Dependable Parts, Inc.

DEPENDABLE PARTS, INC. 581 the Rocky Mount plant were to cease operations, it would result in a complete shutdown of the Wilson plant. As noted above, in 1946 the Board found appropriate a unit con- fined to the Rocky Mount production and maintenance employees. Due to substantial changes in the Employer's operations, and the fact that our earlier decision was based primarily upon : (1) the extent of the petitioner's organization, a factor to which the Board is now precluded from giving controlling weight; 6 (2) the absence of em- ployee interchange, which interchange the record herein reveals now exists; and (3) the geographical separation of the plants, which, by itself, is not sufficient reason to render a unit inappropriate; 7 we deem our earlier decision not controlling. In view of the foregoing, and particularly the integration and in- terdependence of operations, common supervision, uniformity of work- ing conditions, and close community of employee interests in the two plants,8 we are of the opinion that the requested unit limited to the Rocky Mount employees is too narrow in scope to be appropriate .9 We shall, therefore, dismiss the petition.10 [The Board dismissed the petition.] ° See Mar) ay Corporation of America -Ecorse Plant, 101 NLRB 313 at 315. 7 See Ilerpolsheimer Company, 100 :NLRB 1452 at 1453. See also Boland Manufacturing Company, 83 NLRB 1254 at 1255, where the Board found that 2 plants located 30 miles apart constituted an appropriate unit 8 Phallsps -Jones Corporation . 96 NLRB 153 at 154 ° Seee Acme Electric Corporation, 102 NLRB 1233 at 1234-1235 ; Homestake Mining Company, 105 NLRB 198 at 200-201, and Ross Lumber Company, 94 NLRB 636 at 637. 10 In view of our disposition of this case, we find it unnecessary to pass upon other issues raised at the hearing concerning the unit inclusion of certain employee classifications Dependable Parts, Inc. 1 and Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehouse- men and Helpers Local Union No. 612 , International Brother- hood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, AFL, Petitioner. Case No. 10-RC,-3012. May 3, 1955 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 Gilbert Cohen, hear- ing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds : 1. The Employer is an Alabama corporation engaged at its plant in Birmingham, Alabama, in the wholesale distribution of automobile parts. During the past year the Employer purchased automobile parts 1 The Employer 's name appears as amended at the hearing 112 NLRB No. 77. 582 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD valued at more than $500,000 directly from points outside the State- of Alabama . During the same period , the Employer made direct out-of-State sales in excess of $100,000 . We find that the Employer is- engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act, and that it will effectuate the policies of the Act to assert jurisdiction.2 2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain em- ployees of the Employer . The Employer refused to stipulate that the Petitioner is a labor organization within the meaning of the Act. We find that the Petitioner is a labor organization, as it exists for the purpose of engaging in collective bargaining with the Employer with respect to wages, hours, and other conditions of employment. 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. At the hearing and in its brief, the Employer made a motion to. dismiss based on the ground that the petition is invalid because blanks were left in the spaces provided in the petition form for indicating whether or not the petition was supported by 30 percent of the em- ployees and for showing that the Employer had refused to recognize the Petitioner. The fact that a petition does not show on its face that it is supported by the requisite percentage of employees is not a ground for dismissing the petition . Showing of interest is a matter for administrative determination and the failure to indicate such is merely a technical defect which is not prejudicial.' The failure to indicate on the petition that the Employer either affirmatively refused to recognize the Petitioner or made no reply is likewise a technical omission which does not prejudice the Employer. The Act does not require a showing that the employer refused to recognize the petitioner before the petition was filed where, as in the instant proceeding, the Employer refused at the hearing to grant recognition.4 4. The Petitioner seeks a unit comprised of countermen , pickers, porter, receiving clerk, shipping clerk, stock clerks, and the truck- driver at the Employer's plant. The Employer contends that due to the integration , similarity of working conditions , employee inter- changeability , and common supervision all of its employees, including the assistant manager, specifier , outside salesmen, price and location clerk, filing clerk ( Miss Murchinson ), inventory control clerks, billing clerk, daily report clerk, and secretary , should be included in the unit. There is no previous history of collective bargaining affecting any of the employees involved in this proceeding . The record does not dis- close that any other union is seeking to represent the employees whom the Petitioner would exclude. 2.Tonesboro Grain Drying Cooperatme, 110 NLRB 481 3 Petco Corporation, 98 NLRI3 150. at 152 4 General Shoe Corporation , 109 NLRB 018 DEPENDABLE PARTS, INC. 583 The Employer is engaged in the wholesale distribution of automo- 'bile parts . Its 26 employees work primarily in a 1-floor warehouse under the general supervision of a manager , with no lower level of supervision. It appears from the record that all employees are sub- ject to the same vacation plan, insurance program, sick leave privileges, bonuses, and pension program. Contrary to the contention of the Em- ployer, the Petitioner would exclude the classifications and individuals discussed below : Specifier, price and location clerk, filing clerk (Miss illurchinson), inventory control clerk , billing clerk , and daily report clerk: These 6 hourly paid employees who work in 2 offices on the warehouse floor, are engaged in clerical work connected with the location, shipment, and inventory of the Employer's goods. The Employer's administrative clerical work is performed by Liberty Motors, Inc., whose stockholders -own all the Employer's stock. We find that these employees are essen- tially plant clericals . Accordingly, we shall include them in the unit. Assistant manager: Although this employee has the title of as- sistant manager, it appears from the record that he has no authority over any employee , that he has the same power to make recon-imenda- tions as do the other employees , and that he is not in charge of the warehouse operation when the manager is absent . His primary job, which is that of troubleshooter, is to handle customers' complaints re- garding faulty shipments of goods ordered from the Employer. For this purpose, he has an office on the warehouse floor where he has fre- quent contact with the warehouse employees . On the basis of the fore- going, we find that the assistant manager ( troubleshooter ) has a suffi- cient community of interest with the warehouse employees to be in- ,cluded with them. Therefore, we shall include him in the unit. Secretary : This employee types letters for the manager and as- sistant manager. She also helps the billing clerk, inventory control clerk, and price and location clerk. She has no access to material of a confidential nature. We find that the secretary is essentially a plant clerical. Accordingly, we shall include her in the unit. Outside salesmen : There are two groups of outside salesmen-the city salesmen and the State salesmen. In the former group are two employees who alternately work in the warehouse and sell in the city every other day of the week. The State salesmen, who work outside the city of Birmingham , usually return to the warehouse about noon of Friday, and work the rest of that day and Saturday in the ware- house. We find that all the outside salesmen considered as a group lack a sufficient community of interest with the employees sought by the Petitioner to be included in the unit. Accordingly, we shall ex- clude them.' 6 American Factors Limited, 109 NLRB 834 584 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD The parties referred to the Board the question of the inclusion of one part-time employee who regularly works from 2 p. in. to 5:30 p. m., 6 days a week in the warehouse. The record reveals that this employee performs duties similar to those of the full-time employees, and shares the same supervision and working conditions. It is the Board's policy to include in the unit regular part-time employees in related categories, and also to permit such employees to vote in repre- sentation elections.6 Accordingly, we shall include the one part-time employee in the bargaining unit as a regular part-time employee and allow him to vote in the election herein directed. Upon the entire record in this case, we find that the following em- ployees of the Employer at its Birmingham, Alabama, plant consti- tute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act : All parts counter men, pickers, porter, receiving clerk, shipping clerk, part-time warehouse employee, stock clerks, truckdriver, price and location clerk, filing clerk (Miss Murchinson), inventory control clerks, specifier, billing clerk, daily report clerk, secretary and assistant manager (troubleshooter), but excluding all outside salesmen, guards, watchmen, and supervisors as defined in the Act. [Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.] MEMBER LEEDOM took no part in the consideration of the above De- cision and Direction of Election. eL Antonsanti, Inc, 100 NLRB 1485, at 1486 The Union News Company and Theatre & Amusement Service Employees Local 54, Building Service Employees International Union, AFL.' Case No. 2-RC-7468. May 4,1955 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 George V. Byrnes, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds : 1. The Employer a New York corporation which is a wholly owned subsidiary of the American News Company, owns and operates in ex- cess of 1,200 restaurants, newsstands, drug stores, lunch counters, book and toy shops, and other miscellaneous retail establishments located in approximately 30 States. During 1953, the gross annual income from these multistate operations exceeded $70,000,000. I The Petitioner's name appears as amended at the hearing 112 NLRB No. 82.