Modern Homes & Equipment Co.

714 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Modern Homes & Equipment Co., Inc. and Teamsters, Chauf- feurs, Warehousemen and Helpers, Local Union No. 991,. Affiliate of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters,, Chauffeurs , Warehousemen and Helpers of America, Ind.' and Millmen's Local Union No. 1932, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, AFL-CIO,' Petitioners.. Cases Nos. 15-RC-2041 and 15-RC-053. December 14, 1959 DECISION, ORDER, AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon petitions duly filed on July 12, 1959, and August 12, 1959, respectively, under Section 9(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Joseph H. Solien, 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 these cases to a three member panel [Chairman Leedom and Members Bean and Fanning]. Upon the entire record in these cases, 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.' The Employer contends that, as Local 1932 is required by the Carpenters' constitution to be a member of the Carpenters District Council of Mobile and Vicinity, hereinafter called the District Coun- cil, which the parties stipulated is a labor organization within the meaning of the Act, this District Council must be in compliance be- fore Local 1932 may use the Board's processes. The record shows that the District Council consists of five locals of the Carpenters in the Mobile area, including Local 1932; and that, as a member of a building trades council, the District Council is a party to a contract which this trades council negotiates, on behalf of its members, with employers in the area. Local 1932 must obtain approval. from the District Council before engaging in a strike. Local 1932, however, unlike the other four locals which are members of the District Coun- i Hereinafter called the Teamsters. 2 At the hearing, the name of the present Petitioner in Case No. 15-RC-2053, hereinafter called Local 1932, was substituted for that of its parent Union, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, AFL-CIO, hereinafter called the Carpenters. 'The Employer's contentions as to the adequacy of compliance with Section 9(f), (g), and (h), by Local 1932 and the Carpenters, involve administrative matters not cognizable in the present proceeding. We are, moreover, administratively satisfied as to the com- pliance status of Local 1932 and the Carpenters. See Desaulnier8 and Company, 115 NLRB 1025, and Standard Cigar Company, 117 NLRB 852. 125 NLRB No. 87. MODERN HOMES & EQUIPMENT CO., INC. 715 cil, represents industrial rather than construction workers and is, therefore, exempted by the District Council's constitution and bylaws from these collective-bargaining negotiations and contracts; does not receive any assistance from the District Council in organizing or negotiating; and executes its own contracts, independently of the District Council. In these circumstances, including the fact that the Employer's employees are industrial rather than construction workers, we find that the compliance of the District Council is immaterial to the compliance status of Local 1932 in this proceeding.4 In any event, we are administratively satisfied as to the District Council's compliance. In view of the foregoing, the Employer's motion to dismiss the petition in Case No. 15-RC-2053 on grounds pertaining to compliance is denied. 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. 4. 'The Teamsters, in Case No. 15-RC-2041, seeks a unit of truck- drivers, truckdriver helpers, warehousemen, forklift operators, and yardsmen; Local 1932, in Case No. 15-RC-2053, seeks a unit of all production and maintenance employees, including all cutting, nailing, assembling, installation and maintenance employees, and installation and maintenance helpers, excluding the employees sought by the Teamsters. The Employer has moved to dismiss the two petitions on the grounds that the units sought were inappropriate, and that only an overall unit is appropriate. In the Employer's operation, of prefabricating and selling houses, there is no assembly line. Instead, the total plant complement, of 30 to 35 employees, is generally employed on the same phase of produc- tion at one time. The duties of these employees, therefore, change from sawing, to nailing, to assembling panels, or to whatever function may currently be in process. The Employer owns three trucks used for local hauling, one trash truck, and one forklift, and, when necessary, leases extra trucks. There are no regularly assigned truckdrivers, truckdriver helpers, or forklift operators, as the plant superintendent selects various indi- viduals for these tasks from the entire production and maintenance force. The only requirement for driving a truck is the possession of an ordinary driver's license. No employee spends more than about one-third of his time driving a truck or operating a forklift, the re- mainder being spent on production. The record shows that the trucks are not in daily use; that the employees, at all times, whether working ' See Standard Cigar Company, supra. 716 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD on the vehicles or on production, are under the supervision of the plant superintendent; and that there are no warehousemen or yardsmen. From the foregoing, we find that there exists no functionally dis- tinct group of truckdrivers, with special interests sufficiently diverse from the production and maintenance employees, to warrant their establishment as a separate unit.5 In addition, as all the jobs in the plant are interchangeable, there are no special requirements of skill or experience for any of them, and there is no regular assignment thereto, we find, in agreement with the Employer, that only a plant- wide unit is appropriate. The parties are agreed that the plant superintendent, the shipping and receiving foreman, and the architect should be excluded from the unit, and that the leadmen should be included. The Petitioners would exclude the detail man as a technical employee, the office clerks as office clerical employees, and the sales serviceman on the grounds that his interests are diverse from the production and maintenance employees. The Employer would include these employees. The record shows that the detail man, under the supervision of the architect, prepares material lists for the use of the production and maintenance employees. On occasion, for purposes of clarification, he will attach a rough sketch to the detail list. Although he works in an office, the detail man is in frequent personal contact with the production and maintenance employees to explain any questions they may have. He is hourly paid, and receives the same employee bene- fits as the production and maintenance employees. He is not required to have technical training, or schooling of any special kind. Upon the basis of the foregoing, we find, in accord with Employer's con- tentions, that the detail man is not a technical employee, and shall include him in the unit .6 A clerk and an assistant clerk type material lists used by the plant employees, check receiving slips against invoices, maintain hardware supplies and issue them to both the plant employees and the customers, take inventory, and run shop drawings on the blueprint machine. Although they now work 3 to 4 miles from the plant, the record shows that their office, which even now is apart from the executive office, will be moved shortly to the plant. Once located in the plant area, these clerks will have personal rather than telephone contact with the production and maintenance employees, and they will have access to the production records. They do no auditing, as this is done by an outside firm, and they take no dictation. These clerks are hourly paid, share in the same benefits as the production and maintenance 5 See Endicott-Johnson Corporation, 116 NLRB 446. We shall therefore dismiss the petition filed in Case No. 15-RC-2041. See Westbrook Manufacturing Company, 118 NLRB 127, 128-129. MODERN HOMES & EQUIPMENT CO., INC. 717 employees, are under the immediate supervision of the architect, as is the detail man whom we have included in the unit, and their ulti- mate supervisor is the plant superintendent. Upon the basis of the foregoing, including the fact that their work is related to the pro- duction process, we find, in accord with the Employer's contention, that these employees are plant clericals, and therefore include them in the unit' The sales serviceman sells and contacts customers outside the store in local areas and in Florida. Incidental to his selling- duties, and also outside the plant, he services the houses sold to customers, and does a small amount of delivering. He returns to the plant only to pick up his tools, check with the detail man on customers' complaints, and occasionally he will help load a truck which is carrying an order he obtained. Unlike the other employees, he is salaried, and is under the immediate supervision of the general manager. In view of the foregoing, and as he spends the majority of his time outside the plant, we find that the sales serviceman does not have sufficient in- terests in common with the plant employees to be included in the unit. Accordingly, we shall exclude him from the unit as requested by Petitioners.' Accordingly, we find that the following employees of the Employer constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargain- ing within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act: All production and maintenance employees at the Employer's Mobile, Alabama, plant, including all cutting, nailing, assembling, installation, and maintenance employees, all helpers, all truckdrivers, truckdrivers' helpers, forklift operators, the detail man, leadman, yardsmen, and plant clerical employees, but excluding the sales serviceman, all office clerical employees, guards, the architect, the plant superintendent, the shipping and receiving foreman, and all other supervisors as de- fined in the Act. 5. Although neither Petitioner requested the overall unit found appropriate, both have a sufficient showing of interest in such unit. In these circumstances, we shall deny the Employer's motion to dis- miss the petition in Case No. 15-RC-2053 and shall place both Unions on the ballot, as alternate choices, with permission to either or both to withdraw upon written notice to the Regional Director within 5 days from the date of this Decision. [The Board dismissed the petition filed in Case No. 15-RC-2041.] [Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.] ' See Cherokee Textile Mills, Inc., 117 NLRB 350. See Central Cigar & Tobacco Co., 112 NLRB 1094, 1095-1096; The Sheffield Corpora- tion, 123 NLRB 1454.