Herron Testing Laboratories, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 18, 1970

182 N.L.R.B. 508 (N.L.R.B. 1970)

508 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Herron Testing Laboratories, Inc. and International Union
of Operating Engineers , Local 18 AFL-CIO, Petitioner.
Case 8-RC-7690, • <
May 18, 1970
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION
BY CHAIRMAN MCCULLOCH AND MEMBERS BROWN AND
JENKINS
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9(c) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, a hearing
was held before Hearing Officer James M. Mancini.
By direction of the Regional Director for Region 8,
this case was transferred 'to the Board for 'decision.
Thereafter,, briefs were filed by the Employer and by
the Petitioner.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
Act, the National Labor Relations Board has delegated
its powers in connection with' this 'case to a three-
member panel.
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 is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the Act and it will effectuate the purposes
of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein.
2. The Petitioner is a labor organization claiming to
represent certain employees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning
the representation of 'employees of the Employer`' within
the meaning of Sections 9(c)(l) and 2(6) and (7) of
the Act. I
The Employer is engaged primarily in the testing
of metals, welders, construction materials, and subsoil
conditions, and employs some 57 rank-and-file employ-
ees, none of whom are represented by a labor organiza-
tion.The test activities are performed in laboratories
located in,a single building but divided into 10 depart-
ments. The_ Petitioner, in an initial organizational effort,
seeks a unit of all 12 employees in the. drill department.
No other union is involved, and no other unit is sought.
The Employer, however, contends that the appropriate
unit must include employees in all 10 departments.
Five of the Employer's departments test the strength,'
durability, or content of plastics, metals, or ores. One
department administers welding tests to determine the
qualifications of welders. The other four departments-
drilling, inspection, soils, and materials testing-consti-
tute the Employer's construction services division. Each
department head in the construction, services division.
reports to the head of the division. Other department
heads report^directly to the president of the company.
The drill department occupies a separate room and
has its own washroom and locker facilities. The authority
of the head of the department is limited to that depart-
ment. He has the authority to hire and fire employees.
Six drillers and six helpers work in the department.'
Drillers report to the plant, receive assignments, and
with a helper, drive their rigs to the drilling sites. One
driller and one helper operate a drill rig, a large piece
of equipment mounted on a truck and used to obtain
soil samples. At the site the team puts down test holes
where indicated by stakes, by a diagram, or by oral
instructions at the site. Drillers are not required to
do difficult layout work. Only a driller or a helper
with at least 1 year's experience operates a rig. Special
hazards are present because of the size, complexity,
and function of the equipment, difficulties in transporting
equipment of this size, and varied terrain and environ-
ment.
The drilling team takes samples and maintains a log
of what is found. At required depths they perform
impact tests, which require counting the number of
blows it takes to drive a sample tube a given depth.
They take very careful measure of the ground water.
They make particle size tests, reaction tests (trying
to shake'water out), and consistency tests. They classify,
seal, and record samples, and make logs of the depths
at which the samples were taken. They must see that
all the data are developed and recorded. Some drillers
complete their logs in the field; others do so after
returning to the plant.
The samples and the logs are then sent to the soils
department, where chemical and other tests are made,
if required by the client. In any event, the report that
is given to the client is prepared by the soils department.
The drillers and helpers do not directly report to the
client. In this connection'the work'of the drilling depart-
ment has been described as supplying "the lab with
the base product."
One they receive their job assignments, drillers are
generally without supervision. At the jobsite they deter-
mine whether to use augers and whether to work over-
time to complete the job or to leave it for the next
day. They also decide when the weather prevents them
from drilling. Drillers also at'times work some distance
from the plant. If the distance is over 30 miles they
get subsistence allowances to permit them to stay over-
night.2
Unlike other employees, the drillers spend from 75-90
percent of their time in the field. When they are in
the shop their first duties are to complete the logs,
and then maintain their equipment. Next they are expect-
ed to perform routine maintenance in the shop. If they
are not occupied with these tasks, they may be temporari-
ly transferred to other departments in order to keep
' The department also employs one person who acts as a liaison
between the department head and the drillers He gives out assignments
and occasionally stakes out drilling sites In the past there was also
a mechanic, but no employee' has occupied this position for several
months
2 Although the 30-mile policy applies uniformly to employees in all
departments, and while the record suggests that onsight soil technicians
and others also are required to travel outside the city, it would seem
that this rule would be invoked more frequently in the case of the
drillers.
182 NLRB No. 83
HERRON TESTING LABORATORIES 509
fully employed The Employer's president testified that
drillers are thereby afforded an opportunity to learn
additional skillls Although there is evidence that drill
department employees were transferred to several other
departments, the only evidence with respect to specific
jobs indicates they performed nontechnical work such
as routine maintenance and pickup and delivery
Company Exhibit 11(b) is a list of eight drill depart-
ment employees who were transferred for various lengths
of time (not specified) during 1968 It is not clear whether
the list was to cover the entire year or only January
through July, the first and last months on the list
The one driller who testified stated that during the
past year on three or four occasions he picked up
and delivered materials for other departments Transfers,
however, occurred only when there was not sufficient
work in the drill department, as in periods of inclement
weather or when few requests for drilling services had
been received
If the drill department is busy, and a man is absent
because of illness or some other reason, a person from
another department will fill in as a helper Company
Exhibit 11(a) is a list showing five such transfers dated
between June 5, 1969, and December 8, 1969, one of
which was for 2 days In addition, at least two drill
department employees began employment in other
departments and later transferred to their present jobs
No one outside the drill department has ever operated
a drill rig, and no one inside the department has ever
been bumped by such transfers
All employees in all departments are treated uniformly
with respect to expense accounts, travel allowances,
fringe benefits, and yearend bonuses The Employer,
however, has met separately with representatives of
the drilling department to discuss certain complaints
of the drilling employees about out-of-town jobsites,
jobsite preparation, drilling rig maintenance, and senior
ty The Employer agreed, among other things, to set
up departmental seniority Management has encouraged
employees to so meet and has met with other groups
Generally, any change of policy brought about by such
meetings is applied to all employees
The Board has ruled that, in the absence of any
bargaining history, a distinct, homogeneous, and func-
tionally coherent group of employees may be established
in a separate departmental group 3
In the instant case the drill department occupies a
separate room The drillers have their own supervisor
who has the authority to hire In addition, they have
separate seniority, though this, to date, may be academic
since the Employer has never laid anyone off Their
common interests are further evidenced by meetings
between department representatives and management,
which resulted in work rule changes Although the
changes (except departmental seniority) applied to the
whole plant, the change in overnight subsistence affected
primarily dill department employees
Drill department work is distinct Drillers work prima
my in the field and primarily to obtain soil samples
Other employees engage primarily in testing Operation
of a drill rig requires special skills and involves hazards
not present in other departments
Although all employees are subject to the same general
personnel policies, this factor does not detract from
the separate community of interest among drillers and
their helpers as manifested by separate supervision,
separate seniority, performance of the bulk of their
work away from the plant, and their distinct skills and
work functions Nor is the evidence of interchange
sufficiently substantial to defeat the separate identity
of the employees sought 4 The interchange is limited
and irregular Transfers of drillers to other departments
result in the performance of unskilled tasks only, and
occur only when the drillers are unable to perform
their regular functions due to unforeseeable circum-
stances Other employees are assigned to the drill depart-
ment only to meet unusally heavy workloads when an
employee in the drill department is absent Those
employees work only as helpers, and such interchange
occurs at most three times a month
Upon these facts, and the entire record in this case,
we find that the drilling department employees constitute
a homogeneous grouping which possesses a distinct com-
munity of interest and that a separate departmental
unit of these employees is appropriate Accordingly,
we shall direct an election in the following unit, which
we find to be appropriate I
All drill operators, drill helpers, and drill mechanics
employed by the Employer at its Cleveland, Ohio,
facilities, excluding all office clerical employees,
professional employees, technical employees,
guards, supervisors,, as defined in the Act, and
all other employees
[Direction of Election" omitted from publication ]
3 See for example Bagdad Copper Company 144 NLRB 1496
and Southern Union Gas Company 175 NLRB No 141
See McCann Steel Co Inc 179 NLRB No 105
There is some suggestion in the record that Kornovsky assistant
to the head of the drill department may be a supervisor and ineligible
to vote However the parties have taken no clear position on this
question and the record with respect to his status is inconclusive
Accordingly we shall permit him to vote subject to challenge
1 In order to assure that all eligible voters may have the opportunity
to be informed of the issues in the exercise of their statutory right
to vote all parties to the election shall have access to a list of voters
and their addresses which may be used to communicate with them
Excelsior Underwear Inc 156 NLRB 1236 N L R B v Wyman Gordon
Company 394 U S 759 Accordingly it is hereby directed that 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 8 within 7 days of 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 circumst
ances Failure to comply with this requirement shall be grounds for
setting aside the election whenever proper objections are filed