Florida Power & Light Co.

In the Matter of FLORIDA PowER & LIGHT COMPANY, EMPLOYER and INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, A. F. OF L., PETITIONER ' Case No. 10-R-1896.-Decided- August 30, 1946 Mr. Alfred L. McCarthy, of Miami, Fla., for the Employer. Mr. F. D. Irwin, of Miami, Fla., for the Petitioner. Mr. Emil C. Farkas, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND ORDER 0 Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at Miami, Florida, on June 28, before Alba B. Martin, Trial Examiner. At the hearing the Employer moved to dismiss the petition on various grounds. The Trial Examiner referred this motion to the Board. For the specific reasons stated in Section IV, infra, the motion is hereby granted. The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations Board makes the following : FINDINGS OF FACT 1. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER Florida Power & Light Company is engaged in the State of Florida in the generation, distribution and sale of electric energy, and the man- ufacture, distribution and sale of fuel gas. During the year 1945 the Employer's gross income from the sale of fuel gas was in excess of $600,000. During the same period the Employer purchased raw mate- rials for its gas department, valued in excess of $250,000, all of which was shipped from points outside the State of Florida. The Employer sells fuel gas to shipyards, industries and other concerns, which are admittedly engaged in interstate commerce. The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. 70 N. L. R. B., No. 76. 1012 FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY H. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED 1013 The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with American Federation of Labor, claiming to represent employees of the Em- ployer. III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION The Employer refuses to recognize the Petitioner as the exclusive bargaining representative of employees of the Employer until the Petitioner has been certified by the Board in an appropriate unit. We find that a° question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the representation of employees of the Employer, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT On September 25, 1942, pursuant to separate elections directed by the Board,' the Petitioner was certified as the collective bargaining representative, for a system-wide unit of the Employer's electrical employees,2 and Gas Department Employees Association was certified as the collective bargaining representative for a Greater Miami Area unit of the Employer's gas employees 3 On October 9, 1945, also, pursuant to an election directed by the Board,4 the Petitioner was certified as the collective bargaining agent for a system-wide unit of the, Employer's gas workers." Under its 1942 and 1945 certifications the Petitioner has been bargaining with the Employer as the repre- sentative of all electrical and gas employees throughout the Em- ployer's system. In this proceeding the Petitioner seeks to merge with the employees it now represents the following gas employees : plant foremen B, dis- tribution foremen B, crew foremen, service supervisors, meter shop foremen, gas clerks, gas office assistants and chemist. But all of these employees, except crew foremen, were specifically excluded by 1 Matter of Florida Power & Light Company, 42 N. L. R. B. 742. The unit consisted of all employees in the electrical , generating , transmission, and dis- tiibutlon departments of the Employer who are employed in Florida , excluding supervisory and management employees above the rank of crew foreman. S This unit consisted of all employees of the gas department of the Employer In. the Greater Miami Area, including working foremen whose rank is comparable to that of a crew foreman and other employees paid out of gas department funds and engaged in manufac- ture, maintenance, distribution , meter repairs, and office work in the gas department, but excluding supervisory employees who have the power to hire and discharge . Gas Depart- ment Employees Association became defunct as a labor organization on or about April 25, 1945. 4 Matter of Florida Power c6 Light Company, 63 N. L. It. B. 484. 1 This unit consisted of all employees engaged throughout the Employer 's plants in the State of Florida in the manufacture and distribution of gas, including construction , opera- tion, maintenance, and meter repair employees but excluding , gas clerks, gas office assistants, office and clerical employees , sales employees , meter readers, collectors , property protection employees, chemists, plant foremen B, distribution foremen B, service supervisors, meter shop foremen , and all other supervisory employees. 1014 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD the Board from the system-wide unit of gas workers in which the Petitioner was certified in 1945; inasmuch as the Employer at that time engaged no crew foremen as such, the Board made no determina- tion concerning the inclusion of this category. Plant foremen B, distribution foremen B, service supervisors, and meter shop foremen were found to be supervisory employees; gas clerks and gas office assistant were found to be office clerical employees; and the chemist was found to be a technical employee. It is clear from the record in the instant case that the functions and duties of the employees whom the Board specifically excluded remain unchanged. Furthermore, it also appears that the Employer still does not employ crew foremen as such. In these circumstances we perceive no reason to grant the Petitioner's request for merger. In reaching our conclusion we have considered the Petitioner's assertion that,the classifications it now seeks tb represent were included by the Board in the Greater Miami Area unit of gas employees in which the Gas Department Employees Association was certified in 1942, and the Petitioner's further argument that categories of a comparable nature were included by the Board in the system-wide electrical unit in which the Petitioner was certified that same year. No concrete evidence appears in the present record to support the Petitioner's position'. Moreover, the issue of the inclusion or exclusion of the em- ployees here in question was not specifically litigated in the proceeding from which evolved the Gas Department Employees Association's certification nor was the question of the inclusion or exclusion of comparable electrical employees so litigated in the case from which ensued the Petitioner's certification as bargaining agent of the electri- cal workers. And in the only proceeding in which a dispute arose with respect to the inclusion or exclusion of the employees here in question and in which this issue was consequently litigated, the Board after due consideration did not include these workers. In the light of the above facts we shall dismiss the petition herein. ORDER Upon the basis of the foregoing, findings of fact, and upon the entire record in this proceeding, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that the petition for investigation and certification of repre- sentatives of employees' of Florida Power & Light Company, Miami, Florida, filed by International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, A. F. of L., be and is hereby dismissed. MR. JAMES J. REYNOLDS, JR., took 'no part in the consideration of the above Decision and Order. ' ' ' '