Atlanta Gas Light Co.Download PDFNational Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsApr 21, 1966158 N.L.R.B. 311 (N.L.R.B. 1966) Copy Citation ATLANTA GAS LIGHT COMPANY 311 WE WILL NOT refuse to bargain by insisting on the inclusion of article III, paragraph B, in the contract. WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner refuse to bargain by insisting on the inclusion of any unlawful clause in the contract. IT IS FIIRTRER ORDERED that the complaint herein be dismissed inso- far as it alleges violations with respect to Section 8(b) (3) and (4) (ii) (A) other than those found herein. MEMBER FANNING took no part in the consideration of the above Supplemental Decision and Order. Atlanta Gas Light Company and General Teamsters Local 528, affiliated with the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America , Petitioner. Case No. 10-RC-6556. April 21, 1966 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, a hearing was held at Augusta, Georgia, on February 3, 1966, before Hearing Officer Scott P. Watson. There- after, the Employer filed a•brief. 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 Act, the National Labor Relations Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member panel [Chairman McCulloch and Mem- bers Jenkins and Zagoria]. Upon the entire record in this case, including the Employer's brief, the Board finds: 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. 2. The Petitioner is a labor organization and 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 Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. 4. Petitioner seeks a unit of all distribution and service employees employed in the Employer's Augusta,, Georgia, division, excluding office clerical and all other employees. The unit requested would encompass a divisionwide group of operating employees in the Employer's service and distribution departments. The parties agree 158 NLRB No. 26. 312 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD that employees of the service department install meters, service cus- tomer appliances, and perform related work in Augusta and sur- rounding communities in the Augusta division, and that employees in the distribution department construct and maintain gas mains and customer service lines throughout the same area. Petitioner would also include in the requested unit four contractor-inspectors (herein called inspectors), who inspect gasline projects built by independent contractors, in order to assure compliance with construction stand- ards established by the Employer. Petitioner contends that the inspectors, although doing no physical work, have a sufficient com- munity of interest with the Employer's distribution and service employees to warrant their inclusion in the requested unit, because they report to work where servicemen do, work under the same gen- eral conditions, and receive the same fringe benefits. The Employer agrees that a divisionwide unit of its distribution and service employees constitutes an appropriate unit for the purposes of collective bargaining, but maintains that the inspectors lack any community of interest with distribution and service employees since their duties pertain solely to the supervision of the work of independ- ent contractors, who utilize their own employees laying gas mains and service lines pursuant to contracts with the Employer. The record shows that the inspectors' duties pertain solely to work performed by employees of the various independent contractors, whose projects they inspect, and that they have virtually no contact with the Employer's distribution and service employees. Normally, inspec- tors work the same hours as the contractors' employees (in order to assure inspection of projects as they progress) and they report for work directly to the project under inspection. To facilitate this arrangement, inspectors may authorize their own overtime if the con- tractor finds it necessary to work long hours to achieve prompt com- pletion of a project. It is also evident that the inspectors have a community of interest closely allied to that of the Employer's managerial personnel. Their managerial judgment is independently exercised (often at remote locations) in matters of importance to the Employer. They may order corrections made in the work being performed, or order a proj- ect stopped entirely. Their approval of completed work is necessary before the contractor is paid. While they receive general supervision from the Employer's superintendent at Augusta and the Employer's managers at two other division locations, their judgment with respect to contractor compliance with the Employer's construction standards is generally accepted. Moreover, the record shows that inspectors are included in the planning of forthcoming contractor projects of importance. RICHMOND LUMBER AND BUILDING SUPPLY COMPANY 313 On the basis of the above evidence, we find that the inspectors lack sufficient community of interests with the Employer's distribution and service employees to warrant their inclusion in the distribution and service unit which the parties agree is appropriate. Accordingly, we shall exclude them from that unit. We also exclude the meterreaders and collectors on the basis of the stipulated evidence., Accordingly, we find that the following employees constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act: All distribution and service employees of the Employer's Augusta, Georgia, division, including crewmen, distribution mechanics, labor- ers, meter repairmen, servicemen, and helpers, but excluding contractor-inspectors, meterreaders, collectors, salesmen, office clerical employees, professional employees, guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act. [Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.2] 1 See Atlanta Gas Light Company, 158 NLRB 240. An election eligibility list, containing the names and addresses of all the eligibile voters, must be filed by the Employer with the Regional Director for Region 10 within 7 days after the date of this Decision and Direction of Election . The Regional Director shall make the list available to all parties to the election. No extension of time to file this list shall be granted by the Regional Director except in extraordinary circumstances. Failure to comply with this requirement shall be grounds for setting aside the election whenever proper objections are fled. Excelsior Underwear, Inc., at al., 156 NLRB 1236. Milton Perel , Ruth S. Perel, J. Plotkin and Shirley P. Plotkin, Co-Partners in Their Own Right and as Guardians for Certain Minor Children , d/b/a Richmond Lumber and Building Supply Company and Local Union No. 1682, Chartered by United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America , AFL-CIO. Case No. 5-CA-3198. April 2,1966 DECISION AND ORDER On December 28, 1965, Trial Examiner W. Gerard Ryan issued his Decision in the above-entitled proceeding, finding that the Respond- ents had engaged in and were engaging in certain unfair labor prac- tices and recommending that they cease and desist therefrom and take certain affirmative action, as set forth in the attached Trial Exam- iner's Decision. Thereafter, the General Counsel filed exceptions to the Decision. The Respondents also filed exceptions to the Decision and a supporting brief. The Respondents further filed a brief in support of those portions of the Decision excepted to by the General Counsel. 158 NLRB No. 40. Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation