Emsco Derrick & Equipment Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsFeb 3, 1947

72 N.L.R.B. 378 (N.L.R.B. 1947)

In the Matter of EMsco DERRICK & EQUIPMENT COMPANY, EMPLOYER and UNITED STEELWORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO, PETITIONER Case No. 21-R-3494.-Decided February 3, 1947 Mr. R. I. Kelly, of Los Angeles, Calif., for the Employer. Messrs. John A. Despol and James H. Reed, both of Maywood, Calif., for the Petitioner. Mr. Arthur Christopher, Jr., of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at Los Angeles, California, on September 13, 1946, before George H. O'Brien, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations Board makes the following : FINDINGS OF FACT 1. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER Emsco Derrick & Equipment Company, a California corporation, owns and operates a plant at Los Angeles, California, where it is engaged in the manufacture of oil well drilling and producing ma- chinery, steel fabricators, and hot dip galvanizing equipment. During 1945, the Employer purchased for use at its plant steel worth approxi- mately $2,000,000, of which amount more than 50 percent represented shipments from sources outside the State of California. During the same year, the Employer manufactured and sold finished products valued in excess of $11,880,000, of which amount 50 percent represented shipments to points outside the State. The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, claiming to represent employees of the Employer. 72 N. L. R. B., No. 71. 378 EMSCO DERRICK & EQUIPMENT COMPANY III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION 379 The Employer refuses to recognize the Petitioner as the exclusive bargaining representative of certain employees of the Employer. We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the representation of employees of the Employer, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT ; THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES The Petitioner seeks a unit consisting of the Employer's plant clerical employees, including timekeepers, but excluding office ein- ployees, confidential employees, and supervisors. In the alternative, the Petitioner seeks to merge these employees into the unit of produc- tion and maintenance employees which it represents under a collective bargaining agreement with the Employer. The Employer opposes both positions of the Petitioner, contending that the appropriate unit should be composed of both office and plant clerical employees. There are approximately 46 plant clerical employees, all of whom either work in close proximity to the production and maintenance employees or come in contact with the latter. Some work directly in the production shops, and others in offices attached to these shops. All these employees perform the customary duties of their various classifications, although a few (timekeepers) perform other plant clerical work, such as the filing of blueprints, in addition to their regular assignments. All plant clericals, except 5 or 6,2 work under the ultimate supervision of the plant production manager.3 There is practically no interchange of personnel between the office and plant clerical groups. Moreover, the record reveals that the Employer has followed the practice of upgrading production and maintenance employees to plant clerical positions. In view of the foregoing facts and upon the entire record in the case, we are of the opinion that the plant clerical employees have a closer community of interest with the production and maintenance employees than with the office employees and may function as part of the production and maintenance unit. We shall, therefore, direct an election among the plant clerical employees so that they may indicate their desires as to whether or not they should be added to the estab- ' Plant clericals in the production shops work the same hours as the production and maintenance employees , whereas the other employees in this category work hours similar to those of the office employees Due to a lack of office space, the Employer ' s office em- ployees are not confined solely to its administrative building but are also located in several plant buildings. 2 These five or six employees are responsible to the metallurgist , the machine shop super- intendent, and the heads of the machinery repair, maintenance, and galvanizing depart- ments, all of whom are piodaction or maintenance superN isors I It appears that, irrespective of wheie they work, office employees are under the super- vision of administrative office supervisois 380 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD lished production and maintenance bargaining unit represented by the Petitioner.4 Accordingly, we shall direct that an election be held among all plant clerical employees at the Employer's plant in Los Angeles, California, excluding all office employees, confidential employees, and all supervisory employees with authority to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or effectively recommend such action. If the employees in this voting group select the Petitioner as their bargaining agent, they will be taken to have indicated their desire to be bargained for as part of the production and maintenance unit now represented by the Petitioner. DIRECTION OF ELECTION As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Emsco Derrick & Equipment Company, Los Angeles, California, 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 Relations Board, and subject to Sections 203.55 and 203.56, of National Labor Relations Board Rules- and Regulations-Series 4, among the employees in the voting group described in Section IV, above, who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of this Direction, including employees who did not work during said pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation or temporarily laid off, and including 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 rehired or reinstated prior to the date of the election, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented by United Steelworkers of America, CIO, for the purposes of collective bargaining. 4 See Matter of Armour and Company, 40 N. L. R B. 1333 ; Matter of Goodman Manufac. tur,ny Company, 58 N. L R B. 531 ; Matter o f Kearney & Trecker Corporation, 60 N. L. R. B. 148, and Matter of Wichita Falls Foundry & Machine Co., 69 N. L. R. B. 458.