Conchemco Inc.

CONCHEMCO INCORPORATED 125 Conchemco Incorporated , Baltimore Division and Interna- tional Union of District 50, Allied and Technical Work- ers of the United States and Canada , Petitioner. Case 5-RC-7002 April 24, 1970 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION BY CHAIRMAN MCCULLOCH AND MEMBERS FANNING AND BROWN Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, a hearing was held before M. Louise Felton, Hearing Officer of the National Labor Relations Board. Following the hear- ing and pursuant to Section 102.67 of the National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations and State- ments of Procedure, Series 8, as amended, and by direction of the Regional Director for Region 5, the case was transferred to the National Labor Relations Board for decision. A brief has been timely filed by the Employer. 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. The Board has reviewed the Hearing Officer' s rulings made at the hearing and finds that they are free from prejudicial error. They are hereby affirmed. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds: 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act, and it will effectuate the purposes of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein. 2. The Petitioner is a labor organization and claims to represent certain employees of the Employer.' 3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representation of the 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 a unit of all production and maintenance employees at the Employer's Baltimore, Maryland, paint manufacturing plant. The Petitioner would include research laboratory handyman Spriggs, but would exclude the leadmen and assistant leadmen, the printing department employees, and employees Bat- chellor, Tucker, and Serio. The Employer, while in general agreement that a production and maintenance unit is appropriate, would include all the foregoing employees except Spriggs, who it contends should be excluded. There is no history of collective bargaining with respect to any of the employees involved herein. The printing department employees: Seven of the employees working in this department print production tickets and labels, and maintain an inventory of labels ' Although the Employer refused to stipulate that the Petitioner is a labor organization within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act, the evidence establishes that the Petitioner admits employees for member- ship, and that its purpose is to represent for the purposes of collective bargaining, employees of employers, as that representation relates to hours, wages, and conditions of employment and advertising materials. There is a printer who operates a printing press. The other employees in this department are order pickers of advertising material. They frequently deliver labels to the labeling department and pack color cards and advertising material for shipment with paint orders. No special training is required for this work, and uniforms are provided for these employees on the same basis as other employees. They are all hourly paid and have the same fringe benefits as the employees in the production and maintenance unit. The printing department is located directly above the control lab (the employees of which are included), in a building which also contains the production office, cafeteria, and storage facilities for the order-filling and labeling department. The department is headed by the printing department supervisor who is responsible to the plant manager. No union seeks to represent the printing depart- ment employees separately. In these circumstances, we find that the printing department employees are engaged in production, and work in close proximity to the other production and maintenance employees, with whom they share similar fringe benefits. As production employees they share a close community of interest with the other production and maintenance employees, and we shall include them in the unit.2 The alleged plant clerical employees: There are three employees in this category: Dianne Batchellor, Susan Tucker, and Peggy Serio. Batchellor and Tucker work in a separate office in the shop area between the cafeteria and the production office, in the afore-mentioned building containing the cafeteria, production office, control laboratory, and order filling and labeling departments. They are supervised by the plant manager, and are called production clericals. Their duties consist of making out production tickets, keeping files of requests for and copies of these tickets, and calculating the amount of production after the batch is completed. They handle no confidential information, are hourly paid, and work hours and receive employment benefits, similar to those of employees included in the unit. Accordingly, we find them to be plant clerical employees, whose duties and interests are most closely allied with those of the production and maintenance employees, and as we customarily include plant clericals in a production and maintenance unit, we shall include them in the unit.3 Serio, unlike Batchellor and Tucker, works adjacent to the general office where the office clerical employees are located, apart from the production area, and is supervised directly by the purchasing agent. She main- tains the inventory of all raw materials used in the manufacturing process. She seldom goes into the plant. Although she receives the same fringe benefits as the production and maintenance employees, including time and one-half for overtime, she works different hours, performs different duties, and has little or no contact with the production and maintenance employees. As 2 Century Electric Company, 146 NLRB 232, 240-241 1 Maryland Cap Corporation. 171 NLRB No 71 182 NLRB No. 23 126 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Serio has separate supervision from unit employees, is geographically removed from the production area, shares similar working conditions with and is located near the office clerical employees, we find that she is an office clerical employee Accordingly, we shall exclude Serio from the unit 4 The leadmen and assistant leadmen There are 11 leadmen and 8 assistant leadmen Leadmen are class I employees, receive 40 cents per hour more than class 2 employees, and wear a different color uniform from regular production and maintenance employees Assistant leadmen are in class 2 and receive a 10- cent differential They wear the same uniform as the production and maintenance employees They are regular production and maintenance employees who fill in during a leadman's absence Both leadmen and assistant leadmen receive the same benefits, punch the timeclock, receive time and one- half for overtime after 40 hours,5 and use the same locker facilities as other production and maintenance employees Leadmen generally receive the work orders or tickets for work to be done from their department supervisors, and parcel out the work among employees in their departments They work along with the others, but also have certain clerical functions to perform at their desks, such as sending lists of absentees to the personnel department each day, filling in production tickets and a vehicle time and temperature log, and recording batches and fillings The record indicates that they do not have the authority to hire, discharge, transfer from one department to another, suspend, layoff, pro- mote, reward, grant wage increases, discipline, or adjust grievances Their recommendations on such matters are independently investigated At night, when department supervisors are not present, leadmen can send employees home for drunkenness, but must refer all other discipli- nary problems to their supervisors, who are on call In these circumstances, we find that the leadmen and assistant leadmen do not exercise the type of independent judgment or responsible direction of the work of other employees indicative of supervisory authority Nor do they possess any other indicia of supervisory authority Accordingly, we find that the leadmen and assistant leadmen are not supervisors and shall include them in the unit i William Spriggs William Spriggs is employed in the research and development laboratory located on the same floor as the general offices He is supervised by the laboratory supervisors Spriggs is basically a handy- man in the laboratory whose duties consist of chasing material, cleaning up in the evening, and scrubbing and waxing Both parties agreed at the hearing that the other employees of this laboratory were to be exclud- ed The evidence is clear that the employees in this laboratory are in no way concerned with the production process We find that Spriggs shares common interests with the excluded laboratory employees, and shall exclude him from the unit In view of the foregoing, we find that the following employees of the Employer constitute a unit appropriate for purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act All production and maintenance employees employed by the Employer at its Baltimore, Mary- land, plant, including warehousemen, shipping clerks, shipping and receiving employees, truckdri- vers, leadmen, assistant leadmen, control laboratory employees, cafeteria employees, printing depart- ment employees, and plant clerical employees, but excluding office clerical employees, salesmen, research and development laboratory employees, professional employees, guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act [Direction of Election? omitted from publication ] Kellogg Switchboard and Supply Company 127 NLRB 64 66 The leadman in the control laboratory is the only leadman paid on a salary basis because of his length of service with the Employer Maryland Cup Corporation supra In order to assure that all eligible voters may have the opportunity to be informed of the issues in the exercise of their statutory right to vote all parties to the election should have access to a list of voters and their addresses which may be used to communicate with them Excelsior Underwear Inc 156 NLRB 1236 N L R B v Wyman Gordon Company 394 U S 759 Accordingly it is hereby directed that an election eligibility list containing the names and addresses of all eligible voters must be filed by the Employer with the Regional Director for Region 5 within 7 days of the date of this Decision and Direction of Election The Regional Director shall make the list available to all parties to the election No extension of time to file this list shall be granted by the Regional Director except in extraordinary circumstances Failure to comply with this requirement shall be grounds for setting aside the election whenever proper objections are filed