Pennsalt Chemicals Corp.

128 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD ledger employees, employment department employees,14 the depart- mental accountant and the internal 'auditor in the accounting depart- ment, the cost and repair accountant, and-the assistant manager of the timekeeping department; but excluding employees represented by the Petitioner and Local 13, salaried- plant clerical employees, the part- time model foodshop clerk, office janitors, the livestock driver, and the head livestock driver, the temporary stenographer in the canned meats sales division,'-' the full-time model foodshop clerk; secretaries to the office manager, plant manager, plant sales manager, and plant superintendent ; time-study engineers, salesmen, the nurse, buyers, confidential employees, professional employees; the managers of the accounting, claims and bookkeeping, purchasing, transportation, credit, disbursements, shipping and billing and IBM, timekeeping, insurance, casualty, and safety, and the industrial engineering depart- ments; the assistant manager of the insurance, casualty, and safety department, the assistant managers of the industrial engineering, accounting, and auditor of the disbursements departments, the pay- master, guards, and all supervisors as defined in the Act. [Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication.] u While the record fails to disclose whether the cashiers , private ledger, and employment department employees are confidential, managerial or supervisory, it appears from their categories that they are office clericals, and, accordingly, we include them in the unit despite the agreement of the parties to exclude them. Ohrbach's Inc., 118 NLRB 231, footnote 1. However, because of the absence of evidence with respect to their duties, nothing in this decision shall be deemed to affect the parties ' right to challenge any of the above-described categories for such reasons. 15 See footnote 13, supra. Pennsalt Chemicals Corporation and Chauffeurs, Teamsters Local #236, International Brotherhood of Teamsters , Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, AFL-CIO, Petitioner Pennsalt Chemicals Corporation, Petitioner and International Association of Machinists, Local Lodge No. 1969, AFL-CIO and International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Ware= housemen and Helpers of America, Local #236, AFL-CIO. Cases Nos. 9-RC-3202 and 9-RM-157. October 24, 1957 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon separate petitions duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the Na- tional Labor Relations Act, a consolidated hearing was held before Thomas M. Sheeran, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. 119 NLRB No. 4. PENNSALT CHEMICALS CORPORATION 129 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 Rodgers, Bean, and Jenkins]. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds : 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. 2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent certain em- ployees of the Employer.' 3. IAM moved at the hearing to dismiss the petition in Case No. 9-RM-157 on the ground that no question concerning representation exists in the unit set forth therein. IAM represents, under a con- tract executed July 2, 1957, a unit of the Employer's production and maintenance employees, excluding laboratory employees, plant clerical employees, and storeroom employees. The unit set forth in the Em- ployer's petition includes the production and maintenance employees and the categories who are excluded from the existing unit. However, at the hearing the Employer stated that it seeks an election not in the overall unit set forth in its petition, but only among the unrepresented employees to determine whether they wish to be added to the existing unit. In view of IAM's indication at the hearing of its interest in adding these employees to the existing unit and our finding below that they may be appropriately added to it, the motion to dismiss is denied. Accordingly, we find that questions affecting commerce exist 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. Teamsters seeks an election in a residual unit of the unrepre- sented laboratory technicians, plant clericals, and storeroom employ- ees. The Employer contends that this unit is inappropriate because of IAM's willingness, noted above, to add these employees to its existing unit. However, the unwillingness of an incumbent repre- sentative to add residual employees to an existing unit is not a pre- requisite to finding a residual unit appropriate. Accordingly, as these employees appear to be all the unrepresented plant employees and are clearly excluded from the existing unit, we find that they may constitute an appropriate residual unit, or may be appropriately added to the existing unit .2 Accordingly we will make no final unit determination at this time but will direct a self-determination election in a voting group of the unrepresented employees to ascertain their desires. There remain for consideration the storeroom clerk, the storekeeper, the shipping clerk, and the engineering clerk, whose placement in the 'International Association of Machinists , Local Lodge No. 1969, AFL- CIO, intervened in Case No. 9-RC-3202 on the basis of an adequate showing of interest. ' Sealtest, Ohio Division of the National Dairy Products Corporation , 117 NLRB 1628;. Yale and Towne Manufacturing Company, 112 NLRB 1268. 476321-58-vol. 119-10 130 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD voting group is in dispute. The storeroom clerk acts as secretary to the purchasing and stores supervisor, performing various clerical duties. He is located with the supervisor in an office adjacent to the Employer's storeroom which is in a separate building and apart from the main office. His office is also adjacent to the office of the material control clerk who also performs clerical duties and whom all parties concede should be included in the voting group. We find, contrary to the Employer's contention that he is a plant clerical rather than an office clerical employee. However, he initiates minor purchase orders for repetitive items needed by the Employer, and may pledge the Employer's credit, but to an extent that witnesses at the hearing were unable to specify. Accordingly, as the record does not establish whether the extent to which he pledges credit is sufficient to constitute him a managerial employee, we will permit him to vote subject to challenge! The storekeeper is in charge of four material handlers who,. as their classification suggests, handle materials coming into and leaving the storeroom. He assigns work to them, is authorized to grant them time off, attends management meetings, and has authority to make recommendations concerning changes in status of the material han- dlers which are given "first" weight. We find that he is a supervisor, in accordance with the Employer's contention, and will exclude him from the unit. The shipping clerk works under the supervision of the service supervisor and performs a number of clerical duties with respect to the shipment of products from the Employer's plant. We perceive no reason for distinguishing this employee from the process clerks, who also perform clerical duties, under the supervision of the service supervisor and other area supervisors and whom the parties would include in the voting group. Accordingly, he is included in the unit. The engineering clerk works directly for the chief plant engineer. Half of his time is spent in drafting and the remainder is devoted to the maintenance of blueprint files and the compiling and computing of technical records and reports. The employee in this classification has taken engineering courses which were necessary for him to qualify for his job. We find under the circumstances that he is a technical employee.' As it does not appear that there are any technical em- ployees in the voting group 8 or in the existing unit, and as the Employer opposes his inclusion, we shall exclude him. Accordingly, we shall direct an election in the following voting group : 8 See Swift & Company, 115 NLRB 755: 1Ve.ctern Electric Company, Incorporated, 100 NLRB 420. 4 La Pointe Machine Tool Company, 109 NLRB. 514. 5 The laboratory technicians , whom all parties would include in the unit, perform routine and repetitive tests for purposes of quality control. No special training is required for this job. These employees do not appear to 1+e technical employees. PLANT CITY WELDING AND TANK COMPANY 131 All laboratory 'technicians, storeroom employees and plant clerical employees at the Employer's Calvert City, Kentucky, plant, including laboratory technicians, junior laboratory technicians, the material control clerk, material handling clerks, shop clerks, process clerks, the toolroom clerk, and the shipping room clerk, but excluding the storekeeper, the engineering clerk, professional employees, all other employees, guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act. If a majority of the employees in the voting group vote for Teamsters, they will have indicated their desire to constitute a separate appropriate unit, and the Regional Director is instructed to issue a certification of representatives for Teamsters for such unit, which the Board under the circumstances finds appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining. If a majority of the employees in the voting group vote for IAM, they will be taken to have expressed their desire to become part of the IAM's present unit, and IAM may bargain for them as part of such unit. If a majority of the employees in the group vote for neither, they will be deemed to have expressed their desire to remain unrepresented. [Text of Direction of Election omitted'from publication.] Plant City Welding and Tank Company and International Broth- erhood of Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders, Blacksmiths, Forgers and Helpers, AFL-CIO, Petitioner. Case No. 12-.RC- 30. October 24,1957 SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES Pursuant to a Decision and Direction of Election,' dated June 21,_ 1957, an election by secret ballot was conducted on July 19, 1957, under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Twelfth Region, among the employees in the unit found appropriate in the above-mentioned Decision. Thereafter, a tally of ballots was fur- nished the parties, showing that out of 81 voters casting valid ballots, 46 voted for the Petitioner, 34 voted against the Petitioner, and 1 cast a challenged ballot.' On July 24, the Employer filed objections to the conduct of the election and to conduct affecting the election. In accordance with the Board's Rules and Regulations, the Regional Director conducted an investigation of the Employer's objections and on August 22, 1957, issued and duly served upon the parties his report on objections, in which he recommended that the objections be over- 1118 NLRB 280. 2 The challenged ballot was insufficient to affect the results of the election. 119 NLRB No. 2.