Central Valley National Bank

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Sep 3, 1965

154 N.L.R.B. 995 (N.L.R.B. 1965)

CENTRAL VALLEY NATIONAL BANK 995
Central Valley National Bank and Northern California District
Council of International Printing Pressmen 's & Assistants'
Union of North America, AFL-CIO, Petitioner . Case No. 20=
RC-6336. September 3, 1965
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION
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 E. Engler. The Hearing Officer's rulings made at the hearing
are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. Thereafter,
the Employer and the Petitioner filed briefs with the National Labor
Relations Board.
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 [Chairman McCulloch and Members 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 organization involved claims to represent certain
employees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of certain employees of the Employer within the meaning of Sec-
tions 9 (c) (1) and 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The Employer is a national bank operating 27 branch offices
located mainly in the San Francisco Bay area. Its central administra-
tive office is in Oakland, California. Petitioner seeks to represent the
employees who work in the supply department,' which is located in a
separate building in Richmond, California, about 15 miles from Oak-
land. The Employer contends that the only appropriate unit should
include all bank personnel, since the bank functions as a highly inte-
grated and centralized organization. Alternatively, the Employer
argues that the unit requested is an arbitrary and fragmented group-
ing of employees and is too limited in scope, because it excludes many
employees in similar classifications working elsewhere in its branches
and central office. There is no history of collective bargaining for any
of the bank's employees.
The supply department, a division of the administration office, func-
tions as the printing, purchasing, storage, and supply arm of the bank.
i In its petition , the Petitioner sought a unit of those supply department employees
directly engaged in the printing process : the proofreader , cameraman , offset press opera-
tors, cutting machine operator , and addressograph operator . At the hearing, however,
Petitioner amended its petition to include all employees in the department involved in
the printing process, adding to the classifications listed above, those people who type
copy and do bindery work . The amended petition in effect covers all employees in the
department except for the manager 's personal secretary.
154 NLRB No. 80.
996 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
It fills all customer orders for personalized checks, and handles most
internal printing of bank forms and manuals 2 In addition, it fur-
nishes office equipment and supplies from stock on hand or through spe-
cial order. The requested items are usually forwarded by common car-
rier, but at times employees at branches or departments may call for
their orders. About half the work of the department concerns the
imprinting of customer names and addresses, branch and account num-
bers on checks, with magnetic ink. After the manager's secretary sorts
the incoming orders, two of the clericals type the necessary information
on paper plates, which are then proofread and inserted on one of the
two check imprinting machines. The imprinted checks are taken to,
the supply area for stapling, binding, and cutting, after which they are
mailed to the proper branch. Other reproduction work is performed
on two Model 1250 Multilith offset presses, and one 14 by 20 Chief off-
set press. If a metal plate is need for printing a particular document
or form, it is processed from a film of the copy. The remainder of the
department's work involves processing supply requisitions.
Keith Tice, assistant vice-president and purchasing agent, manages
the supply department. Its 13 employees are classified as follows: 4
general clerical employees, 1 of whom is Tice's secretary; 1 senior mul-
tilith operator; 3 intermediate multilith operators; 1 addressograph
operator; and 4 supply clerks. The job classifications other than "gen-
eral clerical" do not exist elsewhere in the bank system.3
The women classified as general clericals type paper plates for check
imprinting, proofread, type invoices for supplies, and also help with
binding and cutting operations. Similarly, the employees who are
designated as supply clerks handle requisitions, inventory, and invoices
and also do cutting, binding, and proofreading. The addressograph
operator is learning how to run the 1250 Multilith offset press, and the
four regular multilith operators also help in handling shipments of
supplies. While each employee devotes most of his time to an assigned
job, it is clear that all are expected to and do assist each other whenever
necessary.
Admittedly, all employees throughout the bank enjoy similar work-
ing conditions and benefits and are subject to the same centralized con-
trols set by the personnel department. However, there is no evidence
of any interchange of employees between the supply department and
other departments or branches.
2 The bank buys some forms ; i.e., preprinted checks, from commercial companies, and
uses a fluid duplicating machine, located in the administration office in Oakland, for the
reproduction of certain forms or memoranda needed on short notice or in limited quantities.
Only the supply department has equipment capable of producing printed material in bulk.
3 There are about 85 employees throughout the bank who are classified as general
clericals . At each branch, one employee is assigned the responsibility for supplies in
addition to his regular duties.
ORANGE BELT DISTRICT COUNCIL OF PAINTERS NO. 48 997
We agree with the Petitioner that a unit of supply department
employees is appropriate here.4 All employees work together in carry-
ing out various manual and clerical tasks associated with the daily
operations of the supply department. Further, there is no interchange
of employees between the supply department and other sections of the
administration office or the branch banks; there is no bargaining history
for these employees; the supply department is a distinct administra-
tive division of the Employer servicing the entire bank; and the
employees are geographically separate from other bank employees.
In view of all these factors, we are satisfied that the supply depart-
ment's functional distinctiveness (including administrative, geo-
graphic, and supervisory separateness) within the Employer's opera-
tions demonstrates a community of interest among its employees suffi-
cient to warrant their placement in a separate unit.
Accordingly, we find that the following employees constitute a unit
appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the mean-
ing of Section 9(b) of the Act.
All employees of the Employer's supply department, located in Rich-
mond, California, including the manager's secretary, but excluding
supervisors 5 as defined in the Act.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
A Although the Petitioner sought to exclude the manager 's secretary , we shall include
her in the unit, because there is no evidence that she is a confidential employee , and her
job function closely identifies her with the interests of her fellow supply department
employees.
5 The record supports the stipulation of the parties, entered into at the hearing, that
Fred Mattix is not a supervisor.
Orange Belt District Council of Painters No. 48, AFL-CIO and
Frank A. Calhoun, d/b/a Calhoun Drywall Company. Case No.
31-CC-7 (formerly Case No. 21-CC-686). September 7, 1965
DECISION AND ORDER
On September 25, 1964, Trial Examiner E. Don Wilson issued his
Decision in the above-entitled proceeding, finding that the Respond-
ent had engaged in and was engaging in certain unfair labor practices
and recommending that it cease and desist therefrom and take certain
affirmative action, as set forth in the attached Trial Examiner's Deci-
sion . Thereafter, Respondent filed exceptions to the Trial Examiner's
Decision and a supporting brief.
Pursuant to Section 3(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, as
amended, the National Labor Relations Board has delegated its powers
in connection with this case to a three-member panel [Chairman Mc-
Culloch and Members Brown and Zagoria].
154 NLRB No. 83.