Western Electric Co., Inc.

In the Matter Of WESTERN ELECTRIC COMP ANY, INCORPORATED, EM- PLOYER and INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, LOCAL No. 1290, A. F. OF L., PETITIONER Case No. 18-RC-398.-Decided August 1, 1919 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before Max Roten- berg, hearing officer. The hearing 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 organizations involved claim, to represent certain em- ployees of the Employer. 3. The question concerning representation : On July 2, 1947, the Employer and one of the three intervenors herein,' United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America, Local 1117, C. I. 0., herein called the UE, entered into a contract covering the employees involved in this proceeding, effective until July 2, 1949, and thereafter from month to month unless terminated by either party upon 60 days' written notice. On August 23, 1948, the parties to the contract executed a supplementary agreement extending the contract to January 2, 1951. The UE urges its contract as a bar to this proceeding. The Petitioner and two of the intervenors, the 1 The Petitioner objected at the hearing to the intervention of two of the three inter- venors herein , the UE and Communications Workers of America, C. I. 0., herein called CWA, on the ground that these organizations had not complied with the filing require- ments of Section 9 (f), (g), and ( h) of the Act . A labor organization 's compliance with these provisions of the Act is a matter for administrative determination by the Board and not subject to attack by the parties . Furthermore , the CWA has effected such compliance. Matter of Procter & Gamble Manufacturing Companp, 78 N. L. R. B . 1043 . The UE was permitted to intervene on the basis of its contractual interest . Matter of Baldwin Loco- motive Works, 76 N. L. R. B. 922. 85 N. L. R. B., No. 100. 857829-50-vol. 85-37 563 564 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD CWA and District 77 of International Association of Machinists, herein called the I. A. M., assert that the supplementary agreement was a premature extension of the 1947 contract and that there is therefore no bar to a present determination of representatives. Although the Employer declined to recognize the Petitioner on the ground of its contract with the UE, it took no position on this issue at the hearing. The extension on August 23, 1948, of the contract which had provided for termination on July 2, 1949, was a premature one 2 We have recently held that a prematurely extended contract may operate as a bar only during the term of the original contract.3 The petition herein, filed on April 27, 1949, was therefore timely. Accordingly, we find that a question affecting commerce exists concerning the repre- sentation of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section .2 (6) and (7) of the Act. 4. The appropriate unit; the determination of representatives : The Petitioner, the CWA, and the UE seek a unit consisting of all hourly rated employees of the Employer's St. Paul, Minnesota, plant,, excluding maintenance electricians and their helpers, clerical and office employees, and supervisors. The TAM seeks a unit of all the employees engaged in the installation, repair, and maintenance of tools, machinery, and equipment, including tool makers, machinists, lathe operators, jig borers, tool and gauge inspectors, grinding ma- chine operators, milling machine operators, heat treaters, detail mak- ers, and welders, but excluding utility men, toolkeepers, oilers, belt rmen, clerk typists, technical investigators, electricians, all other pro- duction employees, office apd professional employees, guards, all group, section, and department chiefs, and all other supervisors. The Petitioner, the. CWA, the UE, and . the Employer contend that the unit sought by the IAM is inappropriate because of the plant-wide collective bargaining history and the integration of the Employer's operations. At its St. Paul plant, comprising three buildings, the Employer is engaged in the manufacture of telephone equipment. The Employ- er's production departments, but not its toolroomn, are operated on, a conveyor belt system, with subsidiary operations feeding into- a major assembly line. The employees sought by the TAM are all assigned to the toolroom, and are engaged in the installation, repair, maintenance, and construction of tools, machinery, and equipment used in the production process. All the toolroom employees are under the supervision of the same department chief, who supervises no pro- duction employees. Although the toolroom employees perform much 2 Matter of Geo. Knight & Co., 74 N. L. R. B. 561. 3 Matter of Republic Steel Corporation, 84 N. L. R. B., No. 60. WESTERN ELECTRIC COMPANY, INCORPORATED 565, of their work throughout the plant, they have separate headquarters, and they do no production work other than that which may be in- cidental to their maintenance duties. When performing their duties in production departments, their work remains under toolroom super- vision, although they are subject to discipline by the production department supervisor. On May 5, 1945, the Board issued a Decision and Direction of Elec- tion in a proceeding involving the same plant and substantially the same unit now sought by the IAM,' in which it found the unit sought by the IAM appropriate.' The employees thereafter selected the UE as their bargaining representative. On July 26, 1945, in a Decision and Certification of Representatives,' the Board found appropriate a unit of production and maintenance employees, excluding those found to constitute an appropriate unit in its Decision of May 5, 1945, and certified the UE as their bargaining representative. The em- ployees in both units have since been bargained for jointly by the UE and have been covered by the same collective bargaining contract. The record does not reveal any substantial change in the operations of the Employer since the issuance of the earlier Decisions. We find that the employees sought by the TAM constitute a homo- geneous, skilled, toolroom group, such as we traditionally establish in a separate unit.' The fact that they have previously designated an organization later also selected by the production and maintenance employees is no reason to deny them an opportunity at this time to express their desire for separate representation or inclusion in a plant-wide unit. Accordingly, we shall make no final unit deterniina- t.ion at this time, but shall be guided in part by the desires of tlie:e employees as expressed in the elections hereinafter directed. Guards: The Petitioner would exclude guards from the plant-wide unit; the UE would include them, and the CWA would include them if they are not "guards" within the meaning of Section 9 (b) (3) of the Act. There are 22 guards in the plant who patrol the plant area, princi- pally during nonworking hours, reporting through an. ADT clock system. Although they are not armed or deputized, they perform the usual duties of plant protection employees, enforcing company rules designed for the protection of company property. Minor infractions Employees formerly classified as junior mechanics and cotter grinders are no longer employed in the machinist group, and employees in the following categories have been added to the group : heat treaters, welders, utility operator, detail makers, jig bore oper- ator, and milling machine operators. 5 61 N. L. R. 13. 974. No petition was filed in that proceeding for. a plant-wide unit. 'Case No. I8-R-1312. P Matter of Sunbeam Corporation, 74 N. L. R. B. 976 ; Matter of Republic Flow Meters Company, 72 N. L. H. B. 296; Matter of Russell Electric Company, 72 N. L. R. B. 278. 566 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD of factory rules by employees are reported by the guards to a super- visor, who takes appropriate disciplinary action.. These -employees are guards within the meaning of Section 9 (b) (3) of the Act, and we shall therefore exclude them .8 Accordingly, we shall direct that separate elections by secret ballot be held among the employees. of the Employer's St. Paul, Minnesota, plant, in the following voting groups : ' - (1) All employees engaged in the installation, repair, and main- tenance of tools, machinery, and equipment, including tool makers, machinists, lathe operators, jig borers, tool and gauge inspectors, grinding machine operators, milling machine operators, heat treaters, detail makers, and welders, but excluding utility men, toolkeepers, oilers, belt men," clerk typists, technical investigators, electricians, all other production employees, office and professional employees, guards, all group, section, and department chiefs, and all other supervisors. (2) All hourly rated employees, excluding all employees included in voting group (1) above, electricians and their helpers, all clerical and office employees, guards, professional employees, and supervisors. If the employees in voting group (1) select the IAM, they will be taken to have indicated their desire to constitute a separate bargain- ing unit 10 DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS 11 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, among the employees in the voting groups described 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 B Matter of C. V. Hill d Company, Inc., 76 N. L. It. B. 158. 6 The utility men, toolkeepers, beltmen, and oilers are excluded as the record shows that they require only a relatively brief training period and do not perform work requiring any particular degree of skill. We are of the opinion that their interests are more closely allied to those of the production and maintenance employees than to those of the employees in the group which the IAM seeks to represent. 10 We shall not place the name of the UE on the ballot in either voting group as it has not complied with Section 9 (f), (g), and (h) of the Act. - As the IAM indicated at the hearing that it did not desire to represent the employees in a plant-wide unit, we shall not place its name on the ballot in voting group (2). "Any participant in the election herein may. upon its prompt •request-to, and approval thereof by, the Regional Director, have its name removed from the ballot. WESTERN ELECTRIC COMPANY, INCORPORATED 567 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 elections, and also excluding employees on strike who are not entitled to reinstatement, to determine whether : (1) The employees in voting group (1), above, desire to be repre- sented, for purposes of collective bargaining, by District 77 of Inter- national Association of Machinists; by International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local No. 1290, A. F. of L.; by Communications Workers of America, C. I. 0.; or by none of these labor organizations; (2) The employees in voting group (2), above, desire to be repre- sented, for purposes of collective bargaining, by International Broth- erhood of Electrical Workers, Local No. 1290, A. F. of L.; or by Communications Workers of America, C. I. 0.; or by neither of these labor organizations.,