Federal Shipbuilding & Drydock Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 2, 1946

69 N.L.R.B. 1130 (N.L.R.B. 1946)

In the Matter Of FEDERAL SHIPBUILDING & DRYDOCK COMPANY, Ei'r-
PLOYER and INDUSTRIAL UNION, MARINE & SHIPBUILDING WORKERS
of AMERICA, LOCAL NO. 16 (C. I. 0.), PETITIONER
Case No. 2-R-6167.-Decided August 1.946
Mr. Paul Findley, of Kearny, N. J., for the Employer.
Rothbard, Harris c Oxfeld, by Mr. Emil Oxfeld, of Newark,
N. J., for the Petitioner.
Mr. Warren H. Leland, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at Newark,
New Jersey, on May 20, 1946, before George Turitz, Trial Examiner.
The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are free from preju-
dicial 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
Federal Shipbuilding & Drydock Company, a New Jersey cor-
poration maintaining its principal office and place of business at
Kearny, New Jersey, is engaged in the business of constructing naval
and merchant vessels at its shipyards located at Kearny and Port
Newark, New Jersey. During the year 1945, the Employer pur-
chased materials consisting of steel plates, boilers, turbine generators
and related equipment valued in excess of $1,000,000, of which ap-
proximately 70 percent was received from points outside the State
of New Jersey. During the same period, the Employer constructed
naval and merchant vessels valued in excess of $1,000,000, of which
approximately 90 percent was shipped to points outside the State of
New Jersey.
The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
69 N. L. R. B., No. 136.
1130
FEDERAL SHIPBUILDING & DRYDOCK COMPANY
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
1131
The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress
of Industrial Organizations, claiming to represent employees of the
Employer.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Employer refuses to recognize the Petitioner as the exclusive
bargaining representative of employees of the Employer until the
Petitioner has been certified by the Board in an appropriate unit.
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. TILE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Petitioner seeks a unit comprised of all employees in the yard
timekeeping section of the time and tabulation department, includ-
ing timekeepers, weld counters, weld wire clerks, piecework checkers,
yard timekeeping office force, main gate clerks, and clock house
clerks, but excluding berth inspectors, restaurant clerks, clerk-typists.
leading men, chief clerks, and chief timekeeper.' The Employer
contends that the unit sought is inappropriate because it is too re-
stricted in scope, and that only a unit of all its clerical employees, in-
cluding the employees herein sought, is appropriate. In the alterna-
tive, the Employer, while agreeing generally with the composition
of the Petitioner's proposed unit, urges the exclusion of the clock
house clerks and the yard timekeeping office force.
The employees whom the Petitioner seeks to include in its unit are
part of the yard timekeeping section of the time and tabulation
department. They are engaged, generally, in accumulating pay-roll
information and data. A few of the employees in the proposed unit
are stationed in the yard timekeeping office, but the majority work
in other departments, particularly production departments, although
all remain under the supervision of the chief timekeeper. The unit
sought consists essentially of timekeepers and employees engaged in
related duties. The Board has previously decided that timekeeping
employees may constitute an appropriate unit apart from clerical
employees generally.2 In accord with such determinations, we find
that the proposed segregation in a separate unit of employees having
timekeeping duties is appropriate.
'Petitioner has previously been certified as representative of the Employer's production
and maintenance employees.
See Matter of Todd'-Johnson Drydocks, Inc., 54 N. L. R. B. 1362; and Matter of Sullivan
Drydoek and Repair Company, 56 N. L. R. B. 582.
1132 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Clock House Clerks : There are four clock house clerks who work
in the yard timekeeping office, racking, sorting, and distributing
time cards used to record the figures submitted to the timekeepers
for the purpose of compiling individual time records which are used
for pay-roll and attendance purposes. It is clear that the work of
these employees is closely integrated with that of other employees
included in the unit. Accordingly, we shall include the clock house
clerks.
Yard Timekeeping Office Force: There are approximately eight
employees in the yard timekeeping office. They control the records of
premium earnings and of the work done on the ships under construc-
tion. In the case of premium earnings the information is obtained
from the timekeepers. As in the case of clock house clerks, the work of
these employees is closely'integrated with that of other employees in
the unit. We shall include the yard timekeeping office force.
We find that all employees of Federal Shipbuilding & Drydock
Company, Kearny, New Jersey, in the yard timekeeping section of
the time and tabulation department, including timekeepers, weld
counters, weld wire clerks, piecework checkers. yard timekeeping
office force, main gate clerks and clock house clerks, but excluding
berth inspectors, restaurant clerks, clerk-typists. leading men, chief
clerks, and chief yard timekeepers. 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, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of col-
lective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the
purposes of collective bargaining with Federal Shipbuilding and
Drydock Company, Kearny, New Jersey, 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 super-
vision of the Regional Director for the Second Region, acting in this
matter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject
to Article III, Sections 10 and 11, of National Labor Relations Board
Rules and Regulations-Series 3, as amended, 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, 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
FEDERAL SHIPBUILDING & DRYDOCK COMPANY 1133
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 Industrial
Union, Marine & Shipbuilding Workers of America, Local No. 16
(C. I. 0.), for the purposes of collective bargaining.
MR. JOHN M. HousTON took no part in the consideration of the
above Decision and Direction of Election.