Chapman Valve Manufacturing Co.

CHAPMAN VALVE MANUFACTURING COMPANY 935 which I pointed out in my dissent in the A & P case are not equally applicable to the instant case where an invalid union-security clause is involved. Chapman Valve Manufacturing Company , and International Union of Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers, AFL-CIO, Petitioner. Case No. 1 RAC-5003. December 14, 1957 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 Thomas E. McDonald, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. 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 [Chairman Leedom and Members Murdock and Bean]. 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 employees of the Employer. 3. Relying on Essex Cos ty News Co.,' the Employer contends that its current contract with the Petitioner covering production and maintenance employees bars the instant petition because of the con- tractual exclusion of the employee classifications now sought by the Petitioner. However, contrary to the situation in that case, the con- tract here contains no promise, express or implied, that the Petitioner will refrain from seeking to represent the employees involved here. Moreover, the Board has held that the exclusion of a group of employees from a contract unit does not constitute a waiver by the contracting union of its claim to represent these employees in the future as a part of the contract unit or as a separate unit.' Accord- ingly, we find that the current contract does not bar a present deter- mination of representatives in the unit of employees sought. We find that a 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. 4. The Petitioner seeks to represent time-study and methods men, the ditto operators who work with the methods men, and the clerks 176 NLRB 1340. 2 United States Gypsum Company, 107 NLRB 122, 125. 119 NLRB No. 123. 936 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD who work with the time-study men. The Employer contends' that time-study and methods men are part of management, they exercise supervisory authority, they are technical employees and as such should not be made a part of the same unit with production employees which to all intents and purposes will be the result if the Petitioner is selected as the representative;' and that the clerks as nontechnical employees cannot be appropriately included in a technical unit of time-study and methods men. Local 112, American Federation of Technical Engineers, AFL- CIO, hereinafter referred to as the Intervenor, is currently recognized by the Employer as the representative of technical employees in the engineering and tool divisions, and in the research, development, and control divisions. The Employer is engaged in the manufacture of various types of valves at its factory located at Indian Orchard, Massachusetts. The time-study and methods employees, as well as maintenance, tool de- sign, toolcrib, and toolroom employees, are under the supervision of the industrial engineer. The tool design employees are represented by the Intervenor, and the others, excepting the time-study and methods employees, are represented by the Petitioner. Under the industrial engineer there is a superintendent of time study and methods who is assisted by a time-study chief and a methods chief. The parties agree that the superintendent is a supervisor but take no position as to the chiefs. The record shows that the time-study and methods chiefs direct, assign, and check the work of the employees, and make effec- tive recommendation relative to discharge, promotions, demotions, and transfers. We find that the time-study superintendent, the time- study chief, and the methods chief are supervisors within the meaning of the Act and exclude them from the voting group. The time-study and methods employees are physically located on the second floor of a building on which are also located employees in personnel, IBM, timekeeping, industrial relations, tool design, and about 15 incentive workers in valve assembly. However, the main production area is located on the first floor. Unlike the production employees, the time-study and methods employees are salaried and have sick-leave benefits similar to those of the technical engineering employees. Methods men study the blueprint which accompanies the manu- facturing order, determine the methods of performance relating to the manufacturing process, the machines, and the sequence of opera- 8 we find no merit in this contention . There is no statutory limitation in the right of a union to represent technical employees because it already represents the same employer's production and maintenance employees . Bulldog Electric Products Company, '96 NLRB 642. CHAPMAN VALVE MANUFACTURING COMPANY 937 tions. Their determination is submitted in the form of a directive to the production departments. Time-study men time the production operation pursuant to the directive, determine production standards,, and establish the rate of pay for the Employer's production employees. In the event of a grievance by the union concerning the time study, the employee who timed the operation meets with the union repre- sentative and the employee and may use his discretion in making an adjustment. Contrary to the Employer's contention, we find this limited participation of the time-study men in the grievance procedure insufficient to constitute him a managerial or confidential employee.4 During the timing of an operation, the time-study man directs the performance of the operation. The Employer contends this direction constitutes an exercise of supervisory authority. We disagree. The operation must be performed pursuant to the methods directive and the time-study employee has authority to make only minor changes in the directive. Time-study men spend about 70 percent of their time in the plant performing time studies; and methods men spend less than 20 percent of their time in the plant. They have no authority to discipline, promote, demote, or transfer employees. Time-study and methods men are hired by the personnel department subject to the acceptance of the industrial engineer. When a production and main- tenance employee moves into the time-study and methods department, he loses his accumulated seniority, except in the event of a reduction in force. Prior to the establishment of the time-study and methods department, within the last 5 years, its functions were substantially performed by the tool engineering department. There was evidence to the effect that all such functions have not been absorbed by the time-study and methods department as of this date. For example, there was testimony to the effect that some of the employees repre- sented by the Intervenor do plant layout work and effectively recom- mend sequence of operation of tool design work. At the time of the hearing, approximately one-half of the Em- ployer's time-study and methods employees were being trained by a representative of an industrial consultant firm in work measurement procedures and statistical calculations in order to establish incentive standards according to the standard hour system which the Employer hopes to put into effect in the plant. The representative testified that the men were taught to deal with both technical and personnel prob- lems as they arise in their work and how to conduct themselves as representatives of management in their dealings with shop employees. There is currently a job-evaluation program in progress at the plant 4 See Bulldog Electric Products Company, supra. 938 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD which was first conducted among the production and maintenance employees, then among the office clerical employees which included the clericals in the time-study and methods department. In the near future, the time-study and methods men will be evaluated with the foremen and other supervisors. In support of the Employer's contention that the time-study and methods men were managerial, evidence was submitted showing that the Employer pays membership fees for them in the Springfield Industrial Association, cosponsors a supervisors' training program at the Springfield Public School, and provides a training program for them with the foremen. No production and maintenance employee is eligible for participation in these programs. Moreover, all appli- cants for a time-study or methods job are given a special test to deter- mine personality and emotional adjustment. Upon the basis of the foregoing, we reject the contention that the time-study and methods men are managerial or supervisory. We find that they are technical employees.' The record shows that there are other technical employees in the plant represented by the Intervenor who have common interests with the technical employees sought to be represented separately by the Petitioner. Under all the circum- stances, we find that the Petitioner's requested unit is inappropriate, as it consists, inter alia, of only a segment of the appropriate grouping of technical employees in the plant.6 However, as the Intervenor has indicated its desire to represent these time-study and methods em- ployees (and apparently ditto machine operators, but excluding clerks) and has made the proper showing of interest therefor, we shall treat it as a cross-petitioner.' Accordingly, we find that the time- study and methods men may, if they so desire, be added to the exist- ing technical unit currently represented by the Intervenor. We shall, therefore, make no determination with respect to these employees at this time, but shall first ascertain the desire of these employees as expressed in the election to be directed herein. If a majority of the time-study and methods men vote for the Intervenor, they will be taken to have indicated their desire to be added to the existing techni- cal unit and the Regional Director shall issue a certification of results of election to such effect. [Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.] 5 See Florence Stove Company, 98 NLRB 16 ; Monarch Machine Tool Co ., 98 NLRB 1243. 6 See Chase Brass & Copper Co., 102 NLRB 62 ; Allis-Chalmers Manufacturing Company, 117 NLRB 749. 7 Notwithstanding the apparent request of the Intervenor to include them, the two ditto machine operators are excluded because (a) they cannot appropriately be merged into the Intervenor's existing unit which is confined to technical employees , and (b ) the Employer objects to their inclusion . See Chase Brass & Copper Co., supra.