John McShain, Inc.

180 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD John McShain, Inc. and Local 77, International Union of Operating Engineers, AFL-CIO, Peti- tioner. Case 5-RC-6998 August 27, 1970 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION BY MEMBERS FANNING, MCCULLOCH, AND BROWN Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, a hearing was held before Hearing Officer William I. Shooer of the National Labor Relations Board. All parties appeared at the hearing and were given full opportunity to participate therein. On February 12, 1970, the Regional Director for Region 5 issued an order transferring the case to the Board. The Petition- er, the Employer, Intervenor Carpenters District Council of Washington, D.C. (hereafter Carpenters), and Construction Contractors Council of Washington, D.C. (hereafter Contractors Council), filed briefs with the Board. Pursuant to the provision 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 rul- ings made at the hearing and finds that they were 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 claims to represent certain employ- ees of the Employer. 3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representation of certain employees of the Employ- er within the meaning of Section 9(c) (1) and Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.' 4. The Petitioner requests an election in a unit of all field engineers, instrument men, rodmen, and chainmen employed by the Employer in the greater Washington, D.C., metropolitan area. The Employer, Carpenters, and Contractors Council contend that the unit requested is inappropriate because it includes some but not all employees performing layout work. ' The Employer, the Contractors Council, and Carpenters contend that Carpenters current collective-bargaining agreement with Contractors Council, of which the Employer is a member, is a bar to this proceeding The evidence shows, however, that that agreement does not cover and has never been applied to the employees sought in this petition It therefore is not a bar They also contend that the only appropriate unit of employees performing layout work is a multiem- ployer unit of the employees of the members of the Contractors Council. The Employer is a Delaware corporation with its office and principal place of business in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. It is engaged in building and construc- tion in several locations, including the Philadelphia metropolitan area and the Washington, D.C., metro- politan area.' In the Philadelphia area it has a single- employer contract with a local of the Carpenters union covering its field survey employees. In Washing- ton it is a member of the Contractors Council, com- posed of some 75 members, which negotiates and executes multiemployer contracts with six building trades unions including the Petitioner and the Carpen- ters.' Neither the Employer nor the Contractors Coun- cil bargains with any union concerning the employees described in the petition herein. Field engineers, instrument men, rodmen, and chainmen make up what is variously referred to as field survey, field en',ineering, or field layout crews. The basic tools of a field survey crew are the transit, level, plumb bob, measuring tapes, and markers like stakes and batter boards. Field engineers, and to a lesser degree instrument men, generally have special schooling and skills in advanced mathematics, as well as substantial job experience. Rod and chainmen need no special skills. Before construction begins, the field survey crew lays out the exterior lines of the building, the excava- tion reference lines, and the placement of the steel and cement building supports called caissons. There- after they set reference lines for the foundation, walls, partitions, and other features of the structure. After construction begins, and when they are needed, the Employer supplements its field survey crews with employees represented by the Carpenters, who know how to use many of the same tools. When so assigned, carpenters are paid under their own contract rather than at rates paid to crewmembers. Carpenter foremen do layout work such as laying out of the interiors of buildings and the construction of wooden forms for pouring cement around steel beams. However, work of this type is better described as layout work after construction has begun, rather than as field survey work. Field survey crews generally have their own separate supervision, and are not normally supervised by car- penter foremen. ' The only work being performed by the Employer in the Washington area at the time of the hearing was on the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts ' The Council-Carpenter, contract covers, among other,,"the u,e of any instrument or tool for layout work incidental to the trade 185 NLRB No. 39 JOHN McSHAIN The Employer's field survey employees are salaried, generally receive no overtime pay, and receive no health, welfare, or pension benefits. They are not represented by any labor organization. The carpenters are compensated at hourly rates, receive double time for overtime, and receive health, welfare, and pension benefits. Based on the above, and the record as a whole, we find that the unit requested by Petitioner is appropriate for purposes of collective bargaining. The field engineers have an identifiable skill, work in crews together with instrument men and rod and chainmen, the crews have their own separate supervi- sion, and are compensated on a distinctive basis. Neither the assignment of carpenters to supplement the crews on an "as needed" basis nor the layout- type work performed by carpenter foremen incidental to carpentry work destroys the separate identity of the crews. The field survey employees are a homogene- ous and separately identifiable group of unrepresented employees with employees with a community of inter- est setting them apart from other employees of the Employer.' We find no merit in the contention that only a Contractors Council multiemployer unit is appropriate. Under the Board's policy, an established multiemployer bargaining history as to other employ- ees is not controlling with regard to the scope of 181 the unit where, as here, the unrepresented employees sought constitute a homogeneous, separately identifia- ble group.' Accordingly, we find that the following employees constitute a unit appropriate for collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act: All field engineers, instrument men, rod and chainmen employed by the Employer within the greater Washington Metropolitan Area, but excluding all other employees, professional employees, guards and supervisors as defined in the Act. [Direction of Election'' omitted from publication.] See Charles H Tompskins Co, 185 NLRB No 38, issued today 'San Jose Moteld/b/a Hyatt House Motel, 174 NLRB No 148 ' 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, NLRB v Wyman-Gordon Company, 394 U S 759 Accordingly, it is directed that an election eligibility list, containing the names and addresses of all the 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 Carpenters may secure a place on the ballot by producing a showing of interest