The Great Western Sugar Co.

936 - DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD The Great Western Sugar Company 1 and International Brother- hood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen, and Helpers of America, Petitioner. Case No. 17-RC-3454. August 10, 1961 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 William J. Cassidy, 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 had delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member panel [Chairman.McCulloch and Members Rodgers and Fanningf]. Upon 'the entire record 2 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. 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 parties agree, and we find, consistent with the bargaining history, that a unit comprised of both seasonal and year-round pro-, duction and maintenance employees is appropriate. The Employer, however, would exclude, and the Petitioner and Intervenor include, the classifications discussed below. The Employer is engaged in the processing of sugar beets into sugar at' its Gering, Nebraska, plant. Its operations are seasonal, and the 46-man year-round or "intercampaign" work force is expanded to 206- during the season or "campaign," which starts in early October and lasts 85 to 120 days. The record shows that over two-thirds of the 1 The name of the Employer appears as amended at the hearing. 2 The Intervenor's request for oral argument is hereby denied as the record and briefs adequately present the issues and positions of the parties . We also deny the Intervenor's motion for consolidation of the instant case with Amalgamated Sugar Company, Case No. 19-RC-2764, and for joint consideration of the two cases by the Board , inter al{a, because of dissimilarity of issues presented in the cases. [On August 31, 1961 , the Intervenor filed a motion for reconsideration and request for oral argument, specifically objecting to that part of the Board 's decision which provides for the exclusion from the appropriate unit of certain individuals found by the Board to! be supervisors. The Board, on November 2, 1961, granted the motion and, pending final' disposition of this matter subsequent to oral argument, amended the Decision and Direc- tion of Election to provide that the following disputed categories of employees be per- initted to vote by challenged ballot: Beet end foremen, sugar end foremen, Steffen house foremen, pulp dryer foremen, chief electrician , and head pipefitter ] s American Federation of Grain Millers, Sugar Division, AFL-CIO, and American Fed- eration of Grain Millers, Sugar Division , Local 270, AFL- CIO, collectively referred to herein as the Intervenor , intervened on the basis of a card showing of interest and a contractual interest as the successor to Federal Labor Union No. 21392. 132 NLRB No. 78. THE GREAT WESTERN SUGAR COMPANY 937 "campaign" employees have worked for the Employer during previous seasons, and that during the processing season the plant operates on a three-shift basis. The beet end and sugar end foremen 4 perform maintenance,. repair, and housekeeping functions and have no supervisory power during the "intercampaign" period. During the operating season they are- responsible for the various operations in the beet and sugar ends of the Employer's plant, in which there are 12 to 17 and 20 to 26 employees,. respectively. Daily instructions are written by the plant superin- tendent regarding the tasks to be carried out in the beet and sugar ends, and the foremen see to the execution of these tasks. They assign work to employees, can temporarily transfer employees, have the, power to hire and discharge, and, when the season ends, they select the employees who are to be retained and those to be laid off. The•' steffen house foreman works with four seasonal employees in the puri- fying of molasses for reprocessing. His job requires 3 years of experi-- ence. He recommends employees for hire, which recommendations; are almost always followed, and has the power to discharge employees. He determines whether or not his operation is running properly on the- basis of information gathered from a data sheet prepared by the lab- oratory, and exercises independent judgment in changing the opera- tion and directing the men under him. The pulp dryer foreman judges pulp and decides whether or not it is suitable to dry. On the- basis of information gathered from a laboratory data sheet he directs the four employees in the pulp dryer, and can vary their operations.. He has the power to discipline employees, and considerable weight is, given to his recommendations regarding the hiring of new employees. He approves the timecards of the employees on his shift and operates the machinery in the pulp dryer only to relieve the regular operators. The head pipefitter is responsible for the care and maintenance of water, steam, fire protection, and sewage pipe. He assigns work, de- termines the order in which jobs will be done, is instrumental in grant- ing promotions, and has the authority to reprimand or to discharge employees. The chief electrician lays out the work that the two shift, electricians are to perform. Besides planning electrical work in the plant he selects the shift electricians, tests new employees for pro- ficiency, and has the authority to reprimand, discipline, and discharge.. Particularly as it appears that the foregoing individuals are the only persons who direct the employees on their respective shifts and have the power to discipline and discharge employees, or effectively to recommend the same,' we find that they have and exercise a direct * The parties stipulated that testimony bearing on the sugar end foreman would be materially the same as that bearing on the beet end foreman. 5 The record, in our opinion, reasonably supports the inference that these individuals are aware of their supervisory authority. :938 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD -supervisory authority or power "responsibly to direct" employees and are therefore supervisors under the Act.' The Intervenor urges, however, that if these individuals are found to be supervisors they should in any event be included in the unit be- ,cause their supervisory powers are limited to the "campaign" period. In Whitmoyer Laboratories, Inc., 114 NLRB 749, and later cases' the Board held that employees "who spend a regular and substantial part ,"of their time performing supervisory duties on a seasonal basis are .supervisors within the meaning of the Act, and are therefore to be ,excluded" from a unit of seasonal and year-round employees. The fact that these individuals were included in the unit on a consent basis in past bargaining has been considered, but is, of course, not binding on the Board. Accordingly, as we see no compelling reason to vary from this established rule, and because of statutory requirement, we shall- exclude from the unit the individuals found to be supervisors therein. The extra station man acts as an assistant to the beet end foreman. He spends 20 percent of his time performing production work. He ,has no authority to hire, discharge, or discipline employees or to effec- tively recommend such action, nor does he assign work. In the absence of the beet end foreman he can temporarily transfer em- ployees. The centrifugal foreman is a seasonal employee under the supervision of the sugar end foreman. He works with six sugar cut- ters in the centrifugal station where white sugar is separated from syrup. He can transfer the sugar cutters from one machine to an- other on a temporary basis, but he has no power to hire, fire, promote, • or discipline employees, or to effectively recommend such action. Any instructions he gives regarding the speed at which the cutters • operate or relief periods are routine in nature. The extra gang fore- man works together with a crew of three to four employees who per- form a variety of jobs throughout the plant. When men from the -extra gang are needed the assistant superintendent directs the fore- man to dispatch them. He has 'no power to hire, fire, promote, or dis- cipline employees. The warehouse foreman, together with one other employee, prepares carloading reports, verifies sugar count, keeps track of orders, and empty sugar cars. He also leads an occasional crew of two to three men in the unloading or restacking of sugar. He has no power to hire, fire, or discipline employees. The boiler- house foreman spends a substantial part of his time operating a boiler and taking water samples. He has no power to hire, fire, and on one oc- ^casion disciplined one employee, which action was subject to review by 9 See, e g, General Extrusion Company, Inc., 121 NLRB 1165 , 1169 ; Magnode Products, Inc, 124 NLRB 596. 7 Central Mutual Telephone Company, Inc., 116 NLRB 1663, 1666-1667 ; Machinery Movers and Erectors Division, Michigan Cartagemen's Association, 117 NLRB 1778, 1781-1782; The Celotex Corporation, 118 NLRB 1020, 1022. THE GREAT WESTERN SUGAR COMPANY 939 higher authority. The assistant chemist spends 50 percent of his time in making routine chemical analyses, and spends the balance of his time watching and checking the results of other tests. He is employed only during the campaign. No special training other than high school • chemistry is required for this position. He has. never reprimanded employees or adjusted grievances, and has no power to hire or dis- charge employees. As the record shows that the foregoing individ- uals do not responsibly direct other employees, exercise independent judgment, or make effective recommendations affecting the status of employees under their direction, we find that they are not supervisors and shall include them.8 The three temporary watchmen work as such only during the inter- campaign; they hold production jobs during the campaign. They make rounds, punch clocks in the plant area, watch for fires but are unarmed. If unauthorized persons or trespassers are found they notify the police. We find that they are guards within the meaning of the Act and shall exclude them.' The stenographer does general stenographic work for the cashier, handles correspondence, receipts, and forwarding orders, and keeps sales records. We find that she is an office clerical employee and, in accordance with our usual practice, shall exclude her from the unit.lo The laboratory clerk works in the laboratory and is primarily en- gaged in using a calculator to compile results of tests and typing reports. We find she is a plant clerical employee and shall include her. The timekeeper records time, calculates pay, and keeps payroll records. We find he is not a confidential employee but rather a plant clerical and shall include him." The janitor cleans the offices during intercampaign. As no persua- sive reason has been given for her exclusion, and such employees are customarily included with production and maintenance employees, we shall include her.12 Accordingly, we find that the following employees constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the mean- ing of Section 9 (b) of the Act: All production and maintenance employees at the Employer's Gering, Nebraska, plant, including the extra station men, cen- trifugal foremen, extra gang foremen, warehouse foreman, boiler- house foreman, assistant chemists, laboratory clerk, timekeeper, and janitor, but excluding the beet end foremen, sugar end fore- 8 E g, Solar-Electric Corporation, 128 NLRB 35 ( unit foremen) 8 Armstrong-Cork Company, South Gate Plant, 117 NLRB 262. Whitmoyer Labora- tories, Inc , supra. 10 See Ryan Aeronautical Co, Electronics Division , 121 NLRB 1502, 1506 11 Murray Ohio Manufacturing Co, Lawrenceburg, Tennessee, Division, 118 NLRB 1027, 1028 12 National Gypsum Company, 128 NLRB 315. °940 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD men, pulp dryer foremen, head'pipefitter, chief electrician, stenog- rapher, managers, assistant managers, superintendents, master mechanics, district office employees, main office employees, as- sistant superintendents, assistant master mechanics, chief chem- ists, cashiers, employees, of the agricultural department (other than beet dump repair men), superintendent's clerks, wet and pressed pulp silo employees, female beet clerks, watchmen, and supervisors as defined in the Act. 5. The Employer's operations are seasonal. At the time of the hearing the Employer's plant was not in operation. In agreement with the parties, we shall, in accordance with our usual practice in seasonal industries, direct that an election be held at or about the peak of the season, on a date to be determined by the Regional Direc- tor, among the employees in the appropriate unit who are employed during the payroll period immediately preceding the date of the 'issuance of notice of election by the Regional Director. • [Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.] ,Brockton-Taunton Gas Company 1 and Local 273, Utility Work- ers Union of America, AFL-C10.2. Case No. R-4964 (formerly 1-R-1351). August 10, 1961 SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND ORDER On April 17, 1943, the Board certified Brockton Gas Employees 'Local Union, Utility Workers Organizing Committee, Congress of -Industrial Organizations, as the bargaining representative of all shop, ,distribution, garage, and production plant employees, including dis- Itribution and production plant clerks, but excluding executives, office .-employees, supervisory employees, nonworking foremen, plant guards, -meter readers, bill collectors, and secretaries to the superintendent, at Brockton Gas Light Company, Brockton, Massachusetts. On August 10, 1960, the Employer and Union filed a joint request -for clarification of the unit, with respect to whether certain employees classified as district representatives, should be within or excluded from, the unit now represented by the Union. Thereafter, the Board issued an order remanding the proceeding to the Regional Director for the First Region to conduct a hearing, or to obtain from the parties a stipulation of facts, on the issues raised by the parties in their request for clarification. A hearing was held on December 13, 1960, before 1 Successor to Brockton Gas Light Company, the Employer 's name in 1943. 2 Successor to Brockton Gas Employees Local Union , Utility Workers Organizing Com- mittee, CIO , the Union's name in 1943. 132 NLRB No. 63.