Stromberg Carlson Corp.

'762 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Stromberg Carlson Corporation' and International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO, Petitioner. Cases 14-RC-6055 and 14-RC-6056 February 25, 1969 DECISION AND ORDER BY CHAIRMAN MCCULLOCH AND MEMBERS FANNING AND BROWN Upon petitions duly filed under Section 9(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, a hearing was held on November 4, 1968, before Hearing Officer Victor R. Witte, Jr., of the National Labor Relations Board. The Hearing Officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. Thereafter, the Employer filed a brief with the Board. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor Relations Board has delegated its powers in connection with these cases to a three-member panel. Upon the entire record in these cases, 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 labor organization involved claims to represent certain employees of the Employer. 3. No question affecting commerce exists concerning the representation of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9(c)(1) and 2(6) and (7) of the Act for the following reasons: The Petitioner seeks to represent employees of the Employer engaged in installing "crossbar" telephone equipment at facilities at Mascoutah, and Millstadt, Illinois, in Case 14-RC-6055, and at the facilities at O'Fallon, Missouri, in Case 14-RC-6056. These operations commenced in 1968 and are scheduled for completion in February 1969. The maximum number of employees engaged in the installation work at each of these facilities has never exceeded twenty. The Employer contends that the only appropriate unit is one comprised of all employees engaged in the installation of telephone equipment regardless of location or the type of equipment being installed. There is no bargaining history for the installers. The Employer is engaged in the installation of telephone equipment at various sites throughout the United States and elsewhere. No permanent facilities are maintained by the Employer at these work sites. The facilities at which the equipment is installed are owned by the Employer's customers. The Employer has in excess of 300 installers divided into five job classifications. These employees The name of the Employer appears as amended at the hearing. are assigned and transferred by the Employer from its' Rochester., New York, headquarters from jobsite to jobsite throughout and outside the United States as 'individuals and ^ not as members of a team or crew. They perform their work on the premises of the Employer's customers where they install telephone equipment either manufactured or purchased by the Employer. The normal practice in staffing these work projects is for the Employer to assign a smaller number of employees to commence the work, to assign a greater number of employees during the time when the work is at its peak level, and then to reduce the work force while the installation is phasing out by transferring installers no longer needed at the particular project to other jobs at which the Employer is installing equipment. Thus, individual installers are transferred by the Employer from jobsite to jobsite as its needs dictate, so that installers may be assembled at an installation facility from many other facilities at which the Employer is completing its work, may then be transferred in and out of installation facilities while the work of installing the equipment is in progress, and then, as the various projects are phasing out, the employees are transferred from the project they are working on to other projects on orders from Rochester, New York. Wages are established within a minimum to a maximum rate range for each of the five job classifications of installers. These rates are determined at the Employer's headquarters in Rochester. Other benefits, such as insurance pension plans, also are uniform for all installers varying only when amount of wage or length of service is a factor. These benefits are determined at the Employer's headquarters in Rochester Other working conditions, such as mileage and per diem allowances are established in Rochester. Labor relations are also centrally administered from the Employer's Rochester headquarters. With regard to industry practice, the record shows that installers are generally ' represented on nationwide basis. Specifically, the installers of North Electric, Western Electric, and Automatic Electric are represented on such a basis. As noted above, the Petitioner indicated its interest in representing only "crossbar" installers and not "XY" installers. In this connection, the two main types of installations made by the Employer are "crossbar" and "XY" installations. These are different types of equipment performing the same function of providing a base for receiving and transmitting telephone messages. Each facility at which the machinery is installed uses only one of the basic product lines, whether, it be an all "crossbar" or all "XY" installation. Installers interchangeably work on installing various product lines, switching from one product line to another as they are transferred from - one facility to another. Specialization as to a particular product line is limited to the level of foremen and management and 174 NLRB No. 116 STROMBERG CARLSON CORP. 763 specialists based in Rochester. In view of the foregoing, particularly the evidence showing that the individual installers are assigned to a job on the basis of need rather than transferred from job to job as a crew, the fact that installers are transferred to and from various projects while work is still in progress, and the fact that installers interchangeably install various product lines without specialization, we conclude that there is no identifiable group of installers located at a work project for the entire work period which could constitute an appropriate unit for bargaining purposes. Under these circumstances, we find that separate units of employees installing "crossbar" telephone equipment at the petitioned-for work sites are not appropriate for bargaining purposes. We shall therefore dismiss the petitions.' ORDER It is hereby ordered that the petitions in Cases 14-RC-6055 and 14-RC-6056 be, and they hereby are, dismissed. :In view of our decision herein, we find it unnecessary to determine whether foremen of the Employer are supervisors within the meaning of the Act