Montana-Dakota Utilities Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 21, 1956

115 N.L.R.B. 1396 (N.L.R.B. 1956)

1396 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
WE WILL. NOT otherwise interfere with the representation of our - employees
through a labor organization of their own choosing.
WE HEREBY DISESTABLISH the Shop Committee as the representative of any of
our employees for the purpose of dealing with us concerning grievances, labor
disputes , wages, rates of pay , hours of employment , or other terms or conditions
of employment , and WE WILL NOT recognize it or any successor thereto for any
of the foregoing purposes.
Corrus ENGINEERING CORPORATION,
Employer.
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.
Montana-Dakota Utilities Co. and Oil, Chemical and Atomic
Workers International Union, AFL-CIO, Petitioner. Case No.
19-RC-1796. May F1, 1956
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 Dan E. Boyd, 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 1 is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the Act.
2. The labor organization involved claims 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) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The Employer is engaged in the production, transmission, and
distribution of natural gas and electricity, and the sale and installa-
tion of gas and electrical appliances, in North Dakota-, South Dakota,
Montana, Wyoming, and Minnesota. The Employer's operations are
divided for administrative purposes into several geographic divisions
and one functional department. The Billings division, with which
we are here concerned, encompasses the Employer's operations in Bil-
lings, Montana, where the division headquarters is also located, and
8 other southern Montana communities, as well as operations in 4
northern Wyoming communities 2
The Petitioner requests an election among all distribution, installa-
tion, and maintenance employess in the area of the city of Billings,
which comprises part of the Billings division. In the alternative, the
1 The name of the Employer appears as Corrected at the hearing.
a Included In the division are the Employer 's operations In Billings, Belfry, Bridger,
Edgar, Fromberg , Joliet, Laurel , Park City, and Silesia, Montana ; and Cowley, Lovell,
Powell , and Elk Basin , Wyoming.
115 NLRB No. 221.
MONTANA-DAKOTA UTILITIES CO. 1397
Petitioner requests a unit limited to those operations of the Billings
division which are located in the State of Montana. The Employer
contends that only a systemwide unit is appropriate; but if the
Board disagrees, the unit should embrace the entire Billings divi-
sion , including its operations in Wyoming.
The Employer's main office is located in Minneapolis, Minnesota,
where its overall policies are formulated, and its sales , public rela-
tions, rate cases, and damage claims are handled. The main office
also supervises and advises the divisions as to labor relations, employee
benefits, accounting, payroll, and personnel practices, as well as oper-
ational procedures. The Employer's pension plan, group insurance,
health and accident plans, and vacation plans are uniform 'through-
out its entire system. Most of the pipeline and transmission line op-
erations are conducted on an integrated basis, and construction and
installation practices are uniform and in accordance with a manual
issued by the Minneapolis office. The pipeline and production de-
partment, which alone appears to be organized on a functional instead
of a geographical basis and has its headquarters in Glendive, Mon-
tana, provides various services to the entire system, such as cathodic
protection of the transmission lines, well service, and pipehauling.
The Billings division is engaged in the natural gas business only.
Its supervisory hierarchy consists of a division manager in charge of
business, and a division general superintendent in charge of opera-
tions. An assistant division manager is in charge of the headquarters
pffice, and an assistant superintendent is in charge of distribution and
utilization work within the city of Billings. Also under the division
general superintendent are a pipeline foreman, stationed at Bridger,
Montana, who is in charge of compressor stations, all of which are
located in Wyoming; a foreman stationed at Powell, Wyoming, who is
in charge of the operation of field gathering lines and pipelines con-
necting three of the Wyoming communities in the division. Although'
the record is not entirely clear, it appears that construction and main-
tenance crews work out of both Billings, Montana, and Powell,
Wyoming, and that they perform some work in both States. The
Billings warehouse provides supplies and equipment for the entire di-
vision, and the Billings office handles all division sales, credit, billing,
chart reading and computing, accounting, and payroll and personnel
records. There is a uniform employee classification system in effect
for the division, which provides minimum and maximum pay rates
for all classifications employed. Hiring is done locally at the various
operations and transfers from one community to another are rare.
The city of Billings accounts for 75 percent of all the business of the
division.
The Employer has 1 contract with several local unions of the Inter-
national Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, covering employees in 8
1398 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
divisions, 1 plant in a 9th division, and the Glendive pipeline and
production department; and a separate but similar contract covering
employees in the Worland, Wyoming, gas fields. This union did not
intervene in the present proceeding. There is no bargaining history
for employees in the Billings division, which was added to the Em-
ployer's holdings in 1951.
It appears from the foregoing factors, particularly the integration
of most of the Employer's operations, and the uniformity of construc-
tion and maintenance and employee benefit plans, that a systemwide
unit of the type requested by the Employer and traditionally con-
sidered by the Board to be the optimum in the public utility industry,
might be appropriate. However, the Board has also held that, al-
though such a unit is ultimately the most desirable, it is'not at all times
and in all circumstances the only appropriate type of unit in a public
utility, particularly where, as here, no labor organization seeks to rep-
resent the employees on a systemwide basis 3 On the other hand, the
Board has not considered appropriate units such as those proposed al-
ternatively by the Petitioner, which comprise only parts of the Billings
division, and therefore correspond to no administrative division of the
Employer's operation,4 and we perceive in this case no compelling rea-
son for departing from this established policy. Accordingly, because
the factors discussed above reflect the operational and administrative
integration of the Billings division as a separate administrative
entity of the Employer's operation, and because there is absent a bar-
gaining history affecting the employees sought on a broader basis, we
find, in agreement with the Employer's alternative contention, that a
unit of employees in the Billings division is appropriate.'
The Petitioner contends that the plant operator (head), plant op-
erators No. 1, and the plant operator and welder, should be excluded
on the sole ground that they are employed in the State of Wyoming,
which is outside the scope of either of the alternate units it requested.
As these employees work within the divisionwide unit which we have
found to be appropriate, we shall include the plant operators No.1 and
the plant operator and welder.6 The parties also disagree as to the
8 See The Housatonic Public Service Company, 111 NLRB 877 ; Philadelphia Electrio
Company, 110 NLRB 320, 322; Western Kentucky Gas Company, 97 NLRB 917, 920.
• See Pioneer Natural Gas Company, 111 NLRB 502; Southwestern Bell Telephone Com-
pany, 108 NLRB 1106; Montana-Dakota Utilities Co., 95 NLRB 887.
6 Western Kentucky Gas Company , 97 NLRB 917; Philadelphia Electric Company, 95
'NLRB 71. -
The Employer's motion to dismiss the petition on the ground that the Petitioner does
not have a sufficient interest showing in the divisional unit, should it be found to be
,appropriate , is denied . Showing of interest is a matter for administrative determina-
tion and may not be questioned at the hearing. Archer Mills, Inc., 115 NLRB 674.
Further, we are administratively satisfied that the Petitioner has a sufficient showing of
interest in the unit found appropriate.
G The record leaves in question the supervisory status of the plant operator (head),
as well as of certain working foremen whom the parties have agreed to include in the
unit. The record reflects that the plant operator (head ) has 4 plant operators under his
CALIFORNIA FURNITURE SHOPS, LTD. 1399
general clerk A. The principal duty of this employee is to keep books
consisting of the warehouse record of materials , at which he spends 95
percent of his time. The remaining 5 percent of his time is spent help-
ing to put such materials away. The Employer contends he should be
excluded because "he is doing clerical work," and the Petitioner con-
tends he should be included because "he is doing a substantial portion
of the work in the warehouse as such." It appears from the reasons
given by the parties for their contentions regarding the unit place-
ment of this employee, and from the record as a whole, that the parties
intended by their stipulation to describe a unit of physical workers
common in the utility industry,' and therefore to exclude plant cler-
ical employees. Accordingly, as the general clerk A spends 95 per-
cent of his time performing plant clerical duties, and in view of the
apparent intention of the parties to exclude plant clerical employees,
we shall exclude him and all plant clerical employees from the unit.'
We find that the following employees constitute a unit appropriate
for purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9
(b) of the Act: All distribution, installation, and maintenance em-
ployees in the Employer's Billings division, including plant operators
No. 1, and the plant operator and welder, but excluding the general
clerk A, all other plant clerical employees, office clerical employees,
professional employees, guards and/or watchmen, and supervisors
as defined in the Act.
[Text of Direction of Election 8 omitted from publication.]
supervision and that he makes their job assignments , and directs the work of 1 of them.
The record , also reflects that the working foremen have under their supervision crews of
from 2 to 3 , to as many as 8 to 10, construction and maintenance employees , the number
fluctuating from day to day, and that they work along with their crews , direct their work,
and make job assignments . It is not clear , however , whether the authority of the plant
operator ( head ) and that of working foremen is merely routine , or requires the exercise of
independent judgment . Accordingly , we shall make no unit disposition as to them, but
shall permit the plant operator ( head ) and the working foremen to vote subject to chal-
lenge.
4 See Iowa Public Service Company, 102 NLRB 701.
d As we have directed an election in a larger unit than was alternatively requested by
the Petitioner , we shall permit the Petitioner to withdraw from the election upon notice
given to the Regional Director , in writing, within 10 days from the date of this Deci-
sion and Direction of Election , if it does not desire to participate in an election in the
larger unit.
California Furniture Shops, Ltd. and Upholsterers, Wood, Bed-
ding, Metal & Chrome Furniture Workers Union , Local No. 1,
Petitioner . Cdse No. 21-RC-4134. May 22, 1956
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 Norman H. Greer, hearing
115 NLRB No. 225.