ACF Industries, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsDec 12, 1963

145 N.L.R.B. 403 (N.L.R.B. 1963)

ALBUQUERQUE DIVISION, ACF INDUSTRIES, INC. 403 Albuquerque Division , ACF Industries, Incorporated ' and Inter- national Association of Machinists, AFL-CIO, Petitioner. Case No. 28-RC-1078.2 December 12, 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 Hearing Officer James W. Mast. 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 [Members Leedom, Fanning, 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 organizations involved claim to represent certain em- ployees of the Employer.' 3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa- tion 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 appropriate unit. The Petitioner seeks a unit composed of all salaried office and plant clerical employees at the Employer's Albuquerque Division.' It would also include certain clerical employees working at the Em- ployer's Mercury test site, but would exclude the clerical employees working at the Employer's field procurement offices in Indianapolis, Indiana, and Los Angeles, California. With a few exceptions as to certain named individuals, the Intervenor takes the same position as the Petitioner with respect to the unit questions. The Employer takes the position that the appropriate unit should be composed of all office clerical, plant clerical, so-called "technical-clerical," and technical employees at the Albuquerque Division. It would exclude the clerical The Employer's name appears as amended at the hearing. 2In a companion case, Case No. 28-RC-1081 , the Petitioner had sought a unit composed of all technical employees at the Employer 's Albuquerque , New Mexico , Division, and at its Mercury , Nevada, test site. During the course of the hearing , however, and before any evidence had been presented with regard to the petition in that case , the Petitioner sought permission of the Regional Director for the Twenty -eighth Region to withdraw the petition for technical employees . As the Petitioner had taken no action inconsistent with its re- quest, and because the Employer withdrew its initial objection to such withdrawal, the Regional Director on May 22, 1963 , granted the request and severed Case No 28=RC-1081 from Case No 28-RC-1078. Consequently , this decision only deals with the latter petition. 8 Office Employees International Union, Local 251, AFL-CIO , was allowed to intervene in Case No. 28-RC-1078 on tke basis of a showing of interest 4 There are some hourly clerical employees who are represented in another unit. When- ever we speak of clerical employees herein, we are speaking only of those sought by the Petitioner , i.e., the salaried clerical employees. 145 NLRB No. 40. 404 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD employees at the Mercury, Nevada, test site, and at the Indianapolis and Los Angeles offices.' The clerical employees, whom the Petitioner seeks at the Employer's Albuquerque Division, work in four separate locations in and near Albuquerque. The main facilities are located in South Albuquerque; the San Pedro and Menaul facilities are located in Albuquerque, but about 7 miles from the main facilities; and the Alameda facilities are located 7 miles north of Albuquerque and about 16 miles from the main facilities. The Mercury (Nevada) test site, herein called NTS, is located (approximately 590 miles from Albuquerque. No one ob- jects to grouping the Alameda, San Pedro, Menaul, and main Albu- querque facilities into one unit. The Employer, however, objects to including the clerical employees located at NTS. Although NTS employees are paid from a central office in Albu- querque and are considered part of the Albuquerque Division, and the project manager there makes periodic reports to the Rover program manager in Albuquerque, NTS is autonomous in its daily operations. Mr. Sloan, as manager of NTS, exercises independent judgment as to the daily direction and operation of the test site, and he reports daily problems to representatives of the Los Alamos scientific labora- tory. Hiring sand termination of employees for NTS is done inde- pendently of Albuquerque supervision, and, although employees from Albuquerque are occasionally and sporadically allowed to transfer to NTS, it is rare that any are allowed to go to Albuquerque from NTS. NTS has its own in-plant promotion system and a separate salary structure. Although NTS is the testing ground for projects mapped out in Albuquerque, the testing is a separate and distinct phase of the Mercury project, the operations performed differ from those in Albuquerque, and NTS does not depend upon Albuquerque for the performance of its daily operations. Of the several bargain- ing units presently existing at ACF Industries, none includes em- ployees located at NTS, but rather are limited to employees in the Albuquerque operations. In view of these facts, we find that a unit limited to the Alameda, San Pedro, Menaul, and main Albuquerque facilities is appropriate, and we shall hence exclude the clerical em- ployees at the NTS facilities. The Petitioner and Intervenor seek to represent a unit composed of all salaried office and plant clerical employees, excluding all techni- cal employees. Among the classifications of employees sought by the Petitioner and Intervenor are certain classifications which the Em- ployer calls the "normal office-administrative,and production-support" clerical employees. It contends that these technical-clerical employ- Is In view of the agreement of the parties to exclude the clerical employees in the Indianapolis and Los Angeles offices, and since the record supports their position, we shall exclude these employees. ALBUQUERQUE DIVISION, ACF INDUSTRIES, INC. 405 ees perform a function which, although clerical, directly serves the technical employees, with whom they work, and whom they assist, and that the interests of this group are therefore more closely allied with the interests of the technical employees. It contends that any unit which includes the technical-clerical employees should also include the technicals. In summary, the Employer's unit contentions are: (1) the only ap- propriate unit would be one composed of all salaried office and plant clerical employees, including the technical-clericals plus the technical employees; or (2) if the Board should disagree with this position and grant the request for "office and plant clericals," such unit should not include the technical-clerical employees; or (3) even if the Board should deem it appropriate to include the technical-clerical employees, it should exclude certain classifications of employees (discussed below) which it contends are technical employees, and which the Petitioner and Intervenor contend are office or plant clericals. In The Sheffield Corporation, 134 NLRB 1101,. the Board aban- doned its previous practice of automatically excluding technical em- ployees from production and maintenance units whenever any party objected to their inclusion, and decided that henceforth it would make a pragmatic judgment in each case, based upon an analysis of all fac- tors which would tend to show where the community of interests lie. The Board subsequently decided to follow this same line of approach in cases where any party objects to the inclusion of technical em- ployees in a unit of office and plant clerical employees 6 In the overall scheme of the Albuquerque facilities, all salaried em- ployees, including professional, technical, plant clerical, and office clerical employees, work together on "projects," i.e., the Employer's product is actually "projects," and while working to complete a proj- ect, all employees, but especially the salaried employees, deal with data pertaining to that particular project. The engineers, draftsmen, designers, etc., work with the production planners and scheduling analysts in order to get a project moving; the illustrators, artists, estimators, tool engineers, plastics engineers, etc., carry the project forward toward final production; and all this time the clerical em- ployees are working with and expediting data of a technical nature dealing with planning, scheduling, and coordinating the project dates, and are recording project results. Many of the plant and office clerical employees must learn to use special typewriters in order to type out reports dealing with technical data. For the most part, of course, all clerical employees must be- come familiar with new and sometimes complex terms, symbols, and methods, of, recordation. However, none of the clerical employees' jobs require an educational background of more than a high school ° See The Budd Company, Automotive Division , Gary Plant, 136 NLRB 1153 406 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD diploma, and it takes on an average from 6 weeks to 6 months ,on-the-job training for a clerical employee to learn his function ade- quately. On the other hand, the technical employees must either have a background of specialized education beyond high school, or must undergo extensive specialized on-the-job training plus completion of' employer-sponsored specialized schooling. Although any clerical employee who qualifies has the opportunity to take these special courses, he cannot, as a rule, step up to a technical job solely on the basis of his on-the-job clerical experience. Although many of the clericals are supervised directly by either technical or professional employees, their job function is nevertheless strictly clerical by nature, and does not require the training that is required of technical employees. Clerical employees are paid under the same salary grade scale as technical employees; however, technical employees are at the top of 'the scale, and are paid salaries which the most senior of the clerical employees cannot reach. In view of all these factors, we find that the so-called technical-clerical employees' interests are more closely allied with those of the office and plant clerical employees than with the technicals. Although there appears some reason for finding appropriate a unit including technical employees with the office and plant clerical em- ployees, the Board is satisfied that the separate functions and interests of the office and plant clerical employees, on the one hand, and the technical employees on the other, create a separate and distinct com- munity of interest for the clerical employees. We are not convinced that the overall unit is the only appropriate unit, as the Employer contends, and we find that a unit of office and plant clerical employees, including the technical-clerical employees, is also appropriate? We shall now proceed to define the appropriate unit, department by department. Department 203-store and yards: We shall include in the unit the dispatcher, the inventory records analysts, and the stock analysts, in view of the parties' stipulation that these employees are plant clericals. The Petitioner 8 contends that the chief receiving clerk is a plant clerical and not a supervisor, while the Employer contends he is a supervisor. The record shows that this man does not have the au- thority to hire, fire, or effectively recommend same, and only occa- sionally takes over routine direction when the foreman is absent. We find that he is not a supervisor and shall include him. The Peti- tioner contends that the supervisor, stores inventory control should be included. In the absence of any conclusive evidence as to his duties, we shall allow him to vote subject to challenge. 'r Consistent with past practice, we are allowing office and plant clerical employees to- gether in one unit in view of the agreement of the parties . See The Budd Company, Automotive Division, Gary Plant, supra. s Unless otherwise specified, the Intervenor' s contentions are the same as Petitioner's. ALBUQUERQUE DIVISION, ACF INDUSTRIES, INC. 407 The Employer contends that the secretary, department head and the secretary-stenographers should be excluded as confidential em- ployees. The record shows that, although the secretary-stenographers have access to some confidential material, and the men whom they assist are sometimes called upon to testify to the competence of em- ployees in their department, these men do not determine, formulate, and effectuate management policy in the field of labor relations. Hence, we find that secretary-stenographers are not confidential em- ployees, and shall include them in the unit .9 As to the secretary, department head in this department, as in all departments, record testimony is sparse as to the duties of the men for whom they work. With respect to some departments, testimony seems to indicate that these men do formulate, determine, and effectuate management policy as to labor relations; but, as to most departments, testimony is conflicting and incomplete. On the basis of these some- what conclusionary and conflicting statements, we cannot determine which of the employees are confidential, and which are not, and hence we shall allow secretary, department heads to vote subject to challenge." Department 111-programing: We shall include the Flexowriter operators, and typists, in view of the parties' stipulation that these employees are office clerical employees." We shall also include the technical report typists, as their work, although dealing with some- what more technical data than the regular typists, is admittedly clerical in nature and requires only a short on-the-job training. The Petitioner contends that the scheduling analysts and senior scheduling analysts are office clerical employees; the Employer con- tends they are technical employees. These employees attend planning committee meetings with technical and professional employees; they exercise independent judgment as to the coordinating of time sched- ules, "justification" reports, etc., and their job requires a substantial 9 See General Motors Corporation , Packard Electric Division, 134 NLRB 1107; The B. F. Goodrich Company, 115 NLRB 722 . We find these facts to be true of all the stenographers and secretary -stenographers who the Employer contends are confidential employees , and we shall therefore include those classifications in all departments in the unit, with the exception of four secretary-stenographers in department 107, discussed be- low. The secretary-stenographer in department 112, and the secretary in department 305, are being allowed to vote subject to challenge. 11 Those allowed to vote subject to challenge are secretary, department heads in depart- ments 203 , 111, 542, 305 , 114, 201 , 204, 541, 543 , 101, 102, 104 , 106, 108, 112, 401, 431, 434, 441, and 451. The parties stipulated to exclude as a confidential employee the secretary , department head in department 107, and stipulated to exclude the whole of department 109. 11 The parties further stipulated that the Flexowriter operators in departments 101, 106, and 303 are office clerical employees, and we shall include them. However, the Employer contends that the Flexowriters in department 204 are technical -clerical employees who should be excluded . We do not agree ; we see no distinction between the duties of these employees and the duties of those in the same classification in departments 101, 111, 106, and 303, and hence we shall also include the Flexowriter operators in department 204, in accordance with our finding that technical-clerical employees are to be included. 408 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD period of specialized training. We find these employees to be technical employees, and shall exclude them from the unit.'2 The Petitioner also contends that the engineering estimators and senior engineering estimators are office clerical employees, while the Employer would have us find them to be technical employees. These employees are required to have a background of specialized trade school training, and must spend an appreciable period of time in learning machine methods, speeds, and capabilities in order to per- form their estimating function. We find these employees to be technical employees, and shall exclude them from the unit. The parties further stipulated that the technical writers and senior technical writers are professional employees. The Petitioner contends that the technical artists and technical illustrators are professional em- ployees, while the Employer and Intervenor contend they are technical employees. Without deciding this dispute, we shall exclude them from the unit. The classification of network coordinator analyst was vacant at the time of the hearing, and record evidence is not sufficient to determine whether it is a clerical, technical, or professional classification. Therefore, if the classification is filled at the time the eligibility list is drawn, we shall allow the employee(s) to vote subject to challenge. Department 542-product engineering : The Petitioner contends that the secretary-stenographers, stenographers, typists, document con- trol clerks, and the supervisor, engineering records control are office clerical employees,13 and that the engineering clerks and senior engi- neering clerks are plant clerical employees. The Employer admits that these employees perform clerical functions, but contends that they are technical-clerical employees who should be grouped with technical employees rather than with office and plant clerical em- ployees. For reasons stated hereinabove, and because they perform strictly clerical work, we find that these employees are appropriately included in a unit of office and plant clerical employees.14 12 Cf. Kearney & Trecker Corporation , 121 NLRB 817. 13 The parties stipulated that the supervisor, engineering records control is not a supervisor. 14 The parties stipulated that the engineering clerks and senior engineering clerks in department 541 are plant clerical employees . In departments 304 and 543, there are senior engineering clerks only ; in 304 it was stipulated that these clerks are plant cleri- cals ; In 543 it was stipulated that one such clerk is an office clerical but the parties dis- agree as to whether another is plant or office clerical. The Employer contends that these classifications in departments 301, 302 , 303, 401, 431, 434, 441, and 451 are technical clerical employees , whereas the Petitioner contends that those in departments 301 and 302 are plant clerical employees and those in departments 303, 401, 431, 434, 441, and 451 are office clerical employees . On the basis of the briefs and the entire record, we see no distinction between the duties of the engineering clerks and senior engineering clerks in department 542 and the various other departments just named. Hence , without deciding in which departments they are plant clerical employees, or in which they are office clericals , we conclude that the engineering clerks and senior engineering clerks in all of the departments named are clerical employees whom we shall ALBUQUERQUE DIVISION, ACF INDUSTRIES, INC. 409 The Petitioner, in summing up its position at the hearing, states that it also seeks to include the standards and specifications analysts. However, during the hearing, it took the position that this was a professional category, while the Employer contends that it is a tech- nical category. On the basis of the record, we shall exclude these employees as technical employees. The Petitioner seeks to include the storekeeper, product engineering, and record testimony shows the category to be plant clerical. However, it further shows that the only employee presently in that classification is performing a different job, and that, presently, there is no storekeeper in the department. If, at the time the eligibility list is drawn up, there is a storekeeper em- ployed in Albuquerque, he shall be included. The parties stipulated that the general foreman, tool cribs, and foreman, tool cribs, are supervisors within the meaning of the Act, and that the associate electronics engineer, associate design engineer, tool engineer, technical writers, and process engineer are professionals within the meaning of the Act. The Employer contends that the draftsmen, engineering data procedures analysts, and drafting checkers are technical employees, while the Petitioner contends they are professional employees. Without deciding the dispute, we shall exclude them. Department 302-vendor inspector: The parties stipulated that those holding the titles of supervisors of quality control records, non- destructive testing, technical testing, field inspection, and vendor in- spection are supervisors within the meaning of the Act. The Peti- tioner seeks to include the certification clerks as office clerical employees. The Employer contends they are technical-clerical em- ployees. For reasons stated above, we find them to be clerical em- ployees whose interests are most closely allied with the other clerical employees in the unit herein found appropriate, and we shall include them. It was further stipulated that the associate chemical engineer, as- sociate metallurgical engineer, metallurgical engineer, and test engi- neer are professional employees within the meaning of the Act, and that the test technicians and field inspection representative are tech- nical employees who should be excluded. include in the unit. See , e.g., Waldorf Instrument Company, Division of F. C. Huyck & Sons, 122 NLRB 803. Note below, the special treatment of these classifications in depart- ment 201. As stated above, the parties stipulated that the typists in department 111 are office clerical employees . They further stipulated that typists in departments 543, 101, 102, 106, 107, and 108 are office clerical employees . The Petitioner contends that the typists in departments 302, 303, 304 , 401, 431 , and 451 are also office clerical employees , while the Employer takes no position as to department 401, but contends that typists in the other departments are technical-clerical employees . For the general reasons stated above with regard to so-called technical -clerical employees , and because we see no significant distinction between the duties of typists in department 542 and the various other departments just named, we find that the typists in all departments are office clerical employees whom we shall include in the unit. 410 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Department 303-quality control and inspection: The parties stip- ulated that the supervisor, quality control records is a supervisor within the meaning of the Act, and that the quality control engineer and senior quality control engineer are professional employees within the meaning of the Act. We need not decide the dispute as to whether the associate quality control engineers and quality control analysts are professional or technical employees, for we would exclude them on either basis. The Petitioner would include the records clerks as office clerical employees, while the Employer contends they are technical-clerical employees. As their work is admittedly clerical in nature, and re- quires no extensive specialized background or training, we find them to be clerical employees whom we shall include in the unit. Department 304-standards laboratory: The parties stipulated that the storekeeper gauges is a plant clerical employee, and that the records clerks in this department are office clerical employees. They further stipulated that the supervisor, standards laboratory, the super- visor, tools and gauges, and the general supervisor, standards labora- tory are supervisors within the meaning of the Act, and that the senior standards technicians and senior tool and gauge technicians are technical employees. Although the Petitioner at the close of the hearing included the field inspection representatives for the Fort Worth, Texas, and Albu- querque areas in its unit request, during the hearing it stipulated on the basis of record testimony to exclude them as technical em- ployees and hence we shall exclude them. Department 305-administration of quality control and inspection: The parties stipulated that the switchboard operator is an office clerical employee, and that the technical specialists are technical employees. The Petitioner contends that the file clerks are office clerical em- ployees, while the Employer would exclude them as technical-clerical employees. We find that the file clerks are clerical employees, and shall include them in the unit. The Employer contends that the secretary-stenographer is a confi- dential employee. As the record is silent as to the duties of the secretary-stenographer in this department, we shall allow her to vote subject to challenge. Department 114-data processing: The parties stipulated that the machine operators, data transmission equipment operators, data proc- essing clerks, and keypunch operators are office clerical employees, and hence we shall include them. The Petitioner would also include the senior machine operators, data control editors, and machine technicians as office clericals, while the Employer contends they are technical employees. The senior machine operators receive a slightly higher salary than do the machine ALBUQUERQUE DIVISION, ACF INDUSTRIES, INC. 411 operators, and they are responsible for the ultimate efficiency and accuracy of reports emanating from their work section. Their pro- motion to this job is based upon on-the-job experience. However, it does not appear that their job requires any formal or specialized training, nor that their work requires the exercise of independent judgment. Hence, we shall include them as office clerical employees. The machine technicians must have a thorough understanding of the functions of the machines with which they work. They exercise independent judgment in the wiring and operation of their machines, and they are required to have specialized training over a long period of time. Data control editors are required to have 2 years of special- ized training, plus 3 to 5 years of experience at ACF Industries. They must have some knowledge of accounting, and they exercise independent judgment in performing their function. We find that the machine technicians and data control editor are technical em- ployees, and shall exclude them from the unit. At the time of the hearing, the Employer contemplated adding the classification of Honeywell operators to its operations. Although it is not clear from the record, it seems that the Petitioner contends they should be included as office clerical employees, while the Em- ployer would exclude them as technical employees. As the record evidence affords an insufficient basis for a decision, we hereby direct that, if there are any Honeywell operators at the time the eligibility list is drawn up, they shall be allowed to vote subject to challenge. Department 204-manufacturing capabilities : The parties stipu- lated that the associate design engineers, design engineers, and process engineers are professional employees within the meaning of the Act. The Petitioner seeks to include the standards and specifications ana- lyst, while the Employer contends he is a technical employee. This employee was transferred from department 542, and the Petitioner contends that the standards and specifications analysts in that depart- ment are professional employees. We see no distinction between the duties of this classification in department 542 and this department. Without deciding whether this is a technical or professional classi- fication, we find that this employee is not a clerical employee, and should be excluded. Department 541-production: The Employer contends that the process engineer is a technical employee, while the Petitioner contends he is a professional employee. Although we note that we see no distinction between the process engineer's duties in this department and department 204, where the parties were in agreement that the process engineer is a professional, we shall exclude the process engi- neer in this department without deciding whether he is a technical or a professional employee. 412 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Department 543-product, planning, and control: The parties stip- ulated that the keypunch operators and production control clerks are office clerical employees. It was further agreed that the production coordinators and contract print machine operators are clerical em- ployees who should be included in the unit; however, there was dis- agreement as to whether these employees are office or plant clerical employees. However, as we are finding appropriate a unit of office and plant clericals together, we need not decide this dispute, but shall simply include them in the unit. Although the Petitioner listed the program schedulers among the classifications it seeks to include, there was no evidence taken as to that classification, and the organizational chart shows that there were no such employees working at the time of the hearing. Hence, should there be any program schedulers employed at the time the eligibility list is drawn up, they shall be allowed to vote subject to challenge. The Employer contends that the machine load coordinator is 'a tech- nical-clerical employee who should be excluded, while the Petitioner would include him as an office clerical. As found above with regard to these categories, we shall include him in the unit found appropriate. The Petitioner contends that the production planners, assistant pro- duction planners, and production schedulers are office clerical employ- ees, while the Employer contends they are technical employees. The production schedulers and production planners are required to have a background of a high school diploma, plus 2 to 3 years of specialized courses offered by the Employer in subjects such as blueprinting and machine loading methods and analysis. The assistant production planners must qualify with a background of a high school diploma, plus at least a year of such specialized courses and they qualify to move into either production planners jobs or production schedulers jobs after 1 to 2 years of further study and on-the-job training. In view of the long and specialized training necessary for these jobs, and also in view of the fact that employees in these classifications receive salaries higher than the average clerical employee included in the unit, we find that the production planners, assistant production planners, and production schedulers are technical employees, and we shall exclude them from the unit. The parties further stipulated that supervisors of lift-truck opera- tors, production stores, production schedulers, production control, production planners, the general supervisor, production planning and control, the storekeeper, production stores, and the foremen of shop expediters and warehouse and receiving are supervisors within the meaning of the Act. The Employer contends that the supervisor, shop schedules is also a supervisor within the meaning of the Act. ALBUQUERQUE DIVISION, ACF INDUSTRIES, INC. 413 On the basis of the sparse evidence in the record, we cannot decide the status of this individual, and hence shall allow him to vote subject to challenge. Department 101-financial accounts: The parties stipulated that the accounting clerks are office clerical employees who should be in- cluded. It was further stipulated that the supervisors of accounting, payrolls, and fiscal accounting are supervisors within the meaning of the Act and that the accountants and associate accountants are pro- fessional employees within the meaning of the Act. The Employer contends that the senior accounting clerks are supervisors, while the Petitioner contends they are not. There is no evidence in the record to indicate that these employees possess any of the indicia of super- visory authority, and, in view of the fact that there are 10 senior accounting clerks and only 17 accounting clerks, we find that the senior accounting clerks are not supervisors, and shall include them in the unit. Department 102-budget and cost accounting: The parties stipu- lated that the accounting clerks and senior accounting clerks in this department are office clerical employees who should be included in the unit. It was further stipulated that the accountants and associate accountants are professional employees within the meaning of the Act. Department 103-plant manager and general administration: It was stipulated that the secretary-executive in this department is a confidential employee who should be excluded, and that the recep- tionist is an office clerical employee who should be included. Department 104-internal audit: The parties stipulated that the auditors, senior auditors, and associate auditors are professional em- ployees within the meaning of the Act. Department 106-office services: The parties stipulated that the contract print machine operators, records control clerks, chief records control clerks, office equipment control clerks, chauffeur, file clerks, messengers, and switchboard operators are office clerical employees. The Employer contends that the document control clerks and chief documents control clerks are technical employees. We find nothing in the training, requirements, or nature of the duties of these em- ployees which would warrant such a finding. Their work is essen- tially clerical, and we shall include them in the unit. The Employer contends that the senior switchboard operator is a supervisor. We agree. The record shows that this employee inter- views applicants, makes effective recommendations as to hiring and firing, grants time off, submits performance ratings for those under her control, has a separate desk, assigns work, etc. We find her to. be a supervisor within the meaning of the Act, and shall exclude her from the unit. 414 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD The parties stipulated that four of the five offset duplicating ma- chine operators employed at the time of the hearing are office clerical employees. The Employer contends that the other one is a technical employee because he is taking special courses which will qualify him for an admittedly technical job. So long as he remains in the classi- fication of offset duplicating machine operator, he shall be included in the unit. The Employer contends that the senior offset duplicating machine operator is a confidential employee because, on occasion, he prints labor contracts on his machine. Since he does not act in a confidential capacity to anyone who formulates, determines, and effec- tuates management policy as to labor relations, we find that he is not a confidential employee, and shall include him.15 The Employer contends that the technical assistant, microfilm op- erations is a technical employee, while the Petitioner contends he is an office clerical. In order to perform the duties attendant upon him in the Employer's operations, this employee was required to have a high school diploma, plus at least 1 year of specialized schooling in microfilming techniques, and approximately 1 year's experience in microlab work. We find that he is a technical employee, and shall exclude him from the unit 16 The parties further stipulated that the senior chauffeur should be excluded as a confidential employee; that the technical librarian is a professional employee within the meaning of the Act; and that the supervisors of duplicating machine operation, microfilm operations, and document control are supervisors within the meaning of the Act. Department 108-purchasing: The parties stipulated that the pur- chasing assistants, traffic clerks, and receptionist are office clerical em- ployees. Although, during the course of the hearing, the Petitioner contended that the supervisor, traffic, is an office clerical employee who should be included in the unit, it did not include him on its list sub- mitted at the close of hearing. Record evidence is too sparse upon which to make a decision as to this individual's supervisory authority, or as to his possible status as a technical employee, and hence we shall allow him to vote subject to challenge. Although there were no employees working in the classifications of file clerk or traffic assistant at the time of the hearing, the Petitioner seeks to include those classifications. As no evidence as to the func- tions of these classifications was taken, we shall allow employees so classified at the time the eligibility list is compiled to vote subject to challenge. The Petitioner seeks to include the field expediters, senior field ex- pediters, buyers, and senior buyers, while the Employer contends that these employees should be excluded as managerial employees. Buyers 15 See General Motors Corporation, Packard Electric Division, supra; The B. F. Good- rich Company, supra. 10 See Thiokol Chemical Corporation , Redstone Division, 123 NLRB 888. ALBUQUERQUE DIVISION, ACF INDUSTRIES-) INC. 415 must be high school graduates, and must have an equivalent of 2 years of college in accounting, purchasing and procurement, or some related function, plus 3 years' experience in the field. Their job is to pur- chase materials for the Employer, and they have the authority to reject bids, and commit the Employer's credit up to the amount of $2,500. We find them to be managerial employees, and shall exclude them from the unit.17 The field expediters and senior field expediters in this department are required to have the same background as buyers, except that only 1 to 2 years' experience is required. Senior field expediters must have at least a year's experience as an expediter with ACF. They are responsible, on a project basis, for the follow- up of suppliers' commitments under purchase orders. They are pri- marily concerned with vendor evaluation, and they assist the field inspection representatives, vendor evaluation representative, and liaison engineers with such matters as the evaluation of the causes of vendor deficiencies, and determination of vendor compliance with the Walsh-Healy Act. One such employee travels extensively with a representative from Sandia Corporation (a design agency), and to- gether they evaluate vendor performance. Another is an expert in compliance with the Walsh-Healy Act. All perform basically the same job, and all effectively recommend whether a supplier shall be accepted or rejected. We find that the field expediters and senior field expediters should be excluded as managerial employees, as they ex- ercise independent judgment with regard to the management purchas- ing prerogative.'8 We do so without deciding whether any of them are supervisors, as contended by the Employer. Department 109-security: The parties stipulated, and we agree, that, due to the very nature of the Employer's work, the entire security department should be excluded as confidential. Department 112-management systems: The parties stipulated to exclude the senior accounting clerks, systems analysts, senior systems analysts, programers, associate programers, and draftsmen as part of a computer-coordinated management planning function, called PERT (production evaluation and review technique). Although the parties disagreed as to whether programers and associate programers are technicals or professionals, it was agreed that they are not clericals, and hence should be excluded. The Employer contends, however, that this entire department should be excluded, as its function is uniquely and entirely managerial. It determines management policies and procedures to be followed in the various departments of the organization, and it reorganizes entire departments and reclassifies employees. The Petitioner would 17 See Mack Trucks, Inc., 116 NLRB 1576. 18 Cf Federal Telephone and Radio Company , a Division of International Telephone and Telegraph Corporation , 120 NLRB 1652 ; Copeland Refrigeration Corporation, 118 NLRB 1364. 416 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD have us include the secretary, department head, secretary-stenog- raphers, and forms clerks. It was stated that all these employees have access to the managerial information which results from the department's research and reevaluation. As we find that record evi- dence as to the duties of the men for whom the secretary, department head and secretary-stenographer work, and as to the exact nature of the materials handled by the forms clerks, is insufficient upon which to decide whether these employees are managerial, confidential, or clerical, we shall allow these employees to vote subject to challenge. Department 107-industrial relations : The parties stipulated to ex- clude as confidential employees the secretary, department head, and the secretary-stenographers who assist H. L. Moore and J. J. Mahon, but the Petitioner refused to so stipulate as to the other two secretary- stenographers in the department; i.e., those who assist R. E. Burge and T. E. Holland. All four of these employees work in the same office, and the men whom they assist all help to determine, formulate, and effectuate management policy in the field of labor relations. We find that all four of the secretary-stenographers are confidential em- ployees, and shall exclude them. The parties stipulated that the remaining secretary-stenographers are office clerical employees who should be included. They stipulated that : stenographers, typists, file clerks, messengers, receptionist, per- sonnel clerks, and senior personnel records clerks are office clerical em- ployees ; that the labor relations analysts, training representative, salary administrative assistant, salary analysts, wage analysts, and interviewer-test administrator are managerial and/or confidential em- ployees who should be excluded; and that the supervisor, safety and fire protection is a supervisor within the meaning of the Act. The Employer contends that the insurance administrator, publica- tions editor,.and safety men are managerial employees, and that the fire inspector is managerial and supervisory, while the Petitioner contends they are office clerical employees. The safety men and the fire inspector spend their entire time on safety inspection and imple- mentation of safety measures; however, they perform no guard duties or plant protection functions within the meaning of the Act, and hence we find that they are not plant protection employees, and shall include them.19 The insurance administrator is responsible for the routine processing of claims filed under the Employer's insurance plan. The publications editor is responsible for the security of items of news from within the plant and from other ACF organizations for 19 See The Carborundum Company, 133 NLRB 1129 . We find that the fire inspector is not a supervisor. The record indicates that he works directly under the supervisor of safety and fire protection , and that, while he has primary responsibility to inspect fire protection equipment , and is in charge of the volunteer safety brigade , he does not haN e the authority to grant time off, nor does he hire, fire , or effectively recommend same. There are only two safety men, one on each shift , and the fire inspector only relays orders coming from the supervisor of safety and fire protection. ALBUQUERQUE DIVISION, ACF INDUSTRIES, INC. 417 incorporation into a monthly publication. Neither of these employees formulates, determines, or effectuates management policy with regard to labor relations matters, nor assists anyone who does; hence, we find that neither the publications editor nor the insurance administra- tor is a managerial employee, and shall include them in the unit. Department 401-development and test engineering: The Employer takes no position as to the senior accounting clerks; the Petitioner would include them. There is no evidence to show that these em- ployees in this department perform functions differing from the functions of accounting clerks in other departments, and hence we shall include them in the unit. The Petitioner contends that the drafts- men, technical illustrators, and technical artists are professional em- ployees, while the Employer contends they are technical employees. Without deciding this issue, we shall exclude them from the unit. The Petitioner contends that the technical assistants are technical employees, while the Employer takes no position. As there is no evidence in the record as to the duties of these employees, we shall allow them to vote subject to challenge. The parties stipulated that the assistant production planner is a supervisor within the meaning of the Act. The Employer takes no position as to the status of the storekeeper, product engineering. As the work of this classification involves only the routine storing of materials, and keeping of inventory thereof, we find the storekeeper, product engineering, to be a plant clerical, and shall include him. The Employer contends that the supervisor, special engineering, financial reports, and statistics is a managerial employee. He receives a salary higher than the average clerical em- ployee, and is required to have a college education, or the equivalent thereof, plus 3 to 5 years' experience. His job entails monitoring expenses, budgets, etc., and he helps coordinate part of the PERT program discussed above. Without deciding whether he is a profes- sional or a managerial employee within the meaning of the Act, we shall exclude him 20 Department 431-Rover: The Petitioner contends that the drafting detailers, draftsmen, and technical illustrators are professional em- ployees, while the Employer contends they are technical employees. Without deciding this issue, we shall exclude them from the unit. The Petitioner would include the receptionist as an office clerical employee, while the Employer would exclude her as a technical- 20 we find that the duties of this classification in departments 431 and 434 are the same as in department 401, and hence shall exclude the supervisor, special engineering, financial reports, and statistics in those departments also. 734-070-64-vol. 145-28 418 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD clerical employee. Consistent with our findings hereinbefore, we find that this employee is a clerical employee whom we shall include in the unit. Department 434-engineering systems analysis: The Petitioner contends that the senior machine operators and keypunch operators are office clerical employees. We find that these employees are clerical employees and we shall include them in the unit. Department 441-Pluto: The Petitioner contends that the drafts- men are professional employees, while the Employer contends they are technical employees. Without deciding this issue, we shall ex- clude them from the unit herein found appropriate. Department 451-pressure systems: The Employer contends that the assistant production planners are technical employees, while the Petitioner contends they are office clerical employees. We find that the facts relating to the duties and background of these employees in this department are the same as to this classification in department 543, and we find that the assistant production planners in this de- partment are also technical employees whom we shall exclude from this unit. Department 201-plant engineering: The parties stipulated that job estimators and maintenance clerks in this department are plant clerical employees. The Petitioner and Employer stipulated that the preventive maintenance scheduler is a supervisor, while the Intervenor refused to so stipulate. We find record evidence to support the stipu- lation that this employee is a supervisor within the meaning of the Act, and shall exclude him. Although no evidence was taken as to the job functions of the engineering clerks and senior engineering clerks in this department, the Petitioner includes these two classifications in its list of inclusions submitted at the close of the hearing. The exhibits show that there were no employees in these classifications at the time of the hearing. Should there be anyone in these classifications at the time the eligi- bility list is drawn up, these employees shall be allowed to vote sub- ject to challenge. Accordingly, we find that all salaried office and plant clerical em- ployees, including those office and plant clerical employees listed in the attached Appendix, employed at the Employer's Albuquerque, New Mexico, facilities, including the Alameda, San Pedro, Menaul, and main Albuquerque facilities, but excluding the Employer's field procurement offices in Indianapolis, Indiana, and Los Angeles, California, and the Nevada test site, located at Mercury, Nevada, and ALBUQUERQUE DIVISION, ACF INDUSTRIES, INC. 419 excluding all other employees," all technical employees, professional employees, confidential employees, managerial employees, guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act, and as listed in the Appendix, consti- tute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9(c) (1) and Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act. [Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.] a The list of classifications of employees in the Appendix under " included ," along with those "allowed to vote subject to challenge ," constitute a comprehensive and all-inclusive list of inclusions . The list of classifications of employees under "excluded" Includes only those classifications which the parties stipulated should be excluded , and those which were in dispute , and which the Board has decided to exclude . It does not contain a listing of other employees whose exclusion was not disputed , but whose status as either guards, professional employees , technical employees , confidential employees , managerial employees, or supervisors , was not litigated . These employees are excluded from the unit by opera- tion of the phrase "all other employees." APPENDIX Included Excluded Department 101 Allowed to vote subject to challenge Accounting clerks. Supervisor, accounting. Secretary, department Senior accounting clerks. Supervisor, payrolls. head. Flexowriter operators. Supervisor, fiscal Typists. accounting. Accountants. Associate accountants. Department 102 Accounting clerks. Senior accounting clerks. Typists. Secretary-stenographers. Accountants. Associate accountants. Secretary, department head. Department 103 Receptionist. I Secretary-executive. Department 104 Auditors. Secretary, department Senior auditors. head. Associate auditors. 420 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD APPENDIX-Continued Included Excluded Allowed to vote subject to challenge Department 106 Stenographers. Typists. Offset duplicating machine operators. Senior offset duplicating machine operators. Document control clerks. Chief document control clerks. Contract print machine operators. Records control clerks. Chief records control clerks. Office equipment control clerks. Chauffeur. File clerks. Messengers. Switchboard operators. Flexowriter operators. Senior switchboard operator. Technical assistant, microfilm operations. Senior chauffeur. Supervisor, duplicating machine operations. Supervisor, microfilm operations. Supervisor, document control. Secretary, department head. Department 107 ' Secretary-stenographers (other than those specifically excluded). Typists. Stenographers. File clerks. Messengers. Receptionist. Personnel clerks. Senior personnel clerks. Senior administrator. Publications editor. Safety men. Fire inspector. Secretary, department head. Secretary-stenographers in offices of H. L. Moore, J. J. Mahon, R. E. Burge, and T. E Holland. Labor relations analysts. Training representative. Salary administrator. Salary analysts. Wage analysts. Interviewer-test administrator. Supervisor, safety and fire protection. Department 108 Stenographers. Buyers. Secretary, department Typists. Senior buyers. head. Secretary-stenographers. Field expediters. File clerks. Purchasing assistants. Senior field expediters. Traffic assistants. Traffic clerks. Technical librarian. Supervisor, traffic. Receptionist. ALBUQUERQUE DIVISION, ACF INDUSTRIES, INC. 421 Included APPENDIX-Continued Excluded Department 109 (entire department excluded) Department 111 Typists. Secretary-stenographers. Flexowriter operators. Technical report typists. Machine operators. Senior machine operators. Data transmission equip- ment operators. Data processing clerks. Keypunch operators. Scheduling analysts. Senior scheduling analysts. Engineering estimators. Senior engineering estimators. Technical writers. Senior technical writers. Technical artists. Technical illustrators. Allowed to vote subject to challenge Secretary, department head. Network coordinator analyst. Department 112 Senior accounting clerks. Systems analysts. Senior systems analysts. Programers. Associate programers. Draftsmen. Secretary, department head. Secretary-stenographer. Forms clerks. Department 114 Machine technicians. Data control editor. Secretary, department head. Honeywell operators. Department 201 ,Stenographers. Preventive maintenance Secretary, department Job estimators. scheduler. head. Maintenance clerks. Engineering clerks. Senior engineering clerks. 422 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Included Secretary-stenographers. Dispatcher. Inventory records analysts. Stock analysts. Chief receiving clerk. Flexowriter operators. Engineering clerks. Senior engineering clerks. Secretary-stenographer. APPENDIX-Continued Excluded Allowed to vote subject to challenge Department 203 Secretary, department head. Supervisor, stores inventory control. Department 204 Standards and specifications analyst. Design engineers. Associate design engineers. Process engineers. Secretary, department head. Department 301 Department 302 Typists. Secretary-stenographer. Certification clerks. Supervisor, quality con- trol records. Supervisor, nondestruc- tive testing Supervisor, technical testing. Supervisor, field inspec- tion. Supervisor, vendor inspection. Metallurgical engineers. Associate metallurgical engineers. Associate chemical engineers. Test engineers. Test technicians. Field imspection repre- sentative (Fort Worth). Field inspection repre- sentative (Albuquer- que). ALBUQUERQUE DIVISION, ACF INDUSTRIES, INC. APPENDIX-Continued 423 Included I Excluded I Allowed to vote subject to challenge Department 303 Typists. Secretary-stenographer. Engineering clerks. Senior engineering clerks. Flexowriter operators. Records clerks. Typists. Secretary-stenographer. Engineering clerks. Senior engineering clerks. Storekeeper, gauges. Records clerks. Supervisor, quality control records. Quality control engineers. Senior quality control engineers. Associate quality control engineers. Quality control analysts. Department 304 Supervisor, standards laboratory. Supervisor, tools and gauges. General supervisors, standards laboratory. Senior standards tech- nicians. Senior tool and gauge technicians. Field inspection representative. Department 305 Switchboard operators. Technical specialists. Secretary-stenographer. File clerks. Department 401 Typists. Draftsmen. Secretary, department Stenographers. Technical illustrators. head. Senior engineering clerks. Technical artists. Technical assistants. Senior accounting clerks. Assistant production Storekeeper, product planners. engineering. Supervisor , special engi- neering, financial re- ports and statistics. Department 431 Typists. Draftsmen. Secretary, department Engineering clerks. Drafting detailers. head. Senior engineering clerks. Technical illustrators. Secretary-stenographers. Receptionist. 424 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD APPENDIX-Continued Included Excluded Allowed to vote subject to challenge Department 434 Senior-machine operators. Keypunch operators. Secretary-stenographers. Senior engineering clerks. Supervisor , special engin- eering, financial re- ports and statistics. Secretary , department head. Department 441 Secretary-stenographers. Senior engineering clerks. Draftsmen. Secretary , department head. Department 451 Typists. Secretary-stenographers. Engineering clerks. Senior engineering clerks. Assistant production planners. Secretary , department head. Department 541 Typists. Secretary-stenographers. Keypunch operators. Engineering clerks. Senior engineering clerks. Process engineer. Secretary, department head. Department 542 Typists. Stenographers. Secretary-stenographers. Engineering clerks. Senior engineering clerks. Document control clerks. Supervisor, engineering records control. Storekeeper , product engineering. Standards and specifica- tions analysts. Foreman, tool cribs. General foreman, tool cribs. Associate electronics engineers. Associate design engineers. Tool engineers. Process engineers. Technical writers. Draftsmen. Engineering data pro- cedures analysts. Drafting checkers. Secretary, department head. THE HALSEY W. TAYLOR COMPANY Included 425 APPENDIX-Continued Excluded Allowed to vote subject to challenge Department 543 Typists. Production planners. Secretary, department Secretary-stenographers. Assistant production head. Senior engineering clerks. planners. Program schedulers. Keypunch operators. Production schedulers. Supervisor, shop Production control clerks. Supervisor, lift-truck schedules. Production coordinators. operators. Contract print machine Supervisor, production operators. stores. Machine load coordinators. Supervisor, production schedulers. Supervisor, production control. Supervisor, production planners. General supervisor, pro- duction planning and control. Storekeeper, production stores. Foreman, shop expediters. Foreman, warehouse and receiving. The Halsey W. Taylor Company and United Steelworkers of America, AFL-CIO. Case No. 8-CA-3118. December 12, 1963 DECISION AND ORDER On September 9, 1963, Trial Examiner John F. Funke issued his Decision in the above-entitled proceeding, finding that the Respondent had engaged in and was engaging in certain unfair labor practices and recommending that it cease and desist therefrom and take certain af- firmative action, as set forth in the attached Trial Examiner's Deci- sion. Thereafter, the Respondent filed exceptions to the Trial Ex- aminer's Decision and a supporting brief. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member panel [Chairman McCulloch and Mem- bers Leedom and Brown]. 145 NLRB No. 43.