Combustion Engineering, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Dec 30, 1975

221 N.L.R.B. 1290 (N.L.R.B. 1975)

1290 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Combustion Engineering ,- Inc. and Office and Profes-
sional Employees International Union, Local No.
13, AFL-CIO, Petitioner . Case 14=RC-7930
December 30, 1975
DECISION ON REVIEW
BY CHAIRMAN 'MURPHY AND MEMBERS
PENELLO AND,-WALTHER
On August 8, 1975, the Acting Regional Director
for Region 14 issued the Decision and Direction of
Election in the above-entitled proceeding in which he
found appropriate a unit consisting of certain office
clerical employees and production schedulers em-
ployed at the Employer's St. Louis, Missouri, facility.
Thereafter, the Employer filed a timely request for
review of the Acting Regional Director's decision,
alleging that the Acting Regional Director erred by
excluding certain employees from the unit.
By telegraphic order dated September 12, 1975, the
Board granted certain aspects of the request for
review and stayed the election pending decision on
review.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the
National Labor Relations Board has delegated its
authority in this proceeding to a three-member panel.
The Board has considered the entire record in this
case with - respect to the. issues under review,
including the Employer's request for review, and
makes the following findings:
The Petitioner sought a unit of office clerical
employees at the Employer's St. Louis facility. The
Employer took the position that, because of a close
interrelationship between the office clericals and
many of the plant clericals, the unit should include
both office and plant clericals. In his decision the
Acting Regional Director excluded most plant
clericals from the unit. He did, however, include
therein material control analysts on grounds that,
although they work in the plant, their work is closely
related to the work of the material control analysts
who work in the office, with whom they interchange
and share the same supervision, and the fact that the
parties were agreeable to their inclusion.
The Acting Regional Director also included in the
unit certain plant production schedulers although he
found that they are plant clericals. He did =so on the
basis that the-parties agreed to include them.
In its request for review, the Employer asserts that
the record demonstrates the interrelationship of the
above groups of plant clerical employees with the
office clericals, as well as the interrelationship with
other plant clerical employees who also should be
included in the unit. It contends that the Acting
Regional Director erred in including some plant
clericals and in excluding others and that such a
carving up of the plant clerical group would create
problems; that consequently either all or-,none of the
plant clericals be included with' the office clerical
employees.
In Weyerhauser Company i we stated that,
Absent agreement of the parties, the Board as a
general rule does not join office and plant clerical
employees in a single unit.
In the instant case while there is agreement, by the
parties that certain plant clericals should be, included,
agreement is lacking, with regard to other groups.
Since all plant clericals cannot be_ included, we
believe that the inclusion of selected groups would
lead to the kind of fragmentation of an employee
group which we deem inconsistent with the purposes
of the Act. Therefore, we shall exclude the material
control analysts and plant production schedulers
from the unit found appropriate (which consists of all
office clerical employees).
Accordingly, this case, is remanded to the Regional
Director in order that he may conduct an election
pursuant to his Decision and Direction of Election,
as modified herein, except that the eligibility period
therefore shall be that immediately preceding the
date of this Decision on Review. [Excelsior` footnote
omitted from publication.]
1 173 NLRB 1170, 1171 (1968).
221 NLRB No. 220