E. W. Bliss Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jan 31, 1949

81 N.L.R.B. 428 (N.L.R.B. 1949)

In the Matter of E. W. BLISS COMPANY, TOLEDO MACHINE TOOL
DIVISION,1 EMPLOYER and INTERNATIONAL UNION, UNITED AUTO-
MOBILE, AIRCRAFT AND AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF
AMERICA (UAW-CIO), PETITIONER
Case No. 8-RU-- 62.Decided January 31, 19419
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before a hearing
officer of the National Labor Relations Board. 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 Board has
delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-man panel
-consisting of the undersigned Board Members.*
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the National Labor Relations Act.
2. The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress
of Industrial Organizations, claiming to represent employees of the
Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of employees of the Employer, within the meaning of Section 9
(c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The appropriate unit :
The Petitioner requests a unit of all office, clerical, and engineering 2
employees in the Toledo Machine Tool Division of the Employer,
including employees in the finance department, engineering depart-
ment, parts department, material control department, order depart-
ment, production control department, purchasing department, ship-
ping and receiving department, works manager's department, the
1 The name of the Employer appears as amended at the hearing.
* Houston , Reynolds , and Murdock.
2 The Petitioner describes the unit requested as "all office and clerical employeedi" ex-
.eluding supervisory employees . At the hearing the Petitioner described the unit sought
by way of departments , and added "engineering employees" to those originally claimed.
81 N. L. R. B., No. 75.
428
E. W. BLISS COMPANY 429
sales department,' and the advertising department, but excluding
confidential employees and supervisors as defined under the Act.
The Employer, although agreeing to the exclusions proposed by the
Petitioner, contends that various other employees should be excluded
from the unit. Thus, the Employer argues that all employees in
the engineering department, the parts department, the advertising
department, and the sales department should be excluded upon the
ground that such departments are controlled by and are integrated
with plants of the Employer at other locations 4 In the alternative,
the Employer contends that if the employees in the engineering depart-
ment as such be included in the unit, certain employees therein in the
classifications of junior and senior engineers, lay-out men, detailers
and detail clerks, should be excluded as professional employees. The
Employer further seeks the exclusion of all clericals in the shipping
and receiving department and certain clericals in the material control
department upon the basis that such employees are plant rather than
office clericals. The Employer would also exclude as a supervisor
a senior clerk in the material control department.
The Toledo Machine Tool Division of the Employer, herein called
the Toledo Plant, is located at Toledo, Ohio, and is one of five plants
owned and operated by the Employer. The other four plants are lo-
cated at Salem, Ohio; Cleveland, Ohio; Hastings, Michigan; and
Englewood, New Jersey, respectively. The home office of the Em-
ployer is in Detroit, Michigan. All five plants manufacture the
same type of power presses. All five plants are served by three en-
gineering offices, of which one is located in the Detroit home office,
another in the Hastings Plant, and the third in the Toledo Plant.
The engineering, parts, sales, and advertising departments are all
located in buildings which are a part of the Toledo Plant. There
being no evidence to the contrary, we assume that the work of each
employee in these departments is performed at the Toledo Plant. The
record discloses that such employees all perform substantially the
same type of work (clerical technical) under similar working condi-
tions as do the employees from other departments of the Toledo
Plant. The employees of the questioned departments have frequent
contact with similar employees in such other departments. It further
appears that there has been no history of collective bargaining cover-
8 The record is not clear as to whether there is a sales department proper , as distin-
guished from the sales engineering department . In referring to the sales department
herein , we shall include the sales engineering department.
4Integration of these departments with plants at other locations is indicated by the
fact that such departments function in their respective fields for the benefit of all plants
of the Employer. The immediate supervisors of these departments are answerable to
officials of the home office at Detroit rather than to officials of the Toledo plant. In the
ease of the sales and advertising departments , the employees therein are listed on the
Detroit office pay roll and their salary determinations are made in Detroit rather than at
Toledo.
-430 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ing all plants of the Employer on a multiple-plant basis insofar as
the claimed employees are concerned. In accordance with the Board's
general policy of placing employees with similar interests in the same
bargaining unit,5 we believe, under the present circumstances, that all
the office, clerical, and technica16 employees in the engineering, parts,
sales, and advertising departments, located at the Toledo Plant, may
properly be included in a plant-wide office, clerical, and technical unit.
There remains for consideration the question of excluding as pro-
fessionals certain categories of employees in the engineering depart-
ment together with the question of excluding plant clericals and the
question of whether a senior clerk in the material control department
is to be excluded as a supervisor.
Professional Employees
As previously noted, the Employer contends that junior and senior
engineers, lay-out men, detailers, and detail clerks should be excluded
as professional employees.
(a) Junior and Senior Engineers: The record discloses that the
work of the junior and senior engineers is predominantly intellectual
and varied in character and involves the exercise of discretion and
judgment. A college education is required of employees in either
category. Senior engineers are capable of handling novel problems
from the standpoint of design. Moreover, their work cannot be
standardized. The duties of a junior engineer are lesser in nature
than those performed by a senior engineer, but a junior engineer can
advance in the course of his work to a senior engineer. Under the
circumstances, we find that the junior and senior engineers are pro-
fessional employees within the meaning of the amended Act,' and
as such may not be included in the same unit with the non-professional
employees unless a majority of the junior and senior engineers vote
for such inclusion. Accordingly, we shall set up a separate voting
group for the junior and senior engineers, as hereinafter provided for,
in order to ascertain their desires with respect to their inclusion in the
unit with the clerical and technical employees.
(b) Lay-out Men: The function of a lay-out man is to explore the
possibility of the manufacture by the Employer of a product ordered
by a customer and to render a general recommendation thereupon.
He makes drawings in which he applies general principles of engi-
See Matter of Phelps Dodqe Mercantile C'ompan,l, 78 N L. R. B. 179
E The Board has, in numerous instances , under similar circumstances, included both tech-
nical and clerical employees in a single bargaining unit. See Matter of Chrysler Corpora-
tion , 55 N. L . R. B. 1039 , and cases therein cited.
7 See Matter of Solar Manufacturing Corp., 80 N. L . R. B. 1358; Matter of Westinghouse
Electric Corporation , 80 N. L. R. B. 591 ; Matter of Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph
Company, Inc., 78 N L. R. B. 814.
E. W. BLISS COMPANY 431
neering and specific principles of power press design. Some of the
lay-out men have college degrees and some do not. The amount of
training required is variable, depending upon the individual. In
hiring a lay-out man the Employer would consider primarily his
experience, rather than whether or not he possesses a college educa-
tion. While the work of a lay-out man has some of the attributes of
a professional employee, it does not appear that such work requires
"knowledge of an advanced type in a field of science or learning cus-
tomarily acquired by a prolonged course of specialized intellectual
instruction and study in an institution of higher learning, . . ."
within the meaning of Section 2 (12) of the Act, as amended.
Accordingly, we find that the lay-out men are not professional
employees.8
(c) Detailers and Detail Clerks: It is the duty of the employees
described as detailers to take the graphic outline of a product to be
manufactured and thereafter to break it down to its component parts.
The detailers then draw up the parts for manufacturing. Their
work requires a basic understanding of engineering and about 2 years
of practical experience. A detailer ordinarily advances to a lay-out
man. The detail clerks read blueprints and make drawings. The
Board has customarily included detailers and similar classifications
in units of clerical and technical employees, and has recently found
that detailers are not professional employees within the meaning of
the Act 10 We therefore find that the detailers and detail clerks are
not professional employees within the meaning of the Act.
Plant Clerks
The Employer contends that all shipping and receiving department
clericals should be excluded from the unit for the reason that they are
plant clerks, rather than general office clerks. Such employees are
classified as senior clerk, junior clerk, and typist. They perform no
manual labor, the major portion of their time being devoted to paper
work. The Employer also objects to the inclusion of Victor Puhl and
Leo Drudzinski, who are under the supervision of the head of the
material control department, on the basis that they also are plant
clerks. Puhl and Drudzinski keep records, receive invoices, and price
parts. Their desks are stationed in the production area of the Toledo
Plant only because such location is more convenient to them in the
performance of their work. They are under no supervision other
than the head of the material control department. Inasmuch as the
See Matter of Murray Ohio Manufacturing Company, 61 N L R B. 47, wherein lay-out
engineers were included in a unit of clerical and technical employees.
9 See Matter of Chrysler Corporation , 55 N. L . It. B. 1039, and cases therein cited.
10 Matter of George A . Fuller Company, 78 N. L . R. B. 207.
432 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
duties and interests of the above -mentioned plant clericals are closely
allied to the other employees in the proposed unit, and since the plant
clericals were not included in the plant -wide production unit cur-
rently being bargained for by the Petitioner , we shall include them
within the voting group of the clerical and technical employees sought
herein 11
The Senior Clerk in the Material Control Department
The Employer would exclude this senior clerk upon the ground that
he is a supervisor. The job of such employee is to mark specifications
on orders as they come through the material control department.
He has no authority to hire or discharge or make effective recom-
mendations in connection therewith. He punches a time clock,
whereas supervisors do not. We find that this senior clerk is not a
supervisor within the meaning of the amended Act; accordingly, we
shall include him within the voting group of clerical and technical
employees sought herein.
In view of the foregoing, we shall direct that separate elections
be held in the following groups at the Toledo Machine Tool Division
of the Employer at Toledo, Ohio, and shall defer our determination
as to the scope of the unit until the results of these elections have been
ascertained:
1. All office, clerical and technical employees, including the employ-
ees in the finance department, engineering department, parts depart-
ment, material control department,12 order department, production
control department, purchasing department, shipping and receiving
department, works manager's department, sales department, and ad-
vertising department, but excluding confidential employees and super-
visors, within the meaning of the Act.
2. All junior and senior engineers.
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the
purposes of collective bargaining with the Employer, separate elec-
tions 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 Eighth
Region, and subject to Sections 203.61 and 203.62 of National Labor
Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 5, as amended, among
1 See Matter of Plankinton Packing Company , 69 N. L R. B. 920 , wherein the Board
found no merit to the contention that p lant clericals should be excluded from a unit com-
posed of office clericals . See also Matter of Republic Steel Corporatson, 72 N. L. R. B. 525.
11 Included herein is the senior clerk referred to above.
E. W. BLISS COMPANY 433
the employees in the voting groups described above, who were em-
ployed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date
of this Direction of Elections, including employees who did not
work during said pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation
or temporarily laid off, but excluding those employees who have since
quit or been discharged for cause and have not been rehired or rein-
stated prior to the date of the election, and also excluding employees on
strike who are not entitled to reinstatement, to determine whether or
not they desire to be represented by International Union, United Auto-
mobile, Aircraft and Agricultural Implement Workers of America
(UAW-CIO) for the purpose of collective bargaining.