Bethlehem Steel Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsApr 9, 1946

67 N.L.R.B. 159 (N.L.R.B. 1946)

In the Matter of BETHLEHEM STEEL COMPANY and INDUSTRIAL UNION OF MARINE & SHIPBUILDING WORKERS OF AMERICA, C. I. O. Case No. 21-R-3167.-Decided April 9,19416 O'Mlfelveny c6 Myers, by Homer I. Mitchell, of Los Angeles, Calif., for the Company. Messrs W. T. Howell and Lee Bailey, of San Pedro, Calif., for the Union. Mr. F. C. Dunn, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION STATEMENT OF THE CASE Upon an amended petition duly filed by Industrial Union of Marine & Shipbuilding Workers of America, C. I. 0., herein called the Union, alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of Bethlehem Steel Company, Terminal Island, California, herein called the Company, the National Labor Relations Board provided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice before Daniel J. Harrington, Trial Examiner. Said hearing was held at Los Angeles, California, on March 7, 1946. The Company and the Union appeared and participated. Both parties were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues. At the close of the hear- ing the Company made a motion to dismiss the petition on the grounds that the employees involved were not employees within the meaning of the Act and that said employees did not constitute an appropriate unit because of the nature of their duties. Ruling was reserved for the Board. For reasons hereinafter set forth, the motion is hereby denied. The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. All parties were afforded opportunity to file briefs with the Board. 67 N. L. R. B., No. 23. 159 160 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY Bethlehem Steel Company, a Pennsylvania corporation, is engaged in the construction, repair, alteration, and conversion of ships at its shipyard at Terminal Island, San Pedro, California. During 1945 materials used in its operations at said shipyard exceeded $500,000 in value, of which more than 90 percent was obtained from sources outside the State of California. During the same period, the value of the work performed at said shipyard exceeded $500,000, of which more than 90 percent related to work performed on ships destined for use in interstate and foreign commerce, or for the United States Government. The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED Industrial Union of Marine & Shipbuilding Workers of America, affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, is a labor organization admitting to membership employees of the Company. III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION The Company has refused to grant recognition to the Union as exclusive bargaining representative of the employees in the alleged appropriate unit on the ground that the proposed unit is not appro- priate for collective bargaining. A statement of a Board agent, received in evidence at the hearing, indicates that the Union represents a substantial number of employees in the unit hereinafter found appropriate.' We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the representation of employees of the Company, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT The Union requests a unit comprising all timekeepers employed at the Company's San Pedro yard, excluding the chief timekeeper and supervisory timekeepers. The Company contends that timekeepers are a part of management and do not constitute employees within the meaning of the Act. It further asserts that the proposed unit is ' A Field Examiner for the Board reported that the Union submitted 29 application-for- membership cards ; that the cards were dated in January, August, October, and December 1945, and that there were 32 employees in the unit petitioned for. BETHLEHEM STEEL COMPANY 161 inappropriate because the labor organization seeking to represent the timekeepers also represents the production and maintenance employees at the San Pedro yard.2 There are approximately 32 timekeepers employed at the San Pedro yard under the supervision of a chief timekeeper. The chief time- keeper is assisted by three supervisory timekeepers and seven leading men. The timekeeping division is a part of the accounting department and is housed in the same building, but in a separate room. The clerical work of the timekeeping division is done in this room, but timekeepers work throughout the yard and on ships in the performance of their duties. Timekeepers check employees through the gates at the begin- ning and end of each shift and also check employees at their work. During the shift the timekeepers go through the yard picking up allocations of work shown on supervisors' reports, which are tran- scribed to employees' time cards in the timekeeping division office. 'T'imekeepers compute shift work, overtime, and repair differentials and make spot check analyses of work and absenteeism. They also investigate claims of employees for wage corrections and make neces- sary adjustments. They gather data used as the basis of time studies. The Company's contention that timekeepers perform managerial functions is not supported by the record. They perform the normal duties of timekeepers and are entitled to collective bargaining rights under the Act." The parties are in agreement that the chief timekeeper and super- visory timekeepers be excluded from the unit. The Company would also exclude leadingman timekeepers, while the Union takes the posi- tion that they should be excluded, if they have the authority to "hire or fire." While leadingmen do not have the authority to hire, dis- charge, or transfer timekeepers, they do have authority to effectively recommend discharges and transfers. They receive 10 cents more per hour than other timekeepers, but have the same working hours and vacation privileges. The testimony of a leadingman timekeeper at the hearing indicates that they are not presently acting in a super- visory capacity, but rather doing regular timekeeper work. The record shows, however, that this is a temporary situation caused by the termination of military hostilities, and consequent drastic reduc- tion in the number of employees, including timekeepers. As a re- sult, former leadingman timekeepers are doing regular timekeeper work. Upon completion of reconversion, the normal procedure of a leadingman timekeeper,for every 10 timekeepers is to be resumed. 2 The production and maintenance employees at the San Pedro yard are represented by a local of the Union and have a contract with the Company. $ Matter of Bethlehem Steel Company, Shipbuilding Division, 59 N. L it. B. 1376 692148-46-vol. 67-12 162 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD The leadman will spend most of his time in directing the work of other timekeepers and will have the power to effectively recommend changes in their status. We shall, therefore, exclude leadingmen from the unit' We find no merit to the Company's contention that the same labor organization that represents production and maintenance employees should not represent timekeepers. The Union here seeks a bargain- ing unit of timekeepers apart from other employees, which has been found appropriate in many cases.,, We perceive no conflict between self-organization for the purposes of collective bargaining and the faithful performance of duty. The motion to dismiss is accordingly denied. We find that all timekeepers at the Company's San Pedro yard, excluding the chief timekeeper, supervisory timekeepers, leadingmen timekeepers, and all or any other supervisory employees with author- ity to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or effectively recommend such action, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargain- ing within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act. V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES We shall direct that the question concerning representation which has arisen be resolved by an election by secret ballot among the em- ployees in the appropriate unit who were employed during the pay- roll period immediately preceding the date of the Direction of Elec- tion herein, subject to the limitations and additions set forth in the Direction. DIRECTION OF ELECTION By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National Labor Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Rela- tions Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3, as amended, it is hereby DIRECTED that, as a part of the investigation to ascertain repre- sentatives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Bethlehem Steel Company, Terminal Island, San Pedro, California, shipyard, an election by secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than thirty (30) days from the date of this Direction, under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Twenty- first Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National Labor + United States Cartridge Company, 49 N. L. it. B 77. Matter of Consolidated Vultee A ircraft Corporation , 60 N. L. it. B. 525. T Matter of Sullivan Drydock and Repair Corporation , 56 N L. it. B. 582. Matter of Ingalls Shipbuilding Corporation , 55 N L R B 629. BETHLEHEM STEEL COMPANY 163 Relations Board, and subject to Article III, Sections 10 and 11, of said Rules and Regulations, among the employees in the unit found appropriate in Section IV, above, who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of this Direction, in- cluding employees who did not work during said pay-roll period be- cause they were ill or on vacation or temporarily laid off, and includ- ing employees in the armed forces of the United States who present themselves in person at the polls, but excluding those employees who have since quit or been discharged for cause and have not been re- hired or reinstated prior to the date of the election, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented by Industrial Union of Marine & Shipbuilding Workers of America, C. I. 0., for the purposes of collective bargaining.