Bethlehem-Sparrows Point Shipyard, Inc.

In the Matter of BETHLEHEM-SPARROWS POINT SHIPYARD, INC . and INDUSTRIAL UNION OF MARINE AND SHIPBUILDING WORKERS OF AMERICA, LOCAL 33, CIO Case No. 5-B-1971.-Decided January 8, 1946 Mr. John L. Wynne, of Bethlehem, Pa., for the Company. Mr. W. I. Woolston, of Philadelphia, Pa., for the Union. Mr. Donald H. Frank, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION STATEMENT OF THE CASE Upon an amended petition duly filed by Industrial Union of Marine and Shipbuilding Workers of America, CIO, herein called the Union, alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of Bethlehem-Sparrows Point Shipyard, Inc., Sparrows Point, Maryland, herein called the Company, the Na- tional Labor Relations Board provided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice before Earle K. Shawe, Trial Exaininer. The hearing was held at Baltimore, Maryland, on September 6, 7, and 8, 1945. The Company appeared specially to•contest the jurisdiction of the Board on the ground that the employees involved herein are not employees within the meaning of Section 2 (3) of the Act. The Union entered a general appearance. All parties participated and were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence' bearing on the issues. At the hearing, the Com- pany moved the dismissal of the petition. For the reasons stated in Section IV, infra, the motion is hereby denied. The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are. hereby affirmed. All parties were afforded an opportunity to file briefs with the Board. Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following : FINDINGS OF FACT 1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY Bethlehem-Sparrows Point Shipyard, Inc., is a Delaware corpora- tion engaged at its Sparrows Point, Maryland, shipyard in the repair, 65 N. L. R B., No. 57. 284 BETHLEHEM-SPARROWS POINT SHIPYARD, INC. 285 alteration, and construction of ships. During the year 1944, the value of the materials used by the Company was in excess of $30,000,000, of which more than 70 percent was shipped to it from points outside the State of Maryland. During that year, the value of the work per- formed at the Sparrows Point yard was in excess of $60,000,000, of which more than 90 percent was destined for shipment to points outside the State of Maryland. We find that the Company is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. II. TIIE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED Industrial Union of Marine and Shipbuilding Workers of America, Local 33, of&liated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, is a,, labor organization admitting to membership employees of the Company. III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION The Company has refused to grant recognition to the Union as the exclusive bargaining representative of certain of the Company's em- ployees until the Union has been certified by the Board in an appro- priate unit. A statement of. a Board agent, introduced into evidence at the hearing, indicates that the Union represents a substantial number of employees in the unit sought.- We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the representation of employees of the Company , within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT The Union seeks a unit composed of the Company's office and cleri- cal employees. The Company contends that the petition should be dismissed on the grounds that the employees thus sought to be rep- resented are not employees within the meaning of the Act and that these employees do not constitute an appropriate unit within the meaning of the Act, asserting that this is especially true where the union seeking to represent clerical employees already represents, as the Union does in this plant, the production and maintenance em- ployees. We have had frequent occasion to consider the status of of- fice and clerical employees, and we have concluded that, as 'such, they ' The Regional Director reported that the Union submitted 162 application -for-member- ship cards which were dated 24 in February , 46 in March , 9 in April, 27 in 11Iay, 5 in June, and 39 in August, 1945, and that 12 were undated ; and that there were 344 employees in the unit sought . At the hearing, the Trial Examiner reported that the Union submitted 13 additional cards dated in August 1945, and that of the 175 cards submitted, 174 bore the names of employees in the unit sought. 286 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD are employees within the meaning of the Act who constitute an ap- propriate collective bargaining unit.' We are not persuaded that the instant case differs from those previously considered by us, nor do we consider that representation of them by the union which repre- sents other employees, seeking, as it does, to represent these employees separately, will not effectuate the policies of the Act.3 We have there- fore denied the Company's motion to dismiss the petition. There remains for us the question of the propriety of the inclusion of certain employees, discussed below, who are sought by the Union, but whom the Company would exclude from the unit for reasons other than its general assertion that they are not employees within the meaning of the Act; these reasons are set out and considered below 4 Outfitters: The principal function of these employees is to plan the work of the various crafts so as to eliminate production lags, In pursuance of that purpose, they write work lists for all crafts, check the actual installation of work against blueprints and speci- fications, order equipment for installation and, in general, plan the work for all crafts in advance. The Company asserts that these em- ployees should be excluded from the unit as managerial employees. In our opinion, the functions of these employees are not of such a nature as to identify them with management. We shall therefore include them in the unit hereinafter found appropriate. Outfitter Supervisors: These employees coordinate and expedite the outfitting work on the ships, consulting the various craft foremen in order to insure that the work will progress smoothly and rapidly and that no craft's work will be delayed by the failure of another to have completed its functions. In other industries these employees would be known as expediters. The Company seeks their exclusion from the unit as supervisory employees. They do not have the au- thority, however, to hire, fire, or discipline the outfitters, or to make effective recommendations affecting their status, and we shall there- fore include the outfitter supervisors in the unit hereinafter found appropriate. Timekeeper Leaders A: Each of these employees directs the work of from 6 to 20 timekeepers and timekeeper leaders B.5 Each assigns work to the timekeepers under him. Timekeeper Leaders A do not have the authority, however, to make effective recommendations con- cerning the employees whose work they oversee. They are not, there- 2 Matter of Bethlehem Steel Company, 63 N L. R. B. 1230; Matter of Bethlehem-Spar- rows Point Ship gaid, Inc , 49 N L R B. 762. 3 Matter of The Babcock & Wilcox Co., 52 N. L. R. B. 900 * For the categories of employees whom the Union and the Company agree should be excluded as maniigerial, technical, supervisory, or confidential, see Appendix A, annexed hereto. 6 Other than its general contention , the Company raises no specific objection to the inclu- sion of timekeepers and timekeeper leaders B. BETHLEHEM-SPARROWS POINT SHIPYARD, INC. 287 fore, contrary to the Company's contention, supervisory employees within the meaning of our usual definition, and we shall include them in the unit hereinafter found appropriate. Photostat Operators: The Company asserts that these employees should not be included in the unit because in performing their duties they photostat, on occasion, matters from the general manager's office which pertain to confidential labor relations data.e The honest per- formance of their duties, however, does not require them to read this material, no copies of which are retained in their department. We shall therefore include them in the unit hereinafter found appropriate. Sketchers: The Company seeks the exclusion of these employees from the unit on the ground that they are technical employees. The sketchers are hourly paid employees whose pay is similar to that of the other employees involved herein. It is their duty to make from blueprints sketches which show the proper placement of pipes and fittings to be installed aboard ships. They are not required to have any technical education or any special training in order to qualify for this position. We are of the opinion that they possess interests in the terms and conditions of employment substantially similar to the other office employees, and are not sufficiently technical to warrant their exclusion from the unit. We shall, therefore, include them in the unit hereinafter found appropriate. Miscellaneous individual employees: The Company asserts that the following named employees (department symbol indicated), clas- sified by the Company as clerks, are either supervisory or confidential or both and should therefore be excluded from the unit. The record does not support the Company's assertion and we shall accordingly include these clerks, as such, in the unit hereinafter found appropriate. V. L. Sirk (QAB) A. V. Hutcheson (QAK) R. Chandler (QAB) J. F. McNulty (QAK) A. Hartsock (QAB) C. E. Hughes (QAK) A. E. Parlett (QAB ) The record, however, does substantiate the claims of the Company concerning the status of certain other employees. Among these employees, the following named are confidential em- ployees within the meaning of our customary definition because they have access to labor relation files and materials which they must con- sult in the performance of their duties, and because they attend man- agement conferences on labor relations matters : F. Bouda (QDB) R. E. Obrycki (EB ) M. Kennedy (EA) G. Buettner (H) See Matter of Hudson Motor Car Company, 55 N L It B 509, as to a similar conten- tion concerning telephone and telegraph operators. 679100-46-vol 65-20 288 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD C. Green (L) D. Maroney (EB) J. Bradstock (N) D. M. Sandebeck (L) T. W. DuBois (P) W. G. Amoss (N) A. Al. Macauley (TA) E. G. West (P) M. Karayinopulos (UA) H. C. Burt (SE) E. V. Malcolm (EA) P. Metallo (TB) M. L. Baer (EA) We shall therefore exclude them, as confidential employees, from the unit hereinafter found appropriate. The record reveals that the following named employees have, at least, the power to make effective recommendations affecting the status of employees under them : J. C. Erdman (QAC) F. S. Hormes (QAC) G. F. Hanunel (QAC) R. C. Clifton (QAK) J. Corbin (EB) - H. E. Seeger (EB) D. D. Jarman (QDB) We shall therefore exclude them, as supervisory employees, from the unit hereinafter found appropriate. The record further reveals that the following named employees perform functions and bear other indicia which more closely align them with management than with the other employees involved : A. M. Hodges (assistant to the assistant, general manager, QAK) J. R. Price (material expediter, UC) We shall therefore exclude them, as managerial employees, from the unit hereinafter found appropriate. There are, in the planning and production department (QAK), two other' employees in dispute, both of whom are classified as "super- visors." ° It is the function of one of these employees to schedule manpower generally over the company yards so that production will conform to schedules. In so doing, it is his duty to study and analyze indirect labor and material costs. Usually this employee works alone, although on occason three or four employees may assist him. The other "supervisor" records the dates that the major steps were taken in the construction process, and sets up schedules based on that knowledge, in order to determine the possible dates of delivery and the dates for future bidding. Normally, he has one employee assisting him. In our opinion, these employees are not managerial supervisory; or confi- dential, as the Company contends, and we shall include them in the unit hereinafter found appropriate, as non-supervisory employees. Remaining to be considered- is the status of the Company's janitors. The Union seeks to include in its unit those janitors whose duty it is to clean the Company's administrative offices, but exclude those who ' R. C. Anderson , C F Kainka BETHLEHEM-SPARROWS POINT SHIPYARD, INC. 289 clean the production and maintenance offices.8 All janitors were spe- cifically excluded from the production and maintenance unit which the Union presently represents. Janitors are found on the pay rolls of two departments in the plant, but they are not divided between those departments by function or according to the lines which the Union seeks to establish. They are also divided into salaried and hourly-paid groups, but this division likewise is not made on the basis of place of performance of duty. Although each janitor cleans either administrative offices or other offices, but not both, they perforin iden- tical duties under the same supervision. We perceive no basis in this case for the exclusion of those who perform their duties in the Com- pany's production and maintenance offices, and we shall include all office janitors in the unit hereinafter found appropriate. We find that all office and clerical employees employed by the Company, including outfitters, outfitter supervisors, timekeeper lead- ers A, photostat operators, sketchers, and janitors, but excluding those categories of employees listed in Appendix A, confidential em- ployees, managerial employees, and all supervisory employees with authority to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or effectively recommend such action, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act. V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES We shall direct that the question concerning representation which has arisen be resolved by an election by secret ballot among the em- ployees in the appropriate unit who were employed during the pay- roll period immediately preceding the date of the Direction of Elec- tion herein, subject to the limitations and additions set forth in the Direction. DIRECTION OF ELECTION By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National Labor Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor Rela- tions Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3, as amended, it is hereby DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa- tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Bethlehem-Spar- rows Point Shipyard, Inc., Sparrows Point, Maryland, an election by secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than thirty (30) days from the date of this Direction, under the di- 8 This discussion does not involve certain plant laborers, excluded from the unit by agreement of the parties, who, as one of their duties perform janitorial duties in the plant yards 290 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD rection and supervision of the Regional Director for the Fifth Re- gion, acting in this matter as agent for the National Labdr Relations Board and subject to Article III, Sections 10 and 11, of said Rules and Regulations, among the employees in the unit found appropriate in Section IV, above, who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately,preceding the date of this Direction, including employees who did not work during said pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation or temporarily laid off, and including employees in the armed forces of the United States who present themselves in per- son at the polls, but excluding any who have since quit or been dis- charged for cause and have not been rehired or reinstated prior to the date of the election, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented by Industrial Union of Marine and Shipbuilding Workers of America, Local 33, CIO, for the purposes of collective bargaining. APPENDIX A General Manager's Department (QAA) All employees Outfitting Department (QAB) General Foreman of Outfitting Outfitting Supervisor Supervisor 9 General Superintendent Assistant General Superintendent Superintendents Assistant Superintendents Quartermen` Technical Welding Inspectors 10 Chief Clerks- Confidential Clerk 12 to Supervisor Confidential Stenographer to Hull Superintendent Assistants to Superintendents Engineer in Charge of Boiler Room Coordinator of Machinery Installation Material Coordinator Outfitting Foreman 14 Material Foreman Confidential Stenographer 15 to General Superintendent S F Sullivan. lJ P Edmiston , R N. Hoenes. 'I J. B Harris, A A Ross '° M R Britt ]9 R Roden 14 E. L. Insley. 15 D P. Coleman. BETHLEHEM-SPARROWS POINT SHIPYARD, INC. 291 Accounting Department (QAC) Works Accountant Chief of Cost Assistant Works Accountant Special Statistical Clerk 16 Confidential Stenographers 17 Supervisor of Timekeepers Chief of Payroll and Tabulating Assistant Supervisor of Tabulating Cashier Assistant Cashier All counters, counter supervisors, counter leaders, counter learners Purchasing Department (QAE) District Purchasing Agent Buyers Travelling Junior Buyer 18 Supervisory Clerk 19 Confidential Typist 20 Industrial Relations Department (QAJ) All employees Production and Planning Department (QAK) Supervisor of Planning and Production 21 Assistant Foreman 22 Head of Cost Group 23 Confidential Clerk 24 to Assistant to General Manager Piece Rate Department (QAL) All employees (lull Drafting Department (UA) Chief Hull Draftsman-Structural Test Engineers Assistant Test Engineers Assistant to Chief Engineer Leading Draftsmen Draftsmen Junior Draftsman Supervisor of Order Department Assistant Supervisor, Order Department 25 10 A G. Preisendorfer 11 G L Beiswanger, A Dailey. 13 E Howland 10 J A Morris. 20 L AT Hayden 21 W C McNlel. 22 W T Brown 23J N Kelly. 2% H G Mulvihill. 11 H. H. Hleatzman. 292 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Confidential Typist 26 to Chief Hull Draftsman Confidential Clerk 21 to Chief Hull Draftsman Machinery and Pipe Drafting Department (UB) Department Chief (Assistant Chief Engineer) Chief Engine Draftsmen Leading Draftsman Draftsmen Junior Draftsmen Supervisor of Cost Section Confidential Stenographer 28 to Chief Engineer Electrical Drafting Department (UC) Chief Electrical Draftsman Leading Draftsmen Draftsmen Junior Draftsmen Confidential Stenographer 29 to Chief Electrical Draftsman Departments QAF, EA, EB, G, H, L, N, 0, P, Q, QDA, 1?, TB, SB, BD,SE,SF,X,Y General Foremen Foremen Assistant Foremen Quartermen Supervisors Pipe Shop (QDB) Foreman Assistant Foreman Chief Clerk Confidential Clerk 31 to Foreman Quartermen Supervisors Plate and Shape Yard (TA) Foreman Supervisor Supervisory Clerk 82 Plate and Shape Yard (TC) General Foreman Assistant General Foreman Foreman Supervisor 29 P. I. West 21 C. A. BruehI 29 A. B. Callison 29 C Pietrowics 80 E H Pinek. I'M. Keyes. 92 R. M Gamble. BETTTLEHEM-SPARROWS POINT SHIPYARD, INC. 293 Furnace Quarterman Supervisory Clerk 33 Pitting and Erecting Department (SC) ° General Foreman Assistant General Foreman Foremen-Assembly Foremen Assistant Foremen Quartermen Supervisors Confidential Clerks 34 to General Foreman and Assistant General Foremen Stores Department (W) General Storekeeper Warehouse Foremen Chief Clerks 35 Material Expediter 36 Voucher Clerk 31 Confidential Clerks 3s Supervisors Confidential Clerk 39 to the Assistant to Superintendent of Ma- terials Confidential Typists 40 Supervisory Clerk 41 Plant Maintenance Department (YB) General Foreman Assistant Foreman Confidential Clerk to General Foreman 41 Supervisors Draftsman Inspector Instrument Men 89 E K Einstein D R Lewis, T Decker 85G M Cavanaugh, W S Heck. 86 L. T Conjar 87 H Ramseyer 88 R. Lowdermilk , M. A. Szeliga. E, H Sealover ee P. Montanari. 408 P Livak, K F. Mock '1 H Schwartz u H Weisheit