Robertshaw-Fulton Controls Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsMay 4, 1962

137 N.L.R.B. 85 (N.L.R.B. 1962)

AERONAUTICAL AND INSTRUMENT DIVISION, ETC. 85 extent that such right may be affected by an agreement requiring membership in a labor organization as a condition of employment , as authorized in Section 8(a)(3) of the Act. SAFEWAY FOOD STORE, INC., STORE #62, 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. APPENDIX NOTICE TO ALL EMPLOYEES Pursuant to the Recommendations of a Trial Examiner of the National Labor Relations Board , and in order to effectuate the policies of the National Labor Rela- tions Act, I hereby notify my employees that: I WILL make whole the employees locked out during the period on and after March 16, 1960 , and until they were reinstated for any loss of pay suffered at a time when this market was open for business . The employees to be made whole are: Addie Black , Belle Coalson , Robert Cummings , Wayne Davis, Allene Eggleston , Thomas Lawson , Terrell McBee, Milton Moore , Vonda Narramore, Roy Navarrette , John Pirtle , Doug Pryor, Eddie Razo, Herschell Skaggs , Walter Titus, Joe Vasquez , and Mike Wiley. I WILL NOT by means of unlawful lockout or in any like or similar manner interfere with, restrain , or coerce my employees in the exercise of their right to self-organization , to form labor organizations, to join or assist Retail Clerks International Association , Local 462, or any other labor organization , to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing , and to engage in concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection or to refrain from any or all such activities , except to the extent that such right may be affected by an agreement requiring membership in a labor organization as a condition of employment , as authorized in Section 8 (a) (3) of the Act. ARNOLD CRABB D/B/A THRIFTY WAY FOOD STORE, 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. Aeronautical and Instrument Division , Robertshaw-Fulton Con- trols Company and International Union , United Automobile, Aircraft & Agricultural Implement Workers of America, UAW-AFL-CIO, Petitioner . Case No. 21-RC-7176. May 4, 1962 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before I. W. Ein, a hearing officer of the National Labor Relations Board. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. Pursuant to the provsions of Section 3(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member panel [Chairman McCulloch and Members Rodgers and Brown]. 137 NLRB No. 8. 86 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 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. 2. The labor organization named below 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 Sec- tion 9(c) (1) and Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act. 4. The appropriate unit: The Petitioner seeks a unit of production and maintenance employees at the Employer's Anaheim, California, plant. In addition to the customary exclusions, the Petitioner would also exclude three of the six main subdivisions or "units" (field engi- neering and sales, administrative and finance, and purchasing), certain departments and sections in the manufacturing "unit," 1 the engineers and office employees in the quality control "unit," salesmen, draftsmen, and executive and administrative employees. The Employer agrees with the Petitioner's request, except that it would also exclude certain other employees whom it regards at techni- cal employees 2 or clerical employees closely associated with the former. Under Litton Industries of Maryland, Incorporated, 125 NLRB 722, the applicable practice was automatically to exclude all technical em- ployees from a production and maintenance unit whenever their unit placement was in issue. At the hearing in the instant case, which was held while this doctrine was in effect, the principal issue litigated was whether the employees in issue were technicals or not within the meaning of the Litton definition." Since the hearing, however, the Board has reconsidered its view that technical employees whose unit placement is in issue are automatically excluded from production and maintenance units. The Board's present view is that the unit placement of technical employees turns on the extent to which such employees share a community of interest with their fellow employees so as to warrant their inclusion in or exclusion from the unit or units in issue. The She ffield Corporation, 134 NLRB 1101. The present record does not contain sufficient evidence for mak- ing a conclusive determination as to this issue. We shall, therefore, permit the employees in question to vote subject to challenge by the parties as to the propriety of their inclusion in the unit herein found appropriate. Such challenges, if determinative, will be disposed of in the customary manner. 1 The production engineering and industrial engineering departments, and the office section of the production controls department, of the manufacturing "unit " E g , technicians employed in the manufacturing unit's assembly and instrument re- pair departments and in the engineering unit's prototype production, oxygen, and fluid projects departments. 'As hereinafter noted Litton has been modified but not with respect to criteria for determining who is a technical employee. GREYHOUND TERMINAL 87 Accordingly, we find that the following employees of the Employer constitute a unit appropriate for the purpose of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act : All production and maintenance employees at the Employer's Ana- heim, California, plant, including plant clerical employees, but exclud- ing employees in the administrative and finance, field engineering and sales, and purchasing "units," the industrial engineering and produc- tion engineering departments and the office section of the production control department of the manufacturing "unit," and the engineers and office employees in the quality control "unit," and also excluding administrative and executive employees, salesmen, draftsmen, office clerical employees, professional employees, guards, watchmen, and supervisors as defined in the Act. [Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.] William S. Shurett, d/b/a Greyhound Terminal and Amalga- mated Association of Street , Electric Railway and Motor Coach Employees of America , AFL-CIO, Division 1174. Case No. 15-CA-1969. May 9, 1962 DECISION AND ORDER On February 5, 1962, Trial Examiner David London issued his Intermediate Report in the above-entitled proceeding, finding that the Respondent had engaged in and was engaging in certain unfair labor practices and recommending that it cease and desist therefrom and take certain affirmative action, as set forth in the Intermediate Report attached hereto. Thereafter, the Respondent filed exceptions to the Intermediate Report together with a supporting brief. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member panel [Members Leedom, Fanning, and Brown]. 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 Inter- mediate Report, the exceptions and brief, and the entire record in the case, and hereby adopts the findings, conclusions, and recommenda- tions 1 of the Trial Examiner.2 ' We note an inconsistency between provision 1(c) of the Recommended Order and the language of the notice to employees As the findings do not appear to warrant the broad cease-and -desist order , we shall amend provision 1(c) to read : "In any like or related manner interfering with, restraining, or coercing his employees in the exercise of their rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act." 3 The Respondent operates a bus terminal pursuant to a written agreement with The Greyhound Corporation (Southeastern Greyhound Lines Division) to sell tickets, furnish 137 NLRB No. 11.