Malden Electric Co.Download PDFNational Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsMar 24, 194239 N.L.R.B. 1077 (N.L.R.B. 1942) Copy Citation In the Matter Of MALDEN ELECTRIC COMPANY and GAS & BY-PRODUCT COKE WORKERS #12007, UNITED MINE WORKERS OF AMERICA, DIs- nuer No. 50. Case No. R-3.541.-Decided March 04,1941"? Jurisdiction : electric utility and appliance industry. Investigation and Certification of Representatives : controversy between rival unions as to appropriate unit; refusal of employer to recognize either union until certified by the Board; certification of representatives upon proof that all employees in the appropriate unit are members of petitioning union and none are members of intervening union. Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : credit employees at the Company's Malden, Massachusetts, plant, excluding supervisory employees ; factors con- sidered : history of self-organization among Company's employees ; prior recog- nition of homogeneous groups ; desire of employees. Mr. Robert H. Jameson, of Boston, Mass., for the Company. Mr. Samruel E. Angoff, of Boston, Mass., for Mine Workers. Mr. William M. Kerwin, of Boston, Mass., for the Brotherhood. Mr. Fred A. Dewey, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES STATEMENT OF THE CASE On October 8, 1941, Gas and By-Product Coke Workers #12007, United Mine Workers of America, District No. 50, herein called the Mine Workers, filed with the Regional Director for the First Region (Boston, Massachusetts) a petition alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning representation of employees of Mal- den Electric Company, Malden, Massachusetts, herein called the Company, and requesting an investigation and certification of repre- sentatives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act. On January 20, 1942, the National Labor Relations Board, herein called the Board, acting pur- suant to Section 9' (c) of the Act, and Article III, Section 3, of Na- tional Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-' Series 2, as amended, ordered an investigation and authorized the Regional Di- 39 N. L. It. B., No. 203. 1077 1078 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR' RELATIONS BOARD rector to conduct it and to provide for an appropriate hearing upon due notice. On January 23, 1942, the Regional Director issued a notice of hear- ing, copies of which were duly served upon the Company, the Mine Workers, and the Brotherhood of Utility Workers of New England, Inc., herein called the Brotherhood, a labor organization claiming to represent employees directly affected by the investigation. Pursuant to notice, a hearing was held on February 12, 1942, at Boston, Massa- chusetts, before Albert J. Hoban, the Trial Examiner duly designated by the Chief Trial Examiner. The Company, the Mine Workers, and the Brotherhood appeared by their representatives and participated in the hearing. Full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross- examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues was afforded all parties. During the course of the hearing the Trial Examiner made several rulings on motions and objections to the admission of evidence. The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner and, finds that no prejudicial errors were committed. The rulings are hereby affirmed. Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the fo1]oving: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY Malden Electric Company, a Massachusetts corporation, is engaged in the distribution and sale of electricity and electrical appliances in Massachusetts.. It purchases its supply of electricity from other com- panies, some of which is generated at points outside of Massachusetts. During the year 1940, the Company sold 114,270,370 kilowatt hours of electricity for a total revenue of $3,576,433.37. The Company also sells electrical appliances at retail, such appliances in many instances being obtained from sources outside of Massachusetts. During the year 1940, the amount of such sales was $187,721.64. The Company also purchases wire, transformers, trucks, cars, poles, meters, gasoline, and other equipment and supplies shipped from sources outside of Massachusetts. The Company also sells substantial quantities of elec- tricity to numerous manufacturing concerns which ship a substantial quantity of their products in interstate commerce, and also to various instrumentalities of commerce such as railroad companies, telegraph companies, radio stations, and telephone exchanges. The Company does not contest the jurisdiction of the Board in this proceeding. H. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED Gas and By-Products Coke Workers #12007, United Mine Workers of America, District No. 50, and Brotherhood of Utility MALDEN ELECTRIC COMPANY 1079 Workers of New England, Inc., are labor organizations . Each admits to membership employees of.the Company. -III. THE 'QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION The Brotherhood and the Mine Workers each have contracts with the Company by virtue of which they are- recognized as bargaining representative of a part of the Company's employees. They disagree as to the appropriate unit for the Company's credit employees. The Company is willing to recognize whichever union is certified by the Board. It appears that Mine Workers represents a substantial number of employees in the unit below found appropriate., We find that a question has arisen concerning the representation of employees of the Company. IV. THE EFFECT OF THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION UPON COMMERCE We find that the question concerning representation which has arisen, occurring in connection with the operations of the Company described in Section I above, has a close, intimate, and substantial relation to trade, traffic, and commerce among the several States atld tends to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerceand the free flow of commerce. V. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT The Mine Workers, in its original petition alleged as the appropriate unit "all inside collection and credit department employees, excluding the supervisors and assistant supervisors ." At the hearing the petition was amended so as to describe the appropriate unit in alternatives as: "All inside collection and credit department employees , excluding the supervisors and assistant supervisors ; or all employees in the stores, night cash posting, outside collection and inside collection and credit department , excluding the supervisors ; or all inside collection and credit department employees and outside collection department em- ployees, excluding the supervisors." The Mine Workers has a contract covering the stores , night-cash posting and outside-collection employees . The credit men are all mem- i The Trial Examiner stated , after examination of four application cards submitted to him by the Mine workers, two of the cards being dated February 24, 1941, one February 24, 1940 , with a notation on the card reading "Feb. 24, 1941," and one dated September 16, 1941, that all the cards appeared to bear genuine, original signatures and that three of the names appear on the pay roll as of February 19, 1941, in the pay-roll classification indicated on the cards, there being but three in that classification as of that date. Cards for the same employees authorizing the deduction of union dues by the Company were also submitted by the Mine workers and appeared to the Trial Examiner to bear genuine original signatures . The appropriate unit is comprised of approximately three persons 1080 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD hers of the Mine Workers whose contention is that it should represent these men either (1) as a separate unit or (2) included in a unit with all of the other employees it represents or' (3) as a part of a collection department unit to be composed of the credit men and the outside collectors whom it represents. The Brotherhood has a contract covering production, garage and commercial-department employees, and it contends that the credit employees are a part of the commercial department which it now represents. The Company has divided its business into a few large departments for accounting -purposes but collective bargaining units have not paral- leled these departmental divisions. For example, at the time of the execution of the contract in which the Company recognized the Broth- erhood as bargaining representative of the commercial employees, the Mine Workers had a contract with the Company covering the stores, night-cash posting, and outside collectors; and the International Broth- erhood of Electrical Workers had a contract covering the bill deliver- ers and meter readers. All of these groups of employees are included in the commercial department as constituted for accounting purposes, yet the Brotherhood does not contend that any of them are a part of the unit which it represents. The'Company's departmental set-up as shown by its pay-roll roster of February 27, 1941, differs materially from its departmental divisions as set up,for accounting purposes. On the pay-roll roster the follow- ing departments, all of which are included in the commercial depart- ment for accounting purposes, are listed separately : commercial, col- lection, night posting, meter reading, and bill delivery and collection. The contract with the Brotherhood covering the commercial-depart- ment employees, was not executed until October 9, 1941, the day after the petition in this proceeding was filed. At that time the credit employees were not carried on the Company's pay-roll roster under the commercial department. While their : names were listed on the schedule of -wages in the Brotherhood's contract, this was done with notice of the Mine Workers' claim to represent them and with the express understanding that the Brotherhood's right to represent them was contingent upon the outcome of this proceeding. Therefore the contract obviously does not preclude a .,determination that the credit employees constitute a separate appropriate unit. The collective bargaining history of the Company, as well as that in other subsidiaries and affiliated corporations of the New England Power Service Company, of which the Company is a subsidiary, shows that it has been the practice to recognize as an appropriate unit any small, homogeneous group of employees who do the same kind of work and who desire to bargain collectively. In a prior proceeding, the MALDEN ELECTRIC COMPANY 1081 Board denied the Brotherhood's petition for a plant-wide unit.2 The credit employees have never bargained collectively with the Company either separately or as part of a larger unit. While the work of the credit employees brings them in contact with various other groups of employees of the Company, including the em- ployees. in.the - so-called commercial department represented by the Brotherhood, their work is more closely connected with the work of employees now represented by the Mine Workers than with the work of employees represented by the Brotherhood. Though the credit employees-might appropriately, be included in a broader unit, in, view of the fact that these employees form a compact homogeneous group engaged in doing the same kind of work, and in view of the fact that they have indicated a desire to be represented by the Mine Workers apart from the employees represented by the Brotherhood, a unit comprised 'of the credit employees is appropriate. We find that the credit employees of the Company, excluding super- visors and assistant "supervisors, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining and that such a unit will insure to employees of the Company the full benefit of their right to self-organ- ization and collective bargaining and otherwise will effectuate the policies of the Act. VI. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES The Brotherhood does not contend that it has been designated or selected by any of the, employees in the unit found appropriate as their representative. The evidence establishes, and We find, that all employees in the appropriate unit have designated and selected the Mine Workers as their representative for the purposes of collective bargaining. The Mine Workers is, therefore, the exclusive repre- sentative of all the employees in such unit for the purposes of collective bargaining, and we shall so certify. Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following : CONCLusIONS OF LAW 1. A question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the repre- sentation of employees of Malden Electric Company, Malden, Massa- chusetts, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act. 2. The credit employees of the Company, excluding supervisors and assistant supervisors, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes 'Tatter of Talden Electric Company and Brotherhood of Utility Workers of New England, Inc, 33 N. L R B. 78 1082 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR REIiATIONS BOARD of,collective bargaining, within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act. 3. Gas & By-Product Coke Workers #12007, United Mine Workers of America, District No. 50, is the exclusive representative of all em- ployees in such unit for the purposes of collective bargaining, within the meaning of Section 9 (a) of the National Labor Relations Act. CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National Labor Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, and pursuant to Article III, Section 8, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED that Gas & By-Product Coke Workers #12007, United Mine Workers of America, District No. 50, has been designated and selected by a majority of the credit employees of Malden Electric Company, Malden, Massachusetts, excluding super-. 'visors and assistant supervisors, as their representative for the pur- poses of collective bargaining and that, pursuant to the provisions of Section 9" (a) of4the Act, Gas & By-Product Coke Workers #12007, United Mine Workers of America, District No. 50, is the exclusive representative of all such employees for the purposes of collective bargaining in respect to rates of pay, wages, hours of employment, and other conditions of employment. MR. WM. M. LEISERSON took no. part in the consideration of the above Decision and Certification of Representatives. Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation