Gerber Products Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsDec 14, 1966

162 N.L.R.B. 121 (N.L.R.B. 1966)

GERBER PRODUCTS CO. 121 M EMBER FANNING, dissenting: For the reasons set forth in my dissenting opinion in Local 25, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO (New Fork; Telephone Company), 152 NLRB 723, I would award the work in question to electricians who are employed by independent electri- cal contractors and represented by the IBEW. Gerber Products Company and Lodge 260 , International Associa- tion of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO, Peti- tioner . Case 26-RC-27119. December 14,1966 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 Edward E. Carrol. The Hearing Officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. The Employer filed a, brief. Pursuant to the provisions of 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. [Members Fanning, Brown, and Zagoria]. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds : 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act and it will effectuate the purposes of the Act to assert juris- diction herein. 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 Sections 9(c) (1) and 2(6) and (7) of the Act. 4. The Employer is engaged in a cooking and canning operation in Fort Smith, Arkansas. Petitioner seeks to represent a unit com- prised of all maintenance employees excluding office clerical employ- ees, professional employees, guards, watchmen, and supervisors. Employer contends that the smallest unit which the Board may find appropriate consists of all production and maintenance employees. There is no history of collective bargaining at the Fort Smith plant.' 'In 1964 the Food Handlers Local No. 425 , affiliated with Amalgamated Meat Cutters and Butcher Workmen of North America , AFL-CIO, petitioned for a separate unit of warehouse employees at the Fort Smith plant . The Regional Director in a decision dated March 6, 1964 , found a separate warehouse unit to be inappropriate. 162 NLRB No. 14. 122 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Although overall production and maintenance units have been estab- lished by the Board at other plants of the Employer, there is no evi- dence that before the present petition was filed any labor organiza- tion had sought a separate maintenance unit. There are approximately 35 maintenance employees , generally classified as "mechanics," in a total work force of approximately 300 employees. The parties stipulated that mechanics possess a high degree of skill and have been employed respectively as electricians, plumbers, carpenters, sheet-metal men, welders, and millwrights, although they are required to possess some subsidiary skill or skills. About seven of the maintenance employees are referred to as "line mechanics" and the remainder as general maintenance mechanics. The general mechanics perform maintenance throughout the plant under the immediate supervision of a maintenance foreman. A small percentage of the maintenance employees work on second or third shift under the general supervision of the shift production foreman. There is a maintenance shop or area for the general mechanics in a part of the building away from where the production work takes place. The line mechanics, on the other hand, work exclusively in the production area. Although under the supervision of the production supervisor, their sole responsibility is to look after the proper func- tioning of the production machinery and to maintain the same.2 Like the general mechanics, the line mechanics perform no produc- tion work and do not interchange with production employees. On occasion a production employee may assist a mechanic in performing some particular maintenance or repair job, but does no maintenance work on his own. Production employees with the necessary qualifi- cations may bid on a maintenance job and unless fully skilled ini- tially, they are required to undergo a period of training. While it is said that the mechanics may similarly bid on production jobs, there are no instances of a mechanic bidding on a production job-3 Mechanics because of their skills are generally higher paid than pro- duction employees, but all employees receive essentially the same fringe benefits. On the record as a whole, we are satisfied that employees engaged in maintenance and repair possess interests which are sufficiently separate from those of the production employees to warrant their separate representation. The fact that line mechanics work in pro- duction areas and on production machinery does not impair their community of interest with other maintenance employees.4 In the 3 For purposes of economy and efficiency , the Employer maintains separate maintenance equipment for the line mechanics located near the production area. 3 The record shows that since the plant was established in 1963 , only one employee, V. D. Simpson , changed from a warehouse II classification to a maintenance I classification only to return to his original classification 4 months later. 4 See Dierks Paper Company , 120 NLRB 290 at 292. THE PAYMASTER CORP. 123 circumstances herein set forth, we believe that a separate unit of maintenance employees is appropriate in this case and accords with Board policy.5 Accordingly, we find that the following employees of the Employer constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act: All maintenance employees employed by the Gerber Products Company at its Fort Smith, Arkansas, establishment, excluding production employees, office clerical employees, professional em- ployees, guards, watchmen, and supervisors as defined in the Act. [Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.'] 5 Sears , Roebuck and Co., 157 NLRB 32; American Cyanamid Company , 131 NLRB 909. 6 An election eligibility list , containing the names and addresses of all the eligible voters, must be filed by the Employer with the Regional Director for Region 26 within 7 days after the date of this Decision and Direction of Election. The Regional Director shall make the list available to all parties to the election . No extension of time to file this list shall be granted by the Regional Director except in extraordinary circumstances. Failure to comply with this requirement shall be grounds for setting aside the election whenever proper objections are filed. Excelsior Underwear Inc., 156 NLRB 1236. The Paymaster Corporation and United Steelworkers of America, AFL-CIO. Cases 13-CA-7.19 and 13-RC-10757. December 15, 1966 DECISION AND ORDER On September 1, 1966, Trial Examiner Milton H. Janus issued his Decision in the above-entitled proceeding, finding that the Respond- ent had engaged 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 Decision. The Trial Examiner further found that the Respondent had not engaged in certain unfair labor practices alleged in the complaint and recom- mended dismissal thereof. Thereafter, the Respondent filed excep- tions to the Decision and a supporting brief, and the General Counsel filed cross-exceptions with a supporting and reply brief. Pursuant to the provisions of 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 [Members Fanning, Brown, and Zagoria]. The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner made at the hearing and finds that no prejudicial error was committed. The rulings are hereby affirmed. The Board has considered the Trial Examiner's Decision, the exceptions and briefs, and the entire record 162 NLRB No. 24.