Brown & Root-Northrop

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 5, 1969

174 N.L.R.B. 1005 (N.L.R.B. 1969)

BROWN & ROOT-NORTHROP 1005
Brown & Root-Northrop and International Union,
United Automobile , Aerospace and Agricultural
Implement Workers of America (UAW),
Petitioner . Case 23-RC-3119
March 5, 1969
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF
ELECTION
By CHAIRMAN MCCULLOCH AND MEMBERS
FANNING AND BROWN
Upon a petition duly filed on March 29, 1968,
under Section 9(c) of the National Labor Relations
Act, as amended, a hearing was held before Hearing
Officer Willard I. Boss. Briefs have been filed by the
Employer and Petitioner.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the
National Labor Relations Board has delegated its
powers in connection with this case to a
three-member panel
The Board has considered the Hearing Officer's
rulings made at the hearing and finds that they are
free from prejudicial error and they are hereby
affirmed.
Upon the entire record in this case, including the
briefs filed by the parties, the Board finds:
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within
the meaning of the Act and it will effectuate the
purposes of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein.
2. The labor organization involved claims to
represent certain employees of the Employer
3 A question affecting commerce exists
concerning the representation of employees of the
Employer within the meaning of Section 9(c)(1) and
Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The Employer is a joint venture comprised of
Brown & Root, Inc., and Northrop Corporation,
created and existing solely for the purpose of
performing operational support services for the
laboratories and test facilities at the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration at the
Manned Spacecraft Center at Houston, Texas In
this endeavor, the Employer operates laboratory and
test facilities owned by the Government. The sole
work product of Brown & Root-Northrop are
written report of the tests and experiments
conducted in the laboratories: reports made from
recorded observations and instrument readings of
the technicians performing the tests The business or
administrative affairs of the Employer are handled
by employees located in the "Beta Building," a
privately leased building located several miles from
the Manned Spacecraft Center'
Petitioner seeks a unit limited to technical
employees engaged in the above-described operation.
The parties agree , and we find, that the administrative clerical
employees , who work in the Beta Building, should be excluded from the
unit found appropriate by the Board
The parties agree on the technical status of some
370 employees. The basic dispute concerns the
Employer's contention that the community of
interest between the technical employees sought and
all employees engaged in laboratory clerical
functions is sufficient to render inappropriate a
technical unit which does not include the laboratory
clericals The parties also dispute the placement of
certain other technical classifications which
Petitioner would exclude on supervisory,
professional, or managerial grounds.
A. The Employer's contention that the
appropriate unit must combine the laboratory
clericals with the technical employees sought by
Petitioner turns upon the community of interest that
exists between these employees. Thus, in The
Sheffield Corporation2 the Board abandoned its
policy of automatically excluding technical
employees from units of other employees simply
because a party objected to their inclusion. Instead,
the Board held that the placement of technicals will
be determined upon an analysis of their community
of interest with other employees. This reasoning was
applied by the Board in Meramec Mining Company'
in considering a unit request which, as the Employer
claims herein, sought to combine clerical and
technical employees. In this case, since the
laboratory clericals whom the Employer would
include consist of a variety of classifications,
encompassing employees with varying skills,
functions, and duties, we shall resolve the placement
issues below by grouping employees who share
common functions and skills, and on that basis
determine whether the community of interest
between each grouping and the technical employees
is sufficient to require inclusion of the clericals in
the technical unit sought
(1) Clerks-general, clerk-typists, secretaries, and
logistical employees
The clerks-general, clerk-typists, and secretaries
spend substantially all of their time performing
paper work. The logistical employees are engaged in
the ordering, maintenance, and distribution of
instruments and supplies. Their work requires no
specific technical or educational background.
Although their work and location brings them into
physical contact with technical employees, their
duties are essentially clerical in nature.
On the basis of the entire record, and the nature
of the Employer's operations, we are satisfied that if
the interests of clerical and technical employees are
to be given proper effect through the process of
collective bargaining, determination of the
appropriate unit must give primacy to the separate
community of interest that exists between employees
'134 NLRB 1101
'134 NLRB 1675
'See The Wayne Pump Division ofSymtngton Wayne Corporation, 170
NLRB No 191
174 NLRB No 146
1006 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
engaged in clerical, nontechnical functions and those
whose work and background is of a technical
nature Accordingly, as clerks-general, clerk-typists,
secrataries, the librarian, the staff assistants, and the
logistics employees are engaged in work of a
nontechnical nature, and as these employees do not
possess skills interchangeable with technical
employees, we find that they have separate and
distinct communities of interest from the technical
employees and we shall exclude them from the unit 5
(2) Data reduction clerks, associate engineers,
engineering aides, technical writers, technical
document coordinator, schedulers
Petitioner would exclude these classifications as
clericals having no community of interest with
technical employees. We disagree
The data reduction clericals must be high school
graduates with some aptitude for graphical
representation of engineering relationships and for
manipulation of figures. They are basically engaged
in the presentation of scientific data in mathematical
form for analysis by professional engineers in
preparation of test reports They make arithmetical
computations in correlating data and prepare charts
and graphs from raw data test results.
The associate engineers are nonprofessionals, who
have at least 5 years' experience in drafting or
related matters, and an aptitude in mathematics or
physics. They are salaried and are engaged in design
work, but at a nonprofessional level. They take
prints of systems drawings and together with
technical employees, check the accuracy of the
drawings with the physical facilities and then revise
the drawing to correct inaccuracies discovered on
comparison of the drawing and physical facility.
The engineering aides are essentially draftsmen
with less skill and experience than the associate
engineers. They normally have a year or two of
drafting experience, or at the very minimum 2 years
of computational work with graphical presentation
of those computations. They perform layouts of
detailed sketches to illustrate the installations
necessary for test set-up, or bench work, or the
illustration of procedures for test purposes.
The technical writers are engaged in the
preparation of test reports for the professional
engineers. They obtain from the engineers the
graphical and mathematical analyses and
conclusions drawn by the latter from particular
tests, the procedures under which the tests were rule
and other similar data, and then place this
information into report format. The report is
submitted for review of the engineers and, upon
approval, the reports are published by the technical
writer
See, e g , Albuquerque Division , ACF Industries, Incorporated, 145
NLRB 403
The technical document coordinator monitors
reports of tests and other documents of a technical
nature prepared by the laboratories He prepares
monthly compilations and condensations of the
reports of the individual laboratories, which are
written by the technical writers
The schedulers, working with data regarding the
work to be performed, and the time limitations
within which tests must be completed, schedule the
laboratory work so as to eliminate conflicts with
other tasks. The schedulers are experienced in the
planning of technical functions and must have an
aptitute for the logical development of sequential
functions.
Without deciding whether these classifications
meet the strict requirements of the Board's
definition of a technical employee, we find that the
community of interest between employees within
these classifications and the technical employees is
sufficient to require their inclusion. Thus, the work
of these employees entails the exercise of
independent judgment with respect to matters of a
technical, rather than clerical nature. Their work
requires some understanding of the technical
processes in which acknowledged technicals are
engaged, and the skills they exercise are more
closely identified with techncial duties than manual,
clerical skills Accordingly, we shall include them in
the appropriate unit.
B. Petitioner has also raised placement issues with
respect to certain technical classifications which it
argues should be excluded as supervisory,
managerial, or professional. These classifications
and our rulings with respect to them are as follows:
(1) Senior research analysts, research analysts,
research assistants
The Petitioner contends that the senior research
analysts, the research analysts, and the research
assistants should be excluded from the unit as
professional employees. While a college degree is
not required in order to fill the postion of research
analysts, most of these employees do have a degree
and, in any event, the job requires a knowledge of
chemistry or biology usually obtained in college.
The research analysts are salaried and have desks in
the laboratories. They take data in the performance
of tests and reduce it to engineering terms and
graphs. They engage in research concerning
procedures for the performance of tests, taking
known procedures and putting them together in
different manners in order to accomplish a specified
result When the research analyst establishes a
procedure for a test, it is submitted for approval to
the Brown & Root-Northrop scientist and the
NASA monitor. The research analysts work under
the direct supervision of the scientist or supervisor
who is responsible for the group activity. The
research analyst reports facts and findings, he does
not reason out the impact of his factual findings. He
BROWN & ROOT-NORTHROP 1007
deals in known techniques, works under direction,
and is not responsible for the outcome of the tests
Senior research analysts in dispute are more
experienced than research analysts. The research
assistant's position requires less training and
experience than that of research analysts. The job
functions, of the two positions, however, are
substantially similar
The individuals occupying the job classifications
discussed above perform under direct supervision,
work pursuant to known and established procedures,
and are not responsible for the outcome of the
projects on which they work, nor, indeed, do they
reason out the impact of their findings We find that
their jobs do not require knowledge of an advanced
type customarily acquired by a prolonged course of
specialized intellectual instruction and study in an
institution of higher learning. We therefore
conlcude, contrary to the Petitioner's contention,
that they are not professional employees. As the
work of the employees in these classifications does,
however, involve the use of independent judgment
and requires the exercise of skills learned from
specialized training, we find that they are technical
employees and include them in the unit.6
(2) Systems specialists, quality control
specialists, and test specialist
With respect to the systems specialists, whom
Petitioner would exclude as having supervisory,
managerial, or confidential status, the evidence
shows that the position requires a high school
diploma and 8 years of related experience in the
technology or system involved. The systems
specialists possess substantial knowledge in their
particular techology. In practically all cases, this is
a result of experience, and most systems specialists
started as technicians.' The systems specialists have
desks in the same general office area as do the
engineers and section supervisors. They assist the
engineers in the breakdown of work into smaller
segments, within the criteria established by the
section supervisor. Systems specialists, like the
engineers, and unlike the technicians, are salaried,
and are not required to wear a uniform.
The systems specialists have no authority to hire,
fire, discipline, reward, promote, transfer, settle
grievances, etc., or effectively recommend such
action. While there is evidence that a section
supervisor might ask a systems specialist to
interview a job applicant, this is only for the
purpose of rendering an opinion as to the applicant's
technical competence. This type of interview might
also be handled by a lead technician and, in either
case, effective recommendation with respect to hire
'See, e g , The Budd Company Automotive Div, Detroit Plant, 154
NLRB 421, 425
'There is a normal line of progression from technician to lead technician,
to systems specialist There is not a normal progression from systems
specialist to the professional engineering category
is not made
For approximately 10 weeks of the year, the
laboratory runs on three test shifts and, during that
period, a systems specialist will act as senior man on
one shift. However, the section supervisor remains
responsible for all three shifts When the systems
specialist acts as senior man on a shift, he engages
in the technical direction of the work and applies the
priorities passed to him by the section supervisor
The power to assign work is for the limited period
of the shift and strictly as delegated by the section
supervisor The systems specialist's power in this
regard does not include the authority to assign an
individual to a task other than that specifically
contemplated by the section supervisor, and the
systems specialist when acting in this capacity is
thus merely a conduit for relaying of directions from
the section supervisor to the technician. While under
test conditions a systems specialist can authorize a
limited deviation from procedure (as could a lead
technician if he were the senior man on a shift), the
systems specialists are not qualified to evaluate
problems and mallunctions. They may only check
according to preplanned checking and control
procedures. If the check does not yield proper
results, the section supervisor or engineer is
contacted.
There is no evidence that the systems specialists
formulate, determine, or effectuate managerial
policies or assist anyone in the performance of that
function in the field of labor relations, or that they
possess any indicia of supervisory authority. We
find, therefore, that they are not supervisors or
confidential, or managerial employees,' and shall
include them in the appropriate unit.
For similar reasons, we shall include in the unit
the quality control specialists in the lunar receiving
laboratory, and the test specialist in section 433 We
reject Petitioner's contention that they are
supervisors. The quality control specialists assist in
the preparation of test sheets, checking to see if
there is adequate information on the sheets to
permit inspection. They check for compliance with
approved procedures for the work, and prepare
discrepancy reports However, they, like the test
specialist who works on the development of test
equipment, have no authority to direct work, nor do
they possess any other indicia of supervisory
authority
C On the basis of the foregoing, the parties'
stipulations, and the entire record, we find that the
following employees constitute a unit appropriate
for the purposes of collective bargaining:
All employees of Brown & Root-Northrop who
are engaged in the techncial operation of tests and
laboratory facilities on behalf of the NASA
Manned Spacecraft Center at Houston, Texas,
excluding clerical employees, professional
employees, construction employees, maintenance
The Budd Company, 154 NLRB 421
1008 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
employees, warehousemen, watchmen, guards and
supervisors as defined in the Act.'
[Direction of Election10 omitted from publication ]
' Tffiml-no merit in Petitioner 's contention that all clinical , medical and
biochemical employees should be excluded from the unit No basis has
been shown for separation of technical employees working in these
laboratories from technicals in other laboratories who are included in the
appropriate unit
"An election eligibility list , containing the names and addresses of all the
eligible voters , must be filed by the Employer with the Regional Director
for Region 23 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 filed Excelsior Underwear Inc , 156 NLRB
1236