The National Survey

THE NATIONAL SURVEY 97 We shall direct an election by secret ballot among the following employees at the Employer's metal products plant at Michigan City, Indiana: All toolroom employees, excluding all other employees and supervisors as defined in the Act. If a majority of employees in the voting group vote for the Peti- tioner, they will be taken to have indicated their desire to constitute a separate appropriate unit, and the Regional Direc- tor conducting the election directed herein is instructed to issue a certification of representatives to the Petitioner for such unit, which the Board, under such circumstances, finds to be appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining. If, under the circumstances set forth below in footnote 8, the name of Local #22268 appears on the ballot in the election hereinafter directed, and if a majority of employees in the group vote for Local #22268, the Board finds the existing unit to be appropriate, and the Regional Director will issue a certification of results of election to that effect. [Text of Direction of Election8 omitted from publication.] Member Peterson, dissenting: Except for the acknowledged craft status of the toolroom employees, there are present here no other factors which I consider a necessary prerequisite to their severance from the production and maintenance unit in which they have been included since 1940. Accordingly, I would dismiss the petition herein. 9 8Although served with notice, Local #22268 did not appear at the hearing. In view of its present contractual relationship with the Employer. Local #22268 may appear on the ballot if, within 10 days of the date of issuance of this Decision and Direction of Election, it notifies the Regional Director of its desire to participate in the election. 9See my dissenting opinion in W. C. Hamilton and Sons, 104 NLRB 627. LAWTON V. CROCKER & HENRY F. CROCKER, d/b/a THE NATIONAL SURVEY and UNITED ELECTRICAL, RADIO AND MACHINE WORKERS OF AMERICA (UE), INDEPENDENT, Petitioner. Case No. 1-RC-3238. July 10, 1953 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 Sidney A. Coven, 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, Murdock, and Peter- son]. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds: 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. 106 NLRB No. 19. 98 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain employees of the Employer. 3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representation 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 a unit of technical and clerical employees at the Employer ' s Chester , Vermont , map-drafting establishment. The parties disagree whether 4 maintenance employees , 3 alleged confidential secretaries , and 6 alleged working supervisors should be included in this unit. The maintenance employees : Fifty to fifty-six of the Em- ployer's 80 employees are cartographic draftsmen , editors, or apprentices , who prepare maps for reproduction by other concerns . The Employer itself has no equipment for repro- ducing maps in quantity , nor does it employ any production employees . The Employer desires to add the maintenance employees , so that the unit will be virtually employer-wide., One of the maintenance employees is a night janitor. The other 3 have a variety of duties . They drive trucks, go on errands, care for the grounds , and handle the stocking and shipping of maps . In addition , 2 of the men spray map negatives and mount map drafts and finished maps; and 1 of these also builds wooden toolkits , map racks , and map shipping cases. On these facts we shall include the four maintenance men. Three of them do much work which is closely related to map drafting and which is performed in close proximity to the technical and clerical employees . ' As for the janitor, he may properly be included with the unit which enjoys his services, despite its technical nature. 3 The alleged confidential employees : Although it desires to include office clerical employees , the Petitioner would exclude 3 unspecified office girls whom it asserts are private secre- taries to the management. The record shows , however, that all the office girls , with the exception of a bookkeeper, work for all the executives interchangeably. There was no evidence that any of the girls spends any substantial amount of time on work pertaining to labor relations policymaking . We there- fore find that none of them are confidential employees in the sense in which that term is used by the Board .4 We shall in- clude all office clericals in the unit.5 The alleged working supervisors : The Petitioner would include, and the Employer exclude as supervisory, sixworking crew chiefs who are hourly paid . As the functions and authority of these persons differ, we shall consider them separately. 1 Excluding only salesmen and the categories excluded by statute 2 Kelsey Hayes Wheel Co , 85 NLRB 666, 670-1; Ingalls Shipbuilding Corp . 73 NLRB 374, 378 3General Dyestuff Corp., 100 NLRB 1311. 4Republic Steel Corp., 94 NLRB 1294, 1295; Phillips Oil Co., 91 NLRB 534, 539 5As the Petitioner desires the inclusion of all nonconfideutial office clericals with the tech- nicals and as the Employer declared that it would oppose a combined technical and clerical unit only if some of the clericals were excluded, our decision against such exclusion reduces this case to the usual one in which, absent objection, the Board holds that a technical-clerical unit is appropriate. Titeflex, Inc , 103 NLRB 223. THE NATIONAL SURVEY 99 Edwin DeGroff , crew leader of the mechanical line drafting section, coordinates the flow of work for the 4 finalized drafting sections in much the same way as is done by Young, an admitted supervisor, for the 4 compilation sections . DeGroff also writes up the job instruction sheets for these 4 finalized drafting sections , in which some 22 persons are normally employed. Like Adams, Bryant, and Young, all of whom are admitted supervisors , DeGroff has several times traveled to Washington to make estimates on United States Map Service jobs . We find that he is a supervisor and shall exclude him. Thurston , crew leader of 1 of the 2 "pull -up" sections in the compilation division , has at times gone directly to Per- sonnel Director Walsh to request wage increases for em- ployees in his section. These increases have been granted. As he thus has the power to make effective recommendations regarding personnel action, we find that he is a supervisor. We shall exclude him. Howe , crew chief of the section which makes drainage and contour drawings and vegetation overlays ( a part of the finalized drafting department ), oversees the work of about 10 employees. Like Supervisors Adams, Bryan, Young, and DeGroff , he has been sent to Washington to estimate the cost of new projects . As there is no evidence rebutting the Em- ployer ' s testimony that Howe 'has power to make effective recommendations regarding personnel action , we find that he is a supervisor and shall exclude him. Thayer , who has charge of placing grid lines on maps, as required , works by himself considerably more than half the time. When the volume of grid work is greater than usual, however , he is given as many as 12 assistants . During the period of more than a month just preceding the hearing, there was no grid work to do and Thayer worked for other crew chiefs. Even when acting as a crew chief , Thayer has never made any recommendations regarding raises and his sugges- tions regarding transfers were not effective . Although at least one apprentice worked for a while under him, Thayer was never called upon to help rate his performance . Thayer's crew members obtained their work assignments directly from the central assignment board maintained by the Employer's dispatcher . When Thayer wished to alter these assignments,he requested Plant Manager Vincent Crocker to make the desired changes. We find that Thayer is not a supervisor and shall include him. Stevens, crew chief in the " stick-up" section ( which places printed names on the maps ), has only 2 employees on her crew. Her $1 an hour rate of pay is the same as that of 1 of her 2 subordinates and less than that of the other .6 The record satisfies us that she has no substantial authority in personnel matters . When apprentices working under her were rated by the management, she was neither consulted about the matter 6 The Employer explained that Stevens had had a shorter span of continuous service than her two subordinates 322615 0 - 54 - 8 100 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD nor informed of the result. We -findthatshe is not a supervisor. We shall include her. LaPoint, chief of the photo analysis and editing crew, in- structs and oversees from 2 to 5 employees. For the past 6 months the number has not exceeded 3. His renumeration is $1.25 an hour, which is the standard journeymen's rate for cartographic draftsmen at the Employer's plant and is less than the rate received by some of the men working under him. We find on the conflicting evidence that he has no power to make effective recommendations regarding personnel matters and that he is not a supervisor . We shall include him. We find that the following unit is appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act: All technical,' office clerical, and maintenance em- ployees at the Employer's Chester, Vermont, establishment, excluding salesmen , the advertising manager , professional employees, guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act.' 5. The Petitioner requests that the payroll period for determining eligibility for voting in the election directed herein be established as May 18, 1953, rather than the period immediately preceding the date of our Decision and Direction of Election. In support of this request, it says that a strike occurred on May 19, the day before the hearing, and that certain employees were then discharged. We are administra- tively advised, further, that the Petitioner on May 22 filed unfair labor practice charges predicated upon these discharges. However, these events could not make necessary the use of a payroll period other than that customarily utilized.9 Moreover, we are administratively informed that the Regional Director on June 9 refused to issue a complaint on the basis of the dis- charges 10 and that the Petitioner did not appeal from that action within the period allowed. Accordingly, for the purpose of in- vestigation of representation the dischargees are no longer employees and are not entitled to vote in the election directed herein. 11 [Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.] 7 We adopt the stipulation of the parties to include the map editors, except for Kendall Crocker, son of one of the partners. 8It was agreed that Adams, Bryant, and Young are supervisors. In addition, we exclude as supervisors: Howe, Thurston, and Edward DeGroff. 9 Dischargees whose status as employees is being determined in pending complaint proceed- ings can vote in Board elections subject to challenge. Grinnell Brothers, 98 NLRB 20. 10 The Regional Director did issue a complaint the next day alleging discriminatory reduction of hours and elimination of overtime. 11 Times Square Stores Corp., 79 NLRB 361. POULTRY ENTERPRISES, INC. and AMALGAMATED MEAT CUTTERS & BUTCHER WORKMEN OF NORTH AMERICA, LOCAL 442, A. F. of L. Case No. 10-CA-1562. July 13, 1953 DECISION AND ORDER On April 15, 1953 , Trial Examiner George A. Downing issued his Intermediate Report in the above -entitled proceeding, find- 106 NLRB No. 15