H & B American Machine Co.

H & B AMERICAN MACHINE CO. 9 all the employees doing the same kind of work. Many of the employees in the proposed unit work in the same or directly comparable job classifications as employees outside the unit. 6 There is also consider- able interchange of employees in the proposed unit with employees who are not sought' Moreover, the record indicates that there have been no significant changes in the Employer's administrative organization since the Board's decision in 1950 quoted above. The interlacing supervisory authority and the common personnel policies still exist. As the unit does not constitute a traditional bargaining group 8 and as it does not include all employees doing the same work and having similar interests,9 we find that it is inappropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining. We shall therefore dismiss the petition. Order IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition in this matter be, and it hereby is, dismissed. 8 The Employer introduced evidence showing that 50 job classifications not included in the unit have functions identical to or directly comparable with 19 job classifications within the unit. The record shows that approximately 300 employees outside the unit work in such classifications and that there are approximately 300 employees in the unit sought. 7 The Employer introduced evidence showing that , since January 1948 , there have been approximately 30 permanent transfers out of the unit and approximately 65 permanent transfers into the unit . The record also contains evidence of extensive temporary inter- change with respect to the employees herein involved. 8 See footnote 2 above. 9 Walker Scott Corporation, 89 NLRB 1339 ; compare Montgomery Ward it Co., 89 NLRB 528. H & B AMERICAN MACHINE CO. and LODGE 1647 OF DISTRICT 64 OF TILE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS, AFL, PETITIONER. Case No. 1-RC-2322. November 16, 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 Torbert H. Macdonald, 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 power in connection with this case to a three-member panel [Members Houston, Murdock, 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 employees of the Employer. 97 NLRB No. 6. 10 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 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, which is the contractual representative of the production and maintenance employees at the Employer's plant in South Attleboro, Massachusetts, seeks a separate unit of time checkers,' excluding the hour timekeeper, executives, office and clerical employees, guards, professional employees, chief time checker, and all other super- visors as defined in the Act. The Employer objects to the requested unit on the ground that the time checkers are part of the payroll or accounting department. . The time checkers are stationed in the various production depart- ments where they work in close association with the production em- ployees. Their principal function is to record on time cards the amount of time individual production employees devote to each par- ticular job. These cards are checked at the end of each day by the chief time checker and the hour timekeeper both of whom spend all their time in the payroll office. Thereafter, the cards are submitted to the cost accounting department. The time checkers are supervised by the chief time checker 2 who, in turn, is ultimately responsible to the treasurer of the Employer. The time checkers and the hour timekeeper are paid on a salary basis, while the production employees, who are supervised by a works manager, are hourly paid.3 In contrast to the office employees, the time checkers and the hour timekeeper have the same schedule as the production employees. From the foregoing facts, it is clear- that the time checkers are plant clericals whose interests are closely allied with those of the production employees:' As the time checkers belong in the same unit with the production and maintenance employees, we shall deny the Petitioner's request for- a separate time checkers' unit. We shall, however, establish a separate voting group for these employees. If a majority of the time checkers vote for the Petitioner, they will be taken to have indicated their desire to be included in the production ' The current contract between the Petitioner and the Employer excludes time checkers from its coverage. 2 The parties agree, and we find, that the chief time checker is a supervisor within the meaning of the Act. Accordingly, we shall exclude him from the voting group hereinafter established a However, the time checkers as well as the production employees receive time and a half for overtime work. 4 Although the time checkers are paid on a weekly rather than an hourly basis, and their line of supervisory authority runs to a different hierarchy from that which super- vises the production employees, these factors do not essentially distinguish them from the production employees with whom they work and have common interests Westinghouse Electric Corporation (Sturtevant Division) 95 NLRB No. 118; Hotpoint, Inc, 85 NLRB 485. NATONA MILLS, INC. 11 and maintenance unit currently represented by the Petitioner, and the Petitioner may bargain for such employees as part of the existing unit .5 There remains for consideration the question whether the hour timekeeper should be excluded from the time checkers' group as desired by the Petitioner. The Employer does not take any position on this issue. As noted above, this employee does all his work in the payroll office. His duties include checking time cards against time-clock cards and punching the appropriate data on cards for the cost accounting department. As the hour timekeeper is located in the payroll office and does not regularly associate with the time checkers or other employees in the production departments, we shall exclude him from the voting group. [Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this volume.] Arcade Manufacturing Division of. Rockwell Manufacturing Company, 96 NLRB 116; Westinghouse Electric Corporation (Sturtevant Division ) supra ; Goodman Manufactur- ing Company, 93 NLRB 1001. NATONA MILLS, INC. and LOCAL 401, INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, CHAUFFEURS, WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS OF AMERICA, AFL, PETITIONER. Case No. 4-RC-1204. November 16, 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 Ramey Donovan, 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 organizations involved claim to represent certain employees of the Employer. 3. For several years, the Employer has recognized the Petitioner as the bargaining representative of the receiving clerk and two truck' 'At the hearing, the Employer moved to dismiss the petition on the grounds of (1) contract bar, and (2) the inappropriateness of the unit. Branch A-23, Levers Auxiliary Section of the Amalgamated Lace Operatives of America , herein called the Intervenor, joined in the Employer's motion to dismiss on the ground of the inappropriateness of the unit. For the reasons stated in paragraphs numbered 3 and 4, infra, the motion is denied. 97 NLRB No. 5.