General Electric Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Nov 2, 1955

114 N.L.R.B. 882 (N.L.R.B. 1955)

882 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
WE WILL NOT in any like or other manner restrain or coerce employees of,
or applicants for employment with, the above-named employer in the exercise
of their rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act, except to the extent that such
rights may be affected by an agreement requiring membership in a labor organi-
zation as a condition of employment , except as authorized by Section 8 (a) (3)
of the Act.
WE WILL make James Carr whole for any loss of pay suffered as a result
of the discrimination against him.
LocAL 369, INTERNATIONAL HOD CARRIERS' BUILDING AND
COMMON LABORERS ' UNION OF AMERICA, A. F. L.,
Labor Organization.
Dated---------------- By ----------------------------------------------
(Representative) (Title)
This notice must remain posted for 60 days from the date hereof, and must not be
altered, defaced, or covered by any other material.
General Electric Company, Major Appliance Division and The
Fall Cities District Council of , Carpenters, Millwrights, Con-
veyors and Machinery Erectors Local Union #2209,_ United
Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, AFL,
Petitioner . Case No. 9-RC-2560. November 2, 1955
DECISION AND ORDER
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a hearing was held before William G. Wilkerson, hear-
ing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free
from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The" Employer I 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. No question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9
(c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act, for the following rea-
sons:
The Petitioner seeks a departmental unit of all employees of the Em-
ployer's central maintenance unit, excluding office clerical employees
and supervisors as defined in the Act. At the close of the hearing,
the Petitioner requested, as an alternative, that the Board establish a
plantwide craft unit consisting of all employees of the following clas-
sifications : Maintenance leader, maintenance technician, maintenance
mechanic, maintenance man, maintenance worker, and maintenance
helper. The Intervenor, who has represented the Employer's em-
3 The Employer's name appears as amended at the heiring.
5Local 761, International Union of Electrical , Radio and Machine Workers, CIO, was
permitted to intervene at the hearing on the basis of its contract with the Employer which
expired on September 15, 1955, and its supplemental contract of September 25, 1955,
covering the employees in question as part of a production and maintenance unit.
114 NLRB No. 133.
GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY 883
ployees on a plantwide production and maintenance basis for the past
2 years, and the Employer contend that the departmental unit peti-
tioned for and the alternative craft unit requested at the hearing are
inappropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining.'
The Employer's operations at Appliance Park, Kentucky, employ-
ing approximately 9,000 production and maintenance employees, con-
sist of 4 manufacturing departments and a service department named
the Appliance Park Project Department, herein called the Project De-
partment. Each of these five departments has its own separate group
of maintenance employees. The group of maintenance employees
which is responsible for the overall maintenance and repair of all of
the facilities and equipment of the Project Department is the central
maintenance unit. It is this group of maintenance employees that the
Petitioner seeks to represent as a separate departmental unit. In addi-
tion to their work for the Project Department, these employees per-
form minor construction work and general maintenance work for the
manufacturing departments on a job-order basis when those mainte-
nance groups become overburdened. At the present, about 50 percent
of their work is for the Project Department and about 50 percent for
the manufacturing departments.
The central maintenance unit consists of about 238 maintenance em-
ployees ,4 including about 6 garage employees who repair the Em-
ployer's forklifts, trucks, and automobiles, and about 28 yards and
grounds employees who are responsible for the landscaping, care, and
upkeep of the grounds and railroad tracks for the entire operations.
The majority of the central maintenance employees, including the
garage employees and a few yards and grounds employees, generally
report at building No. 26 for work assignments, while the remaining
yards and grounds employees report for work at a separate location
called the Hoffman house. The employees of the central maintenance
unit are divided into approximately 21 classifications,' all but 5 of
8 The Intervenor and the Employer contend further that the alternative unit request is
barred by their supplemental contract which was executed prior to the close of the hear-
ing. In view of our disposition of the case , we do not find it necessary to rule upon
this contention.
'About 195 of these employees are included in the Petitioner 's requested alternative
unit. The number of maintenance employees in the maintenance group for each manu-
facturing department is as follows : (1) Home Laundry Department, 97 maintenance em-
ployees, of which about 70 are included in the alternative unit requested, ( 2) Range and
Water Heater Department, 114 maintenance employees, with about 60 in the alternative
unit; (3) Dishwasher and Disposall Department , 36 maintenance employees, with about
16 in the alternative unit; and (4) Household Refrigerator Department , 278 maintenance
employees with about 142 in the alternative unit
_s They are 'as follows maintenance leader, maintenance mechanic, maintenance man,
maintenance woiker, maintenance helper, maintenance laborer, automobile and truck
mechanic, laborer-welder , laborer, janitor, heavy equipment operator , gardener , material
mover, receiver , sign painter , tool crib attendant, tool crib keeper, truckdriver , yardsman
and groundsman, and track labor leader . The central maintenance unit also has a job
classification of maintenance technician but, at the present, does not have any employees
in this classification.
387644-56-vol. 114-57
884 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
which are duplicated in most of the Employer's other maintenance
groups which are assigned to the production departments.'
The employees of the central maintenance unit perform the follow-
ing types of general maintenance duties : Install and maintain air-
conditioning and heating systems, install machinery, maintain radio
equipment, repair cranes, generators, and automotive equipment, per-
form minor construction work, repair production machinery, repair
overhead steam, gas, air, water, and condensate systems, and perform
other duties involving the skills of carpenters, millwrights, sheet metal
workers, pipefitters, electricians, and plumbers. Although the Em-
ployer's maintenance employees are not designated by craft classifica-
tions and work assignments do not follow strictly craft lines, an em-
ployee must acquire the skills of at least one craft, such as, electrician,
millwright, pipefitter, or carpenter, before reaching the classification
of either maintenance mechanic, maintenance technician, or mainte-
nance leader, and an employee's prior work experience is not com-
pletely ignored in making his work assignments.
The employees of the production department maintenance groups,
having the same classification as central maintenance employees, also
generally perform work similar to that performed by the latter em-
ployees. There has been some employee transfers from the main-
tenance groups of the manufacturing departments to the central
maintenance unit. All of the Employer's maintenance employees of
the same job classification receive an identical basic wage rate regard-
less of the department of his employment. Furthermore, all mainte-
nance employees have similar working conditions, have plantwide sen.-
iority for certain purposes, and enjoy the same employee benefits.
From the foregoing, it is clear that the employees of the Employer's
central maintenance unit are not identified with traditional trades or
occupations distinct from those of the groups of maintenance em-
ployees for the Employer's manufacturing departments and, there-
fore, do not have special interests in collective bargaining which are
distinct from those of the other groups of maintenance employees.
We, therefore, find that a unit of the employees of the central main-
tenance unit is not appropriate for severance from the existing'pro-
duction and maintenance unit on a departmental basis.' It is equally
clear that the maintenance employees which the Petitioner seeks, in
its alternative unit request, to represent as a separate craft unit con-
sists of a multiskilled group of maintenance employees which may not
be severed from the existing production and maintenance unit in this
case.
9 These five are as follows : yardsman and groundsman , sign painter , track labor leader,
heavy equipment operator, and gardener.
7 The Louisville Plant of the Minneapolros -Moline Company , 108 NLRB 1458, at p. 1460;
see also dmeiscan Potash & Chemical Corporation , 107 NLRB 1418, at p. 1424.
EAST TEXAS PULP & PAPER' COMPANY 885
Accordingly, we find that neither the departmental unit nor the
craft unit herein soughtis appropriate for the purposes of collective
bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act, and we
shall, therefore, dismiss the instant petition.
[The Board dismissed the petition.]
MEMBER MuRDoc$ took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Order.
East Texas Pulp & Paper Company and International Brother-
hood of Paper Makers, AFL, Petitioner
East Texas Pulp & Paper Company and Beaumont Metal Trades
Council , AFL, Petitioner . Cases Nos. 39-RC-874 and 39-RC-875.
November 2,1955
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND ORDER
On August 10, 1955, the Board issued its Decision and Direction of
Elections 1 in the above-entitled proceeding in which it found that
separate groups of powerhouse employees, electricians, and mainte-
nance employees could be separately represented, and accordingly
directed self-determination elections for the employees in these groups,
as well as an election in a residual group of production employees,
with provision for appropriate pooling of the groups in the event the
employees in any of the groups being granted self-determination elec-
tions voted against the labor organization seeking to represent them
separately. Pursuant to such Decision and Direction of Elections,
elections by secret ballot were conducted on August 30, 1955, under
the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Six-
teenth Region among the employees in the separate voting groups.
At the conclusion of the elections, the parties were furnished with a
separate tally of ballots for each of the four voting groups.
In group (a), the powerhouse group, the tally showed that the
IBEW, the labor organization seeking this group's separate repre-
sentation, had not obtained a majority of the valid ballots cast.'
Accordingly, these employees were included in group (c), the broad
maintenance group, and their votes were pooled with those voting in
group (c). In group (b), the electricians group, the tally showed that
the IBEW, the labor organization seeking this group's separate rep-
resentation, had obtained a majority of the valid ballots cast and that
this majority was unaffected by the challenged ballots cast in this
group. As the IBEW had secured a majority of the votes cast, it was.
1113 NLRB 539.
2 There were no challenged ballots in voting group (a).
114 NLRB No. 135.