Steamship Trade Association of Baltimore, Inc.

6 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD found that 1 such employee , Cecil Fore , was a supervisor and recommended that the challenge to his ballot be sustained. However, he found that the other 2 employees , Elam and Pritchett, were not supervisors and recommended that the chal- lenges to their ballots be overruled . The Petitioner excepted to this finding and contends that all 3 employees are supervisors. As no exception was taken to the Regional Director ' s action insofar as he found that Fore was a supervisor , we adopt this finding and sustain the challenge to his ballot. As the other two challenged ballots are insufficient to affect the results of the election,4 we find it unnecessary to rule on them. Accordingly , we will overrule the objections to the election, and as the majority of the ballots were cast in favor of the Inter- venor , we will certify it as the representative of the employees in the appropriate unit. [The Board certified Coolidge Corporation Independent Union as the designated collective -bargaining representative of all production and maintenance employees employed by the Em- ployer at its Middletown , Ohio, plant , including leadmen, in- spectors , and shop clericals , but excluding office clerical employees , draftsmen, engineers , guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act.] Member Beeson took no part in the consideration of the above Supplemental Decision and Certification of Represen- tatives. 4 As we have sustained the challenge to Fore's ballot , the maximum number of valid votes cast, including the 2 other challenged ballots , would be 95, of which the intervenor received 48. STEAMSHIP TRADE ASSOCIATION OF BALTIMORE, INCOR- PORATED and INTERNATIONAL LONGSHOREMEN'S ASSO- CIATION, Petitioner . Case No. 5-RC-1363. March 23, 1954 DECISION AND ORDER Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 ( c) of the National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Sydney Smith, hearing officer . The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby af- firmed.' 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. 1The name of the Employer as it appears in the formal papers was amended at the hearing to the form shown above. 108 NLRB No. 3. STEAMSHIP TRADE ASSOCIATION OF BALTIMORE, INCORPORATED 7 2. The labor organization involved claims to representcer- tain employees of the Employer.2 3. No 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 , for the following reasons: Steamship Trade Association of Baltimore , Incorporated, herein called the Association , is an association of individual member companies engaged in the maritime industry in Balti- more and vicinity . The Association and the Petitioner, which is the recognized representative of stevedores and dock la- borers employed by the Association ' s member companies, negotiate contracts for the wages and working conditions of these employees. In the instant proceeding , the Petitioner seeks to represent in an associationwide unit timekeepers employed by the indivi- dual member companies of the Association , not hitherto repre- sented for bargaining purposes . The Association, contending that certain timekeepers as a group are essentially office clerical employees and should not be included in a unit apart from other office clerical employees of its member companies. We agree with this contention. Disregarding certain timekeepers who may be supervisors or managerial or confidential employees , timekeepers gen- erally perform the following duties : For a short period each day timekeepers work on the docks, assigning identification tags to longshoremen and taking their time . They pay long- shoremen on Fridays . They spend , however, the great majority of their working hours in the pier offices or in the uptown offices of their member companies , computing cost or per- formance figures based upon the labor hours worked and the amount of a given commodity handled . They are paid on a salary basis and , in general , share the vacation , sick-leave , and in- surance benefits of office clerical employees . They perform their duties with access to office records of their member companies . Under these circumstances , we find that time- keepers in general are office clerical employees.3 Because timekeepers comprise only a segment of the office clerical staffs of the Association ' s member companies, we find that the proposed unit limited to timekeepers from which other office clerical employees are excluded is not an appro- priate unit.4 We therefore dismiss the petition. [The Board dismissed the petition.] Member Beeson took no part in the consideration of the above Decision and Order. 2 Wm. L. Hoge & Co., Incorporated, 103 NLRB 20. 9Gastonta Weaving Company , 91 NLRB 899, 900. 4 Cf. F. H. McGraw & Company, 106 NLRB 624.