Loews Theatres, Inc.

590 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Lorillard, a Division of Loews Theatres, Incorporated, Inc. and Tobacco Workers International Union, AFL-CIO-CLC, Petitioner. Case 9-RC-10801 July 28, 1975 DECISION ON REVIEW AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION BY MEMBERS JENKINS , KENNEDY, AND PENELLO On December 4, 1974, the Regional Director for Region 9 issued a Decision and Direction of Election in the above-entitled proceeding in which he found appropriate the Petitioner's requested unit of salaried quality control employees at the Employer's Louis- ville, Kentucky, plant, on the basis that they have a community of interest separate and identifiable from the interests of the already represented plant employ- ees. Thereafter, in accordance with Section 102.67 of the National Labor Relations Board Rules and Reg- ulations, Series 8 , as amended, the Employer filed a timely request for review of the Regional Director's decision on the ground, inter alia, that in making the above unit finding he departed from precedent. The Petitioner filed opposition to the request for review. On January 2, 1975, the National Labor Relations Board by telegraphic order granted the request for review insofar as it involves the issue of a separate unit or a self-determination election for the quality control group employees, denied it in all other as- pects, and stayed the election pending decision on review. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the Na- tional Labor Relations Board has delegated its au- thority in this proceeding to a three-member panel. The Board has considered the entire record in this case with respect to the issues under review and makes the following findings: The Employer urges that the interests of the re- quested quality control employees are so closely linked with those of the employees currently repre- sented by Petitioner's Local 201 that they do not constitute a separate appropriate unit but may only be added to the existing unit through a self-determi- nation election. We agree. The Employer manufactures tobacco products at its Louisville facility here involved. Since 1937, the Petitioner's Local 201 has represented a unit of pro- duction and maintenance employees at the plant. Be- ginning in 1938, hourly paid quality control employ- ees have been included in the unit. In 1958, the Employer instituted a two-tier inspection quality control system and the salaried quality control group was added under the separate supervision of the quality control manager . Although the bargaining unit inspection employees are under the day-to-day supervision of production and maintenance supervi- sors, they also receive supervision from the quality control supervisors with regard to the technical as- pects of their duties. The salaried quality control em- ployees have not been included in the unit repre- sented by Local 201.1 It is undisputed that both the hourly paid inspec- tors in the existing unit and the approximately 30 salaried quality control employees now employed at the plant frequently perform similar job functions, work the same hours, and have daily contacts with production and maintenance employees. In view of the current representation of the hourly paid quality control employees as part of the existing production and maintenance unit, we are unable to agree with the Regional Director that other factors, such as dif- ferences in mode of payment, fringe benefits, super- vision, skills and educational qualifications, and in- frequent interchange, support a finding that the salaried quality control employees share a sufficient community of interest apart from other employees to warrant their establishment as a separate unit. Fur- ther, while the salaried quality control employees constitute a residual unrepresented group, the Board has held, in the absence of another labor organiza- tion seeking to represent them as a residual unit, that they may only be represented as part of the existing unit, after a self-determination election? In the circumstances, we shall direct a self-deter- mination election herein in the voting group de- scribed below to determine whether or not such em- ployees wish to be included as part of the existing unit represented by the Petitioner's Local 201:3 All salaried quality control group employees em- ployed by the Employer at its Louisville, Ken- tucky, plant, including quality control examin- ers, factory and office waste control clerks, the quality analyzer technician, production quality control instrument clerk, and the production quality control clerk, but excluding all other em- ployees, office clericals, confidential employees, professionals, guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act. i Local 201 did not intervene herein. z See Arizona Public Service Company, 182 NLRB 505 (1970); The Budd Company Automotive Division, Detroit Plant, 154 NLRB 421, 428 (1965); The Cessna Aircraft Company, 123 NLRB 855, 858 (1959). 3 The conduct of the election is contingent upon the filing of a motion with the Regional Director by Local 201, as the incumbent representative of the existing unit, to substitute itself for the Petitioner herein . If Local 201 does not file a motion to such effect within 5 days from the date of this Decision on Review and Direction of Election, the Regional Director shall dismiss the petition. 219 NLRB No. 106 LORILLARD, A DIVISION OF LOEWS THEATRES 591 If a majority of employees in the above voting production and maintenance unit currently repre- group vote for Local 201, they will be taken to have sented by Local 201, and the Regional Director shall indicated their desire to constitute part of the existing issue a certification of results to that effect. [Direction of Election and Excelsior footnote omit- ted from publication.]