Foster Wheeler Corp.

FOSTER WHEELER CORPORATION 211 assigned to driver-salesmen routes and who spend 50 percent or more of their time at this work shall be eligible to vote. [Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this volume.] FOSTER WHEELER CORPORATION and LODGE 1665, INTERNATIONAL Asso- CIATION OF MACHINISTS, PETITIONER. Case No. 3-RC-622. May 1',1951 Decision and Direction of Election Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (e) of the National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before John C. MeRee, 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 Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member panel [Members Houston, Reynolds, and Styles]. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds : 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. 2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain em- ployees 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. 4. The Petitioner seeks to represent a separate unit of factory clerks at the Employer's Dansville, New York, plant, where the Employer is engaged in the manufacture of oil refining, steam generating, and other heavy machinery and equipment. In the alternative, the Peti- tioner would merge these employees with the production and mainte- nance employees whom it currently represents.' The Employer contends that the factory clerks sought by the Petitioner do not con- stitute an appropriate unit, and further contends that they should not be added to the existing production and maintenance unit. The Employer. contends that the interests of the factory clerks are more closely identified with those of the office clerks than with those of the production and maintenance employees. However, the factory clerks ' On April 26, 1943, following a consent election, the Petitioner was designated as bar- gaining representative for a unit of production and maintenance employees excluding, among others, the factory clerks. Case No 3-R-560 (unpublished). On November 12, 1950, the Employer and the Petitioner executed a contract covering the production and maintenance employees to remain in effect for 1 year, and which contained an automatic renewal clause. 94 NLRB No. 37. 212 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD sought by the Petitioner work in various plant buildings, while the office clerks work in a separate main office building, and the duties of the former are more closely integrated with production work than the duties of the office clerks. We find, therefore, in accordance with our usual policy, that, the factory clerks may, if they so desire, be added to the existing unit of production and maintenance employees 2 We shall, therefore, accord the factory clerical employees the opportunity through an election to express their desires as to whether or not they should be added to the established production and maintenance unit represented by the Petitioner. There is a dispute as to the unit placement of the following em- ployees, whom the Petitioner would include as factory clerks, and whom the Employer would exclude from the proposed unit. Shop clerks.-There are three categories of shop clerks known as "A" clerks, "B" clerks, and "C" clerks. The plant consists of five buildings, and each major department in the plant has a small office in which the shop clerks and the production foreman work. Shop clerks prepare time cards, personnel records, and requisitions for mate- rials under the supervision of the production foreman. They have frequent contact with production employees. The Board has here- tofore held that clerical employees such as these are plant clerks, and may be represented in the same unit as production and maintenance employees .3 The Employer contends, however, that the shop clerks should be excluded as confidential employees. They may be present in the office when discussions involving labor relations occur between the foreman and assistant foreman, and they know what rates of pay other em- ployees receive. As it does not appear from the record that the fore- man is concerned with the Employer's general labor relations,4 and as knowledge of salaries paid to employees is not alone sufficient to bring the shop clerks within the Board's definition of confidential em- ployees,,' we find that they are not confidential employees. The Employer contends, further, that the "C" clerks should be ex- cluded from the unit as supervisors. "C" clerks, in addition to per- forming duties similar to "A" and "B" clerks, are responsible for the accuracy of the work of the other clerks, receive a higher salary, and train new employees. They have on occasion been consulted with respect to transfers and the efficiency of the other clerks. Although the record indicates their reports on the efficiency of other clerks are in most cases accepted without question, there is no evidence that the 2 aemmer Manufacturing Company, 85 NLRB 700; General Petroleum Corporation, 83 NLRB 514. 3 Waterous Company, 92 NLRB 76; Truscon Steel Company, 88 NLRB 331. 4 Hotpoint, Inc, 85 NLRB 485 5 Chicago Railway Equipment Company, 85 NLRB 586. FOSTER WHEELER CORPORATION 213 "C" clerks recommend the other clerks for promotions , and the rec- ord indicates that transfers are initiated by the chief shop clerk alone. Although it was stated at the hearing that the "C " clerks have the power to recommend disciplinary action against other employees, it does not appear that they have ever exercised that power or that any weight would be given to such recommendation , if made. Accord- ingly, we shall permit them to vote in the election directed below.6 Stockroom clerks.-These clerks work in the stockroom located in a plant building across the road from the main office building. Two of the clerks in the stockroom check material requisitions , three handle perpetual inventory records, one, known as the cutting specifications c]erk, prepares cutting lists for sheet metal for the use of the shop, one is the chief stockroom clerk, who supervises the stockroom clerks 7 and one is the chief inventory clerk who was recently moved to the stockroom from the accounting office and is under the direct super- vision of the chief accountants The Employer contends that the stockroom clerks should be excluded on the ground that they are not factory clerks.9 The chief stockroom clerk, who supervises these clerks, is responsible to the stockroom foreman, who in turn is re- sponsible to the factory superintendent . Records kept by these clerks are for the direct use of the production department , they work the same hours as shop clerks and production and maintenance employees, punch time cards in the same place as the production and maintenance employees, and work in the same locale as production and maintenance employees and shop clerks. In view of the foregoing, we find the interests of the stockroom clerks are allied with those of the production employees , and we shall ,permit them to vote in the election directed below.10 Chief inspector's office.-This office is located within a few feet of the stockroom. There are two clerks working in this office; one prepares affidavits and keeps records, and the, other acts as a stenog- rapher and writes reports from daily foundry tests. The Employer contends that these two employees should be excluded as confidential employees. The chief inspector handles grievances of the inspectors under his supervision, and prepares reports on these grievances which may be typed by either of his two clerks . The plant inspectors super- 6 Indianapolis Newspapers Inc., 83 NLRB 407. 7 The Petitioner takes no position as to the unit placement of this employee. As the record discloses that he has the authority effectively to recommend the discipline and promotion of stockroom clerks, we shall exclude him from the voting group as a supervisor 8 In accordance with the agreement of the parties, we shall exclude the chief inventory clerk , as his interests are more closely allied with the accounting department than with the plant clerks. 9 We find without merit the Employer 's contention that the material requisition clerks should be excluded as confidential employees . See footnote 5, above. 10 Wm. P McDonald Corporation, 83 NLRB 427 , Mississippi Products, Inc., 78 NLRB 873: Goodman Manufacturing Company, 58 NLRB 531. 214 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD vised by the chief inspector are included in the existing production and maintenance unit. The chief inspector does not represent the Employer in contract negotiations with the Petitioner, and informa- tion on his reports .on grievances is already known to the shop steward when the report is made. He also prepares reports of a confidential nature for the Employer in connection with defense contracts. As the chief inspector does not formulate or effectuate the Employer's general labor relations policies, we find these clerks are not confi- dential employees,",. and, as their interests are allied with the plant clerks, we shall permit them to vote in the election directed below. Accordingly, we shall direct an election in the following voting group : All factory clerks at the Employer's plant at Dansville, New York, including shop clerks, stockroom clerks, and the two clerks in the chief inspector's office, but excluding guards, professional employees, the chief stockroom clerk, the chief inventory clerk, and all other supervisors as defined in the Act, and all other employees. 12 If a majority of these employees vote for the Petitioner they will be taken to have indicated their desire to be included in the produc- tion and maintenance unit currently represented by the Petitioner. [Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this volume.] 11 Amplex Manufacturing Company, 85 NLRB 523. 12 The Employer contended at the hearing that the Petitioner 's showing of interest is inadequate. The adequacy of a showing of interest is a matter for administrative deter- mination, not litigable by the parties . See Elastic Stop Nut Corporation of America, 87 NLRB 1532. In the instant case, the Board is administratively satisfied that the Petitioner has made a sufficient showing of interest. THE ZIA COMPANY, PETITIONER and INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, LOCAL UNION 611 AND INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS, LOCAL No. 9 AND LOCAL No. 9A. Case No. 33-RM-11. May 0, 1951 Decision and Direction of Election Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Joseph A. Jenkins, 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 Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three- member panel [Members Houston, Reynolds, and Styles]. 94 NLRB No. 50.