of such employees, including checking credentials at plant exits, patroling plant property, main- taining order, and enforcing plant rules for the protection of plant 1 The Petitioner has no members other than employees who are guards and is pot directly or indirectly affiliated with any other union which admits to membership employees other than guards. 84 N. L. R. B., No. 98. 848 - INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER COMPANY 849 property and equipment from loss through fire, vandalism, and.pil- ferage.' The guards have no authority to hire or discharge, or to discipline other employees . They report infractions of plant rules 'to their -own immediate supervisors. From these facts, it appears clear-that the employees in question are not supervisors or confidential employees, and-that they may properly constitute a bargaining'un'it. The Employer's motion to dismiss is accordingly denied. The Employer further contends that if a bargaining unit of guards is established, it should include the two plant protection equipment inspectors, whom the Petitioner would exclude. These inspectors are paid slightly more than guards, but they have no authority over the guards. They perform identical duties except that they have the additional duty of making daily inspections of the plant fire apparatus, which may consume as much as 50 percent of their time. They work under the same supervision as the guards , use the same locker room, report to work at the same office, and enjoy the same vacation benefits and privileges . The inspectors relieve the plant guards, and, if one of the two inspectors is absent , a plant guard is designated to replace him. In view of the similarity of their work and interests, we shall include the plant protection equipment inspec- tors in the unit of guards. We find that all plant guards employed at the Louisville, Ken- tucky, plant of the Employer, including plant protection equipment inspectors, but excluding the chief , assistant chief, and lieutenants of guards, and all other supervisors, may constitute a unit appro- priate 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 purposes of collective bargaining with the Employer, an election 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 super- vision 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 described in paragraph numbered 4, above, who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of this Direction of Election , including employees who did not work during said pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation or 850 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR. RELATIONS BOARD 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 bar- gaining, by Louisville Guards Union, Local-15, International Guards Union of America.