American Beryllium Co., Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 3, 1963

142 N.L.R.B. 457 (N.L.R.B. 1963)

AMERICAN BERYLLIUM COMPANY, INC. 457
or other rights and privileges , to all our employees who participated in the strike
which began April 27, 1962, and who have not already been reinstated, dis-
missing, if necessary , all persons hired on or after April 27, 1962.
WE WILL make each such employee whole for any loss of pay suffered by
him as a result of our failure , if any, to reinstate him within 5 days after such
unconditional application.
WE WILL NOT, by refusing to bargain in good faith , or in any like or related
manner , interfere with , restrain , or coerce our employees in the exercise of
their rights to self-organization , to form, join , or assist the above -named union,
or any other labor organization , to bargain collectively through representatives
of their own choosing , and to engage in other concerted activities for the purpose
of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection, or to refrain from
any or all such activities.
ALMEIDA Bus LINES, INC.,
Employer.
Dated------------------- By-------------------------------------------
(Representative) (Title)
This notice must remain posted for 60 consecutive days from the date of posting,
and must not be altered , defaced, or covered by any other material.
Employees may communicate directly with the Board 's Regional Office, Boston
Five Cents Savings Bank Building, 24 School Street , Boston, Massachusetts , 02108,
Telephone No. Lafayette 3-8100 , if they have any questions concerning this notice
or compliance with its provisions.
American Beryllium Company , Inc. and International Associa-
tion of Machinists, AFL-CIO, and Local Lodge 1767, Peti-
tioner. Case No. 12-RC-1289. May 3, 1963
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND ORDER CLARIFYING
CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
On November 9, 1961, the Regional Director for the Twelfth
Region issued a certification of representatives in the above-entitled
proceeding, certifying the International Association of Machinists,
AFL-CIO, as the bargaining representative for the following unit of
the Employer's employees :
All production and maintenance employees including plant
clericals and inspectors at the Employer's Sarasota, Florida,
plant; and excluding all office and office clerical, professional
employees, technical employees, guards, and supervisors as de-
fined in the Act.
On October 29, 1962, the Petitioner filed a motion for a Decision
and Order Clarifying Certification, alleging that the Employer's
timekeepers properly belong in the unit as plant clericals, and that
the Employer refuses to recognize that these timekeepers belong in
the unit or to bargain with the Petitioner on matters affecting their
status. On November 6, 1962, the Employer filed its response to the
Petitioner's motion for clarification of the certification alleging that
the timekeepers are not plant clerical employees and are not appro-
priately part of the bargaining unit.
142 NLRB No. 54.
458 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
On December 6, 1962, the Board directed that a hearing be held
to detennine, in effect, whether those persons occupying the status of
"timekeepers" were properly within or without the unit described
above. A hearing was held before Obedlah R. Miller, hearing officer,
on January 3, 1963. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing
are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the National Labor
Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection
with this proceeding to a three-member panel [Members Rodgers,
Fanning, and Brown].
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board finds :
The record shows that the Employer operates a beryllium fabri-
cating plant at Sarasota, Florida, and that in carrying on its opera-
tions, the Employer employs three employees classified as timekeepers.'
The dispute between the parties underlying the instant motion for
clarification arises over the unit placement of these timekeepers.
Essentially, the Union contends that because of the location of the
time office and the duties performed by the timekeepers, they are
plant clerical employees properly included within the unit. The
Employer, on the other hand, contends that they are office clerical
employees, that their work is primarily cost accounting, and that
their location near the production facilities is merely for the con-
venience of the Employer and the employees themselves. Alterna-
tively, the Employer contends that these employees have access to
confidential cost and price information and, accordingly, should be
excluded from the unit as confidential employees.
The record shows that the employees involved herein work in the
time office which is located directly behind the administrative offices,
but is separated from these offices by a concrete wall. The time office,
which is constructed of wood and glass partitions, is immediately
adjacent to the grinding room and looks out on production line facili-
ties located approximately 12 feet away. Although the time office
is directly behind the main office, there is no connecting door between
the two offices, and to go from one to the other it is necessary to pass
along the edge of the production area.3
As to the timekeepers' functions, the record shows that at the
beginning of each shift they remove the timecards of the production
employees and take the cards to the time office where the cards are
maintained until the end of the shift when the cards are returned to
the timerack at the timeclock. After the shift starts, and an employee
3In accordance with our findings herein, we deny the Employer's motion to dismiss
this proceeding. See Phillips Petroleum Company, 129 NLRB 813, 814, footnote 3
2 At the hearing, the parties stipulated that timekeeper Iiildahl is a supervisor and
should be excluded from the unit
3The plant is built in the shape of a T with the top of the T occupied entirely by the
administrative offices, while the bottom of the T is occupied by production facilities and
related areas such as the res'troom used by production employees.
AMERICAN BERYLLIUM COMPANY, INC. 459
had been assigned a particular job, the employee reports to the time
office window and gives the timekeeper the job and operation numbers.
Upon completion of the job, the employee again reports to the time
office window and gives the timekeeper the time consumed on the
particular assignment. The timekeepers record all of this informa-
tion on the employee's timecard and a job cost card, which is also
maintained in the time office. The timekeepers also compile employee
working time for the payroll office, maintain scrap lists, process cus-
tomer purchase orders, and prepare supply purchase orders and routine
production schedules.
One of the timekeepers testified that in performing the above func-
tions he maintains contact with the production employees approxi-
mately 15 percent of his time and spends an additional 11/2 hours each
day in the production area checking with production employees as
to their assigned jobs. In addition, the timekeepers make occasional
trips to the garage and another plant building about 300 feet from
the main plant to accumulate production information from the em-
ployees in these buildings.
The record also shows that, although timekeepers are in no way
subject to the production supervisory hierarchy but report directly
to administrative officials, they work the same hours as the production
employees, punch a timeclock, receive the same fringe benefits, use the
same locker and restroom facilities, are hourly paid, and appear on the
same payroll as the production employees.'
In addition to the above facts, the record shows that the Iwo time-
keepers were employed on September 24, 1961, which was the last
day of the payroll period for eligibility in the election held on No-
vember 1, 1961, and that Spencer, one of the timekeepers, voted in
the election without challenge or objection. Teeter, the other time-
keeper, was called into military service shortly before the election and
did not vote.
In such circumstances, and particularly in view of the work per-
formed by the timekeepers and their relationship to, and close com-
munity of interest with, the production employees and the produc-
tion processes, we find these employees to be plant clerical employees
who belong in the unit heretofore found appropriate.5
[The Board clarified the certification heretofore issued by specifi-
cally including timekeepers.]
* The office employees receive many of the same fringe benefits , but work only on the
day shift , start and finish work at different hours, have separate restroom facilities, and
are paid on a salary basis
6 Weyerhauser Company, 132 NLRB 84, 85; and Wm . R. Whittaker Co., Ltd, 117 NLRB
339, 344. We also find no merit in the Employer's contention that these employees are
confidential employees They do not assist or act in a confidential capacity to persons
who formulate, determine , or effectuate management policies in the field of labor relations.
See Lord B a ltimore Press , Incorporated, 128 NLIIB 334, footnote 7.