Sanborn Telephone Co, Inc.

512 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD plant where the requested lithographic production employees are all located. Her job involves primarily the operation of a Duplimat, a type of offset press . Unlike the employees in the plant, the office multilith operator is not engaged in regular production work in con- nection with the accounts of the Employer 's customers but rather on work used in the Employer 's own advertising or promotion activities. Furthermore, she is not under plant supervision but rather that of "central supply" located in the office building. Under these circum- stances, we find that the multilith operator does not have such a close community of interest with the lithographic production em- ployees in the plant as to require her placement in the requested unit. Consequently, we shall exclude the office multilith operator from the voting group. In view of the foregoing, we find that the requested unit may be appropriate . However, we shall make no final unit determination at this time but shall direct that an election be conducted in the following voting group of employees at the Employer's Des Moines, Iowa, operations : All lithographic production employees , including cameramen, strippers, opaquers, platemakers, offset pressmen and their assistants, plant multilith operators, and apprentices in all categories, but ex- cluding all other employees , office clerical employees , professional em- ployees, pasteup employees , office multilith operator, guards, and su- pervisors as defined in the Act. If a majority of the employees in the above -described voting group vote for the Petitioner, they will be taken to have indicated their desire to constitute a separate bargaining unit and the Regional Di- rector conducting the election is instructed to issue a certification of representatives to the Petitioner for that unit . In the event a ma- jority in the voting group do not vote for the Petitioner, they will be taken to have indicated their desire to remain a part of the exist- ing unit represented by the Pressmen , and the Regional Director will issue a certification of results of election to such effect. [Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.] Sanborn Telephone Company, Inc. and Communication Workers of America, AFL-CIO, Petitioner. Case No. 3-RC-2947. Janu- ary 7, 1963 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 Henry J. Winters, hearing 140 NLRB No. 43. SANBORN TELEPHONE COMPANY, INC. 513 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 McCulloch and Members Leedom and Brown]. 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 organization involved claims 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 Sections 9(c) (1) and 2(6) and (7) of the Act. The Employer, Sanborn Telephone Company, Inc., is a wholly owned subsidiary of Independent Telephone Corporation, hereinafter referred to as ITC, which operates in 12 States. The Employer is 1 of 11 operating units in ITC's New York-New Jersey division.2 The Petitioner seeks to represent, in a separate unit, all employees of the Employer at Sanborn, New York, including installer repairmen, cen- tral office men (maintenance), wire chief, cable splicer and helper, test boardman, and central distribution office technicians, but excluding office clerical employees, salesmen, executives, guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act. The Employer contends that the requested unit is too limited in scope because it does not include employees of all com- panies in the ITC's New York-New Jersey division. The Employer further contends that, if the Board should find appropriate a unit limited to the Sanborn employees, that there should be two depart- mental units rather than a single plantwide unit. There is no history of collective bargaining for any employees in the New York-New Jersey division. Headquarters of the New York-New Jersey division are at Dryden, New York. This division serves an area about 185 miles to the east and 185 to the west of Dryden. No area served is contiguous to the Sanborn operations, the nearest being West Valley, which is about 45 to 50 miles away. Each company has a separate franchise from the Public Service Commission. The record indicates the following with respect to the centralization and integration of operations in the New York-New Jersey division. The Dryden office provides accounting, engineering, purchasing, and billing services for all companies in the division. General policy con- 1 At the hearing, the petition and other formal papers were amended to show the correct name of the Employer , as it appears in the caption 2 Seven of the companies in the New York-New Jersey division are wholly owned by ITC, +he parent company The president of ITC owns 100 percent of three other companies, and about 89 percent of another company . These holdings will probably be transferred to the ITC. 514 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD cerning employee working conditions and benefits are established at Dryden, and are uniform for all employees in the various operating units constituting this division. Although there are occasional trans- fers between the various operating units in the division, the record shows that there were only two transfers in 8 years from Sanborn to other companies in the division. The record further indicates that temporary transfers of employees between companies occur only in cases of emergencies or when a special skill is needed. The Employer's operations are headed by a general manager, Ilelme, who reports to W. B. Harrison, director and vice president of ITC in charge of the New York-New Jersey division, with headquarters at Dryden. Helme hires and discharges employees, and reports such information to Dryden along with other personnel actions. Opera- tions at Sanborn are conducted in two departments, the commercial and military departments, each of which is headed by a service man- ager. There are nine employees, including the supervisor, in each department. The commercial department installs and maintains con- ventional telephone service for subscribers in and around Sanborn. The military department installs and services communications equip- ment on a military base. There is, however, a certain amount of over- lapping of work, and commercial department employees go into the military installation to perform services and to assist employees in the military department. For this reason, all employees in the re- quested unit receive security clearance. The cable splicer, assigned to the commercial department, does the cable splicing for both depart- ments. The rates of pay for both departments are approximately the same, and there have been transfers of employees between the two departments. Although the broader unit, alleged to be appropriate by the Em- ployer, might be appropriate, it is not the only appropriate unit, and this fact does not preclude a finding that the unit here requested, which is lesser in scope, is also appropriate for the purposes of collec- tive bargaining. It is not Board policy to compel labor organizations to represent the most comprehensive grouping. In the instant case, there is no history of collective bargaining on a broader basis, and no labor organization seeks to represent these employees in a more compre- hensive unit. In view of the fact that the unit requested consists of all the operating and maintenance personnel of the Employer, and also, in the light of the autonomous day-to-day operation of the San- born company, the overall immediate supervision by the general man- ager, the infrequent contact and interchange among employees in the various companies comprising the New York-New Jersey division, and the geographic separation of the Employer's operations from those SANBORN TELEPHONE COMPANY, INC. 515 of others in the division, we find the requested unit, limited to the Em- ployer's employees, to be appropriate. The Employer contends that, in the event a unit limited to the Em- ployer's operations is found to be appropriate, there should be two departmental units. We find no merit to this contention. As noted above, the employees in both departments have interests in common, and there is an overlapping of work of both departments. Nor do we find merit in the argument that there should be two separate units be- cause only employees in the military department are required to have security clearance. The record is clear that employees in the commer- cial department also have security clearance, because they go into the military installation to perform services. Absent a cogent reason for doing so, the Board is reluctant to find departmental units appropri- ate. No such reason is present here. Accordingly, we find that only a single unit of both departments is appropriate. There remains for consideration a determination as to the super- visory status of three shift supervisors in the military department. There are nine employees, including the service manager, in this de- partment. Because the military department operates on three shifts, one employee has been designated as a supervisor for each shift. The shift supervisors rotate shifts about every 41/2 weeks, and do not always work with the same man or men. On the evening and night shifts there is one employee working in addition to the shift super- visor. The shift supervisors spend all of their time working and, like the other employees in the department, except the service manager, are hourly paid and receive overtime pay. They do not hire, discharge, promote, or discipline employees or make any effective recommenda- tions with respect to such matters. The record indicates that they do train men and assign work to them. If any problems arise on the evening or night shifts, the shift supervisors call the military systems supervisor or the general manager for advice. We are not convinced from this record that the shift supervisors meet the statutory standards of responsible direction requiring the exercise of independent judgment. Moreover, if found to be super- visors, there would be the unrealistic ratio of four supervisors to five employees. We, therefore, find that the shift supervisors are not super- visors within the meaning of the Act, but merely perform the functions of a more experienced worker in relation to one with less experience, and shall include them in the unit.' Accordingly, we find that all of the Employer's employees at San- born, New York, including installer repairmen, central office men 8 Cf. Lampcraft Industries, Inc., and Leslie China, Inc., 127 NLRB 92, 94-95 681-492-63-vol. 140--34 516 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD (maintenance), wire chief, cable splicer and helper, test boardman, central distribution office technicians, and shift supervisors, but ex- cluding office clerical employees, salesmen, executives, guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act, constitute a unit appropriate for col- lective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act.' [Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.] 4 There is no dispute as to the composition of the unit. The parties stipulated to exclude the two service managers as supervisors. Berea Publishing Company and Cleveland Printing Pressmen Union No. 56, affiliated with International Printing Pressmen and Assistants' Union of North America, AFL-CIO, Petitioner i Berea Publishing Company and Cleveland Typographical Union No. 53, affiliated with International Typographical Union, AFL-CIO, Petitioner. Cases Nos. 8-RC-460 and 8-RC-4589. January 7, 1963 DECISION, ORDER, AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon separate petitions duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the Na- tional Labor Relations Act, as amended, a consolidated hearing was held before Bernard Levine, 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 these cases, the Board finds : 1. The Employer contends that the Board should not assert juris- diction. The parties stipulated that the Employer publishes a news- paper which carries advertisements amounting to $4,000, purchased by national advertising agencies, of nationally sold products. Fur- ther, the Employer derives an annual revenue of $294,512.48 from its operations, $98,230.66 of which is derived from job printing. In view of the foregoing, we find that the Employer is engaged in com- merce within the meaning of the Act, that its business is essentially the operation of a newspaper, and that its gross revenues warrant the assertion of jurisdiction 2 2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent certain em- ployees of the Employer. 3. In Case No. 8-RC-4589, a question exists concerning the repre- sentation of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Sec- tions 9(c) (1) and 2(6) and (7) of the Act. 1 The name of the Petitioner in Case No. 8-RC-4602 appears as amended at the hearing. 'Belleville Employing Printers, 122 NLRB 350; Chicago North side Newspapers, 124 NLRB 254 ; The McMahon Transportation Company, 124 NLRB 1092. 140 NLRB No. 55.