Atlanta Gas Light Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 21, 1966

158 N.L.R.B. 311 (N.L.R.B. 1966)

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.