Lumber Fabricators, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Sep 30, 1954

110 N.L.R.B. 187 (N.L.R.B. 1954)

LUMBER FABRICATORS, INC. 187
Petitioner, work on or in close connection with the several testing
,conveyor lines, or "back end" operations, which constitute a substan-
tial part of the Employer's production assembly line procedure. The
function performed by the troubleshooters is patently an essential
and integral part of that procedure. The functions of the other cate-
gories sought consist essentially of the provision and maintenance of
the testing line equipment. Upon the entire record, we find that the
categories here sought to be represented as a separate group are essen-
tially no more than highly skilled production and maintenance em-
ployees, and as such are not entitled to severance from the existing
production and maintenance units.9 Therefore we shall dismiss the
petition.
[The Board dismissed the petition.]
MEMBERS MURDOCK and RODGERS took no part in the consideration
of the above Decision and Order.
9 Cf. Heintz Manufacturing Co., 100 NLRB 1521 at 1526; American Potash & Chemical
Corporation, 107 NLRB 1418.
LUMBER FABRICATORS, INC. and UNITED ELECTRICAL, RADIO AND
MACHINE WORKERS OF AMERICA (UE), PETITIONER . Case No.
9-RC-9,088. September 30,1954
Decision and Direction of Election
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a hearing was held before Orville E. Andrews, 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 this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer 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. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9
(c) (1) andSection 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The appropriate unit :
The Petitioner seeks a unit of all production and maintenance em-
ployees at the Employer's Clarksville, Ohio, plant. The Employer
and the Intervenor contend as to scope, that only a multiplant unit,
including the employees of the Employer's main plant at Fort Payne,
Alabama, is appropriate.
1 United Brotherhood of Carpenters & Joiners of America, AFL, was permitted to inter-
vene at the hearing on the basis of a sufficient showing of interest.
110 NLRB No. 21.
188 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
The two plants, which manufacture related products, are approxi-
mately 450 miles apart, but have only 1 payroll department and 1 engi-
neering department, both of which are located at the Fort Payne plant.
The labor relations for both plants are handled by the same official.
They also have a common vice president and production manager.
The Clarksville plant, however, has a separate plant superintendent
who has the power to hire and discharge employees. The employees
of the Fort Payne plant are currently represented by the Intervenor,
whereas the employees of the Clarksville plant have not been previous-
ly represented. A few employees have been transferred from the Fort
Payne plant to the Clarksville plant for the purpose of training em-
ployees at the latter plant. There has generally been no interchange
between the personnel of the two plants below the supervisory level.'
In view of the geographical separation of the two plants, the lack of
a substantial interchange of employees between them, the separate im-
mediate supervision of the employees of the Clarksville plant, and the
absence of any bargaining history for the employees of that plant, we
believe that the production and maintenance employees of the Clarks-
ville plant may constitute a separate appropriate unit.' On the other
hand, the record also contains sufficient evidence, such as the cen-
tralized control of labor relations and the integrated operations to
justify the inclusion of the Clarksville plant employees in a single unit
with the Fort Payne plant employees. Accordingly, we shall make no
final unit determination at this time, but shall first ascertain the desires
of these employees as expressed in the election hereinafter directed.
As to composition, the Employer and the Intervenor would include
in any unit found appropriate the layout man, checker, inside panel
leader, outside panel leader, saw leader, and yard leader, whereas the
Petitioner would exclude them as supervisors. The layout man lays
out panels on a long table and marks them for studs or window open-
ings from a code sheet supplied by the engineering department at the
Fort Payne plant. He does not have any employees working under
him. We find that he is not a supervisor and shall include him in the
unit. The checker checks off finished material to be shipped from
a packing list and directs four men in loading the trucks. As the rec-
ord does not contain sufficient facts for us to determine whether or not
the checker is a supervisor, we shall permit him to vote subject to chal-
lenge . The inside panel leader, outside panel leader, saw leader, and
yard leader have approximately 5, 10, 12, and 7 men, respectively,
working under them. These four leaders cannot hire, lay off, or dis-
charge employees but can effectively recommend such action. We
9 Bonded Freightways , Inc., 103 NLRB 407 at 409 ; Delta Tank Manufacturing Company,
Incorporated, 100 NLRB 364.
TENNESSEE EGG COMPANY 189
find that the four leaders are supervisors as defined in the Act and
shall exclude them from the unit.
We shall direct an election in the voting group composed of the pro-
duction and maintenance employees at the Employer's Clarksville,
Ohio, plant, including the layout man, and checker 3 but excluding
the inside panel leader, outside panel leader, saw leader, yard leader,
office clerical employees, guards, professional employees, and super-
visors as defined in the Act.
If a majority of these employees vote for the Petitioner, they will be
taken to have indicated their desire to constitute a separate appropriate
unit, and the Regional Director conducting the election directed here-
in is instructed to issue a certification of representatives to the Peti-
tioner for that unit which the Board, under such circumstances, finds
appropriate for purposes of collective bargaining. In the event the
majority vote for the Intervenor, they will be taken to have indicated
their desire to become part of the existing unit composed of employees
at the Fort Payne, Alabama, plant, now represented by the Intervenor,
and the Regional Director will certify the results of the election.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
3 This individual is included solely for the purpose of permitting him to vote subject to
challenge and his inclusion in the voting group is not to be taken as a final determination
of his unit placement.
TENNESSEE EGG COMPANY and TRUCK DRIVERS, & HELPERS LOCAL
UNION No. 728 INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, CHAUF-
FEURS, WAREHOUSEMEN & HELPERS of AMERICA, AFL, PETITIONER.
Case No. 10-RC-2720. September 30, 1954
Decision and Direction of Election
Upon a petition duly filed, under Section 9 (c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Philip B. Cordes,
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 this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the National Labor Relations Act.'
, The Employer is engaged in processing and distributing poultry and eggs. It also
distributes butter and margarine . It has its main plant at Chattanooga , Tennessee, and a
branch plant at Atlanta , Georgia , which is alone involved in this proceeding . During the
past year the Atlanta plant shipped out-of -State goods valued in excess of .$50;000. The
parties stipulate and we find that the Employer is engaged in commerce and that it will
effectuate the policies of Act to assert jurisdiction herein.
110 NLRB No. 19.