South Carolina Electric & Gas Co.

I)8:('ISIONS OF NAI'IONAI. IABOR RELATIONS BOARD South Carolina Electric & Gas Company and Interna- tional Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL- CIO, Local 398, Petitioner. Case I 1 RC-4658 July 10, 1979 DECISION ON REVIEW AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION By CIIAIRMAN FANNING ANI) MEMBIERS JNKINS ANI) PENEI.I.O On March 21, 1979, the Regional Director for Re- gion I issued a Decision and Direction of Election in the above-entitled proceeding in which he fotund the petitioned-for unit for "downstairs clerks" working in the Employer's Charleston electric distribution de- partment an appropriate unit for purposes of collec- tive bargaining. In so doing, the Regional Director rejected the Employer's position that any unit of clerks in its Charleston electric distribution depart- ment must include both "upstairs clerks" and "down- stairs clerks." Thereafter, in accordance with Section 102.67 of the National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations, Series 8, as amended, the Employer filed a timely request for review of the Regional Di- rector's decision. The National Labor Relations Board, by telegraphic order dated April 13, 1979, granted the Employer's request for review. There- after, the Employer filed a brief on review. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the Na- tional Labor Relations Board has delegated its au- thority in this proceeding to a three-member panel. The Board has considered the entire record in this case, including the Employer's brief on review, with respect to the issues under review, and makes the fol- lowing findings: The Employer, a South Carolina corporation, is en- gaged in the distribution of electricity and natural gas and in the operation of urban mass transit systems. This proceeding involves employees only in the Em- ployer's Charleston electric distribution department, which is responsible for building, operating, and maintaining electric power distribution lines. Peti- tioner, which currently represents linesmen at the Charleston facility, seeks to represent a unit of clerks at the same facility. It contends that the requested unit is composed of two downstairs clerks. The Em- ployer conceded at the hearing that a unit of all clerks in its Charleston electric distribution department would be appropriate, but asserted that such a unit must include seven upstairs clerks in addition to the two downstairs clerks. The record shows that the Employer's upstairs clerks work in an office in the main building of the Employer's facility located at 642 Meeting Street, Charleston. South Carolina. This building is con- nected by a covered patio to a smaller building. The two downstairs clerks work in the smaller building. The duties of upstairs and downstairs clerks vary, but are primarily clerical. Four of the upstairs clerks receive calls from customers regarding complaints or requests for service, in addition to performing other clerical duties. Two upstairs clerks are switchboard operators, and one upstairs clerk is classified as a ste- nographer and has responsibility for minor letterwrit- ing for the department manager and for processing requisitions, purchase orders, and payroll records. The two downstairs clerks are primarily responsible for maintaining time and mileage records for the line- men. In addition, they handle the issuance of tools and safety equipment to linemen. One of the down- stairs clerks may, on occasion, perform some loading and unloading work, but this occupies no more than about 3 percent of his time. It appears that there is frequent contact, both face- to-face and via telephone, between upstairs and downstairs clerks. The Employer's personnel man- ager testified, for example, that "there would never be a day that passes that downstairs clerks] wouldn't be [in the upstairs office] for some reason or other." These contacts involve, inter alia, the processing of records regarding the distribution by downstairs clerks of safety equipment and other supplies to the linemen. Additionally., downstairs and upstairs clerks use the same employee lounge, all clerks have essen- tiall) the samet skills (the Employer requires only a high school diploma for employment in either office),' upstairs clerks frequently fill in for absent downstairs clerks, and, during the "summer storm months." downstairs clerks work upstairs to handle the tele- phones approximately 2 days per week. Finally, there is testimony that one employee transferred from the downstairs office to the upstairs office and later trans- ferred back downstairs. Upstairs clerks are supervised by Supervisor Ben- ton, while downstairs clerks are supervised by Super- visor Cox, who also supervises linemen. Ordinarily, downstairs clerks do not report to Benton, and up- stairs clerks do not report to Cox, except in those situations, described above, when there are tempo- rary assignments between offices. Wages and other working conditions for clerks are essentially the same. Thus, the record shows that all clerks, upstairs and downstairs, are salaried and re- ceive the same fringe benefits. Downstairs clerks and ' One of the downstairs clerks apparently had been a utilityman. There is no evidence. nor is it contended, that this experience was a prerequisite to performing his duties as a downstairs clerk. 243 NLRB No. 64 388 SOt1J1 CAROI.INA EL.ECTRI( & (;AS COMPANY one of the upstairs clerks work 40 hours per week. The other upstairs clerks work 37-1/2 hours per week. In view of the foregoing, we find merit in the Em- ployer's exceptions to the Regional Director's conclu- sion that a unit limited to the two downstairs clerks is appropriate. In so concluding, the Regional Director relied on evidence that the downstairs clerks are sepa- rately supervised, work in another building separated from the upstairs office, and have different work schedules and different previous work experience. However, despite evidence of separate immediate su- pervision, slightly different work schedules, and physically separate work stations,2 we are persuaded that an appropriate unit must include both upstairs and downstairs clerks. In this connection, we find it significant that upstairs clerks perform functions which are closely related to the functions of the downstairs clerks, that both groups of clerks are in the same administrative department, that there are significant instances of both temporary and perma- nent transfers between the upstairs and downstairs offices, and that all clerks are salaried and receive the same fringe benefits. Accordingly, we find that the two downstairs clerks do not share a community of interest sufficiently separate from the upstairs clerks to warrant their representation in a separate unit. 2 As suggested above, there is no evidence. nor is it contended that the fact that one of the downstairs clerks had been assigned to the field before he assumed his position in the downstairs office indicates that this field experi- ence was prerequisite or even relevant to his position as a downstairs clerk Hence. contrary to the Regiona! Director. we con- clude that the downstairs clerks do not comprise an appropriate unit.' See Atlanta Gas Light ('onpat. 158 NLRB 240 (1966): cf. Connecticut Light and Power (Cto pan y , 222 NLRB 1243 (1976). Accordingly, in light of the foregoing, we find that the following employees of the Employer constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bar- gaining within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act: All upstairs and downstairs clerks employed by the Employer at its Charleston electric distribu- tion department, excluding all production and field employees, technicians, pipe welders. pipe welders' assistants, guards and supervisors as de- fined in the Act. [Direction of Election4 and E.vcel.tior footnote omitted from publication.] I Moreover, the unit described in the Regional Director's decision, which includes downstairs clerks but excludes. inter alta. "all other office clerical employees" (emphasis supplied). is inappropriate on its face. See. eg.. (alh- tirnia Phsitcians' Services. dhba Cualirnia Blue Shield. 178 NLRB 716. 718 (1969). . At the hearing the Employer conceded that a unit consisting of both upstairs and downstairs clerks would he an appropriate unit. owever. no evidence appears in the record as to whether Petitioner is willing to preoceed to an election in such a larger unit. Accordingly, inasmuch as the unit found appropriate herein is larger that the unit sought by Petitioner. the Direction of Election is conditioned upon Petitoner's demonstrating. within 10 days from the date hereotl that it has an adequate showing of interest in the broader unit found appropriate 389