Bethlehem Steel Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jan 16, 1943

46 N.L.R.B. 1166 (N.L.R.B. 1943)

In the Matter of BETHLEHEM STEEL COMPANY, STATEN ISLAND YARD
and INDUSTRIAL UNION OF MARINE & SHIPBUILDING WORKERS OF
AMERICA, LOCAL 12, C. I. O.
Case 1Vo. R-4659.-Decided January 16, 1943
Jurisdiction : shipbuilding industry.
Investigation and Certification of Representatives : refusal to accord petitioner
recognition ; election necessary.
Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : all timekeepers of the Company
employed at the Staten Island yard, excluding the head timekeeper and all
supervisory timekeepers.
Cravath, de Gersdorff, Swaine Wood, by Mr. "C. A. McLain and
Mr. E. E. Buchanan, of New York City, for the Company.
Mr. Samuel L. Rothbard, of Newark, N. J., and Mr. Charles L.
,Brecht, of Hoboken, N. J., for the Union.
Mr. A. Sumner Lawrence, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon petition duly filed by Industrial Union of Marine & Ship-
building Workers of America, Local 12, C. I. 0., herein called the
Union, alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen con-
cerning the representation of employees of Bethlehem Steel Company,
Staten Island Yard, Staten Island, New York, herein called the Com-
pany, the National Labor Relations Board provided for an appropriate
hearing upon 'due notice before Cyril W. O'Gorman, Trial Examiner.
Said hearing was held in New York City on December 11, 1942. The
Company and the Union appeared, participated, and were afforded full
opportunity to be. heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses and
to introduce evidence bearing on the issues. At the close of the hear-
ing, the Company made a motion to dismiss the present proceeding.,
The motion is hereby denied for reasons hereinafter stated. The Trial
Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error
1 The Company ' s motion to dismiss was based on two grounds : ( 1) that the timekeepers
were not employees within the meaning of the Act , and (2) that the unit claimed by the
Union nas inappropriate.
46'N. L. R. B., No. 139.
1166
BETHLEHEM STEEL COMPANY 1167
and are hereby affirmed. The Company filed a brief which the Board
has duly considered.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF, THE COMPANY
Bethlehem Steel Company is a Pennsylvania corporation with
offices for its shipbuilding division, the only one involved in this pro-
ceeding, located in the city of New York and with a shipyard at Staten
Island, New York, where the Company is engaged in the work of
repairing, reconditioning, constructing and reconstructing ships.
During the calendar year 1941, the Company used at its Staten Island
yard raw materials valued in excess of $14,000,000 of which more than
70 percent was delivered to the Staten Island yard from points outside
the State of New York. During the same period, the amounts billed
by the Company for work performed at its Staten Island yard, totaled
in excess of $32,000,000, of which more than 95 percent was billed with
respect to work on ships which were destined for interstate or foreign
commerce or for the United States Navy Department or the United
States Maritime Commission.
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
Industrial Union of Marine & Shipbuilding Workers of America,
Local 12, is a labor organization affiliated with'the Congress of Indus-
-trial, Organizations, admitting to membership employees of the
Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
Shortly before the filing of the petition, the Union requested that
the Company bargain with it as representative of a unit comprising all
the timekeepers with the exclusion of the head timekeeper, employed
by the Company at the Staten Island yard. The Company declined
to bargain on the ground that the timekeepers were not employees
within the meaning of the Act and upon the further ground that the
unit was inappropriate.
A statement of the Regional Director, introduced in evidence at
the hearing, indicates that the Union represents a substantial number
of employees in the unit herein found to be appr6priate.2
2The Regional Director reported that the Union had submitted 118 authorization cards
of which 113 appeaied to bear the genuine original signatures of persons on the Company s
pay roll of October 16, 1942, containing the navies of 179 employees within the alleged
appropriate unit.
1168, DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
We- find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning
the representation of employees of the Company within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7)' of the National Labor
Relations Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Union originally claimed in its petition that the appropriate
unit should consist of all the timekeepers at the Company's Staten'
Island yard exclusive of the head timekeeper. At the hearing, the
Union modified its position by requesting that the timekeeping super-
visors, of'whom there are 14 in number, be excluded from the appro-
priate unit. The Company agrees that the head timekeeper and the
supervisors should be excluded; it contends, however, that timekeepers.
As a group are not employees within the meaning of the Act or entitled
to" the rights of- collective bargaining thereunder because of their'
allegedly close relationship to management.
The contention that timekeepers are not employees' within the mean-
ing of the Act has been previously presented to and rejected by the
Board 3 We see,no reason for departing from this position.
The' Company's claim- that a unit of timekeepers is inappropriate
'becau'se they are a part of management or closely related thereto 'is
based chiefly on the fact that the data collected by the timekeepers
is used by a number of different departments and individuals close
to management in making determinations which are vital to the carry-
ing on of the business of the Company. Thus, it appears that the
information submitted by the timekeepers to the accounting depart-
ment is used in. preparing pay rolls, figuring labor costs, and in com-
piling tax returns and other financial statements required by the man-
agement. Moreover, the timekeepers' figures are accepted by the Com-
pany as the-basis for determining the pay of employees, particularly
in'the case of a short pay dispute in which the records of the account-
ing department disagree with those of the timekeeper involved.
On the other hand, there is nothing, in the record to indicate that
timekeepers as a group exercise managerial functions. ' It is admitted
by the Company that timekeepers do 'not act in a supervisory capacity
in the sense of directing the work of other employees. The evidence
is clear that timekeepers do not compile rates and do not know the
overall costs of production on any job. They assign no'employee of
the yard to any specific production job, make no reports concerning
employees whose production has fallen off, and do not report violations
of company rules. Timekeepers cannot make decisions of any kind
without first going to the operating department supervisors or to the
timekeeping supervisors.
$ See Matter of United""Aircraft Products , Inc. and International Union, United Auto-
mobile, Aircraft & Agricultural Implement Workers of America, C . 1 0; 41 N. L. R. B. 501.
BETHLEHEM STEEL COMPANY 1169
While the Company places much emphasis on the fact that the time-
keepers form a division of,the accounting department, it appears not
only that timekeepers are under a supervision separate from that of
the accounting department but that timekeepers as such, keep no per-
manent records and make no accountings in the course of their em-
ployment. Outside of the functions of delivering or picking up cards
or new records to be used by the timekeeping division, timekeepers
have ordinarily no contact with the accounting department except on
occasions when through lack of manpower in the accounting depart-
ment, timekeepers are called in to check time figures in connection
with short pay disputes. We are of the opinion that the timekeepers
are not so closely related to top management that a unit of timekeepers
would be inappropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining.4
We find that all the timekeepers of the Company employed at the
Staten Island yard, excluding the head timekeeper and all supervisory
timekeepers, constitute an appropriate unit for purposes of collective
bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
We shall direct that the question concerning representation which
has arisen be resolved by an election by secret ballot among the em-
ployees in the appropriate unit who were employed during the pay-roll
period immediately preceding the date of our Direction of Election
herein, subject to the limitations and additions set forth in the
Direction.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National Labor
Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act
and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor Relations
Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Bethlehem Steel
Company, Staten Island, New York, an election by secret ballot shall
be conducted as early as possible, but not later than thirty (30) days
from the date of this Direction, under the direction and supervision
of the Regional Director for the Second Region, acting in this matter
as agent for the National Labor Relations Board and subject to Article
III, Section 10, of said Rules and Regulations, among the employees
4 See Matter of Cramp Shipbuilding' Company and Industrial Union of Marine it Ship-
building Workers of America Local No lit, 46 N. L R. B 115. For reasons stated in
similar cases , we also reject the contention that a unit of timekeepers is inappropriate in
this case because the Union seeking to represent such unit is now the representative of the
,production and maintenance employees. See Matter of Campbell Soup Company (Camden.
New Jersey Plant) and United Cannery of Agricultural Packing it Allied Workers Local
No. 50, C. 1. 0., 45 N. L. R. B. 6.
504086-43-vol. 46-74
1170 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
in the unit found appropriate in, Section IV, above, who were em-
ployed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of
this Direction, including employees who did not work during said
pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation or temporarily laid
off, and including employees in the armed forces of the United States
who present themselves in person at the polls, but excluding employees
who have since quit or been discharged for cause, to determine whether
or not they desire to be represented by Industrial Union of Marine &
Shipbuilding Workers of America, Local 12, affiliated with the Con-
gress of Industrial Organizations, for the purposes of collective
bargaining.
CHAIRMAN MILLIS took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Direction of Election.