Franklin Mint Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jan 26, 1981

254 N.L.R.B. 714 (N.L.R.B. 1981)

DECISIONS OF NATIONAL. LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Franklin Mint Corporation and Local 835, Interna-
tional Union of Operating Engineers, AFL-
CIO, Petitioner. Case 4-RC-13954
January 26, 1981
DECISION ON REVIEW AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
BY CHAIRMAN FANNING AND MEMBERS
JENKINS AND TRUESDALE
On March 24, 1980, the Acting Regional Direc-
tor for Region 4 issued his Decision, Order, and
Direction of Election in the above-entitled pro-
ceeding, in which he dismissed the petition filed
herein for a unit of maintenance department em-
ployees at the Employer's Franklin Center, Penn-
sylvania, facility, Pennsylvania, facilities, as alterna-
tively requested, on the basis that such units were
inappropriate.'
Thereafter, in accordance with Section 102.67 of
the National Labor Relations Board Rules and
Regulations, Series 8, as amended, Petitioner filed a
timely request for review of the Acting Regional
Director's decision on the ground that he erred in
finding a maintenance unit to be inappropriate
herein. The Employer filed a statement in opposi-
tion.
By telegraphic order dated April 28, 1980, as
amended May 1, the National Labor Relations
Board granted the Petitioner's request for review.
Thereafter, the Employer filed a brief on review.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the Na-
tional Labor Relations Board has delegated its au-
thority 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 brief on review, and
makes the following findings:
The Acting Regional Director found that the
maintenance department employees, whether con-
fined to those at Franklin Center or including as
well those at the Rockdale facility, did not consti-
tute a distinct and homogeneous group of skilled
journeyman craftsmen and, therefore, a unit of
I In Case 4-RC-13974, which had been consolidated with the instant
petition for hearing, Local 115, affiliated with the International Brother-
hood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America,
herein called Teamsters, sought a unit of production and maintenance
employees at the Rockdale facility. In his decision the Acting Regional
Director found solely appropriate a unit of production and maintenance
employees at both the Franklin Center and Rockdale plants, as well as at
the Employer's Concordville, Pennsylvania, warehouse facility He di-
rected an election contingent upon Teamsters' submission of an adequate
showing of interest. Teamsters filed no request for review. and on May
29, the Regional Director dismissed Teamsters' petition administratively
because Teamsters had failed to submit an adequate showing of interest
within the time period allowed
254 NLRB No. 84
maintenance department employees was inappropri-
ate. 2
The Employer is a mail-order house engaged in
the design, manufacture, and sale to the public of
collectibles, including coins, tokens, commemora-
tive medals, jewelry, fine arts, and books. The Em-
ployer's operations consist of a main facility,
Franklin Center, and two smaller facilities, Rock-
dale (located approximately I mile from Franklin
Center) and Concordville (located approximately 7
miles from Franklin Center). Franklin Center em-
ploys approximately 566 permanent hourly employ-
ees, including approximately 80 maintenance and
toolroom employees; Rockdale employs approxi-
mately 197 permanent hourly employees, including
9 maintenance employees; and Concordville, a war-
ehousing complex, employs approximately 25 per-
manent hourly employees, with no maintenance
employees.
The maintenance department and toolroom ma-
chine shop comprise the Employer's maintenance
and facilities engineering department, a separate ad-
ministrative department. Its supervisory hierarchy
consists of the director, the maintenance control su-
pervisor, and individual supervisors for the various
functions, including the toolroom machine shop
employees, the production maintenance mechanics
and the oiler, the building custodians, the heating,
ventilation, and air-conditioning employees, the
electricians, and the electronic instrument repair-
men.
The machine shop at Franklin Center is com-
prised of 11 toolmakers and 4 toolroom machinists.
These employees devote most of their time to pre-
paring tools, dies, molds, and small parts used in
the production process. In preparing die blanks, the
toolroom machinists receive solid bars, cut them
into the lengths designated by the manufacturing
control schedule, and, on a lathe, turn the bar to
various diameters. The die blanks are then trans-
ported to the die shop, where the dies are fabricat-
ed and detailed artwork is added. If no artwork is
required, the toolroom machinists make the dies.
After the dies have been used in the production
process, they are routed to the welding shop, part
of the toolroom machine shop, where a mainte-
nance mechanic destroys them. The toolroom ma-
chinists also provide shafts and collets, as well as
other parts, to the production maintenance me-
chanics for use in maintaining production machin-
ery. During the Employer's annual shutdown for
maintenance, approximately 20 percent of the tool-
room employees are retained along with "a large
2 For the reasons expressed in his Decision, we agree with the Acting
Regional Director that a maintenance departmental unit limited to Frank-
lin Center maintenance employees is inappropriate
714
FRANKLIN MINT CORPORATION
portion" of the maintenance employees. Job appli-
cants for the machine shop positions are required
to have 4 to 7 years of prior experience with some
schooling desirable. New employees in the machine
shop usually come from outside the Company. The
toolroom machinists and toolmakers are included in
the Employer's top three pay classifications. Their
supervisor is responsible to the director of mainte-
nance and facilities engineering.
The production maintenance mechanics at
Franklin Center are responsible for keeping pro-
duction and production support machinery operat-
ing. Three to five mechanics are daily stationed in
different maintenance zones, and are assigned to a
zone by their supervisor upon reporting to the
maintenance department. The zone mechanics
repair small breakdowns as they occur, taking di-
rection only from their maintenance department su-
pervisor.
Between two to four of the maintenance me-
chanics work as truck repairmen. Their function is
primarily to repair forktrucks at the Concordville
and Franklin Center warehouses, where they spend
an average of 3 days a week and 2 days a week,
respectively. Their services are arranged for
through the maintenance department at Franklin
Center; they are directed to Concordville by their
Franklin Center supervisor, who also directs them
as to what repair "methods" to employ. While they
are employed at Concordville, the Concordville su-
pervisor may remove them from their current jobs
and may direct them to perform needed additional
repairs. Any movement of the repairmen away
from Concordville must be approved by their su-
pervisor at Franklin Center.
The remainder of the first shift production me-
chanics perform prescheduled large machine re-
pairs.
The second shift employee is essentially unsuper-
vised and has only troubleshooting duties. If a
major breakdown occurs he calls his supervisor at
home for instructions.
The oiler at Franklin Center reports to the pro-
duction maintenance mechanic supervisor. The
oiler is responsible for performing routine greasing
and oiling in accordance with an inspection list.
The tool crib employee, who works the first shift
only, distributes tools to maintenance personnel. He
reports to the maintenance control supervisor, who
is generally responsible for the coordination of all
maintenance activities in conjunction with the di-
rector of maintenance.
The 25 building custodians at Franklin Center
work two shifts. There is a supervisor for each
shift. The first shift custodians are assigned certain
manufacturing areas and are responsible for remov-
ing trash and sweeping floors. If a production em-
ployee wants a custodian to perform some cleaning
work for him, he is expected to contact the custo-
dial supervisor or the manufacturing dispatcher,
who relays the request, and a custodian is generally
assigned to do the work. The second shift cleans
office areas, the maintenance department, and bath-
rooms.
The 15 building maintenance mechanics at
Franklin Center include 3 heating, ventilation, and
air-conditioning (HVAC) employees who are sepa-
rately supervised, 3 electronic instrument repair-
men, also separately supervised, 5 electricians sepa-
rately supervised, and a carpenter and 3 mainte-
nance helpers, who appear to be supervised by the
maintenance and engineering functions director or
his assistant. The HVAC employees all work the
first shift. The Employer requires that prior to
being hired they be skilled in dry walling, plumb-
ing, painting, and ventilation work. Should the
HVAC employees' services be required during the
second shift, a production employee designated by
the HVAC supervisor is expected to call the
HVAC employees in. The electricians are also re-
quired to be skilled prior to their being hired. They
work two shifts, both supervised by the same su-
pervisor, whose hours overlap the two shifts. Ap-
proximately 80 percent of the electricians' work is
"undefined emergency," and 20 percent is "long-
term scheduled." They perform electrical work on
machinery throughout Franklin Center. The elec-
tronic instrument repairmen repair cameras, moni-
tors, and other such equipment at Franklin Center.
They are assigned to the first shift. Generally,
schooling and prior experience are not required,
with two current repairmen having been trained on
the job.3
The Rockdale facility has one electronic instru-
ment repairman, one electrician, and two produc-
tion maintenance mechanics. They are supervised
by a maintenance supervisor. If parts, advice, or
other services are required, they are obtained from
Franklin Center. Two custodians work the first
shift at Rockdale, performing the same functions as
their Franklin Center counterparts. They receive
their directions from a maintenance supervisor,
who is ultimately responsible to a production su-
pervisor. Additionally, the Franklin Center tool-
room employees perform 60 percent of the re-
quired machining work for Rockdale and the
Franklin Center HVAC employees perform the
ventilation work at Rockdale. At the time of the
1 There is only limited evidence as to the precise functions of the car-
penter and the three maintenance helpers. lIoweLeer. there is no dispute
that these classifications are within the maintenance department and that
thes perform oliell maintenance functions
715
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
hearing, one HVAC employee had been temporaily
assigned to Rockdale for several months to work
on the heating ducts.
The maintenance department, as well as the tool-
room machine shop, has its own offices on the
mezzanine level at Franklin Center. These offices
are separate from the production offices. The ma-
chine shop, tool crib, and maintenance work areas
are on the ground level of Franklin Center in sepa-
rate but adjacent locations, apart from the produc-
tion area.
Employees at all three facilities share common
fringe benefits and uniform wage rates and grades
and are subject to the same work rules. Hiring for
the various functions is the responsibility of the in-
dividual maintenance supervisors. They interview
applicants after initial screening by the personnel
office and make the final hiring decision. Seniority
is companywide, and during layoffs employees may
bump less senior employees at another facility and
in another job classification, provided the senior
employee is deemed to have the ability and experi-
ence to adequately perform the job. In this regard,
employees' performance appraisals, prepared by the
immediate supervisor, play a significant role.
The record reveals that 10 of the 25 building
custodians have bumped or transferred into their
current positions since 1970, and conversely, 23
former custodians have bumped or transferred into
production jobs during this same period. With re-
spect to temporary interchange, there is no evi-
dence that the custodians, or any other petitioned-
for employees, ever temporarily fill in on produc-
tion jobs or that production employees temporarily
perform custodial or other maintenance work.
Upon the foregoing, we find, contrary to the
Acting Regional Director, that a unit of all maiote-
nance employees employed at the Employer's
Franklin Center, Rockdale, and Concordville facili-
ties is appropriate herein. 4 We are satisfied that the
Employer's maintenance employees have the requi-
site community of interest to constitute a mainte-
4 See American Cyanamid Company, 131 NLRB 909, 910 (1961). The
cases relied on by the Acting Regional Director to support his contrary
conclusion are clearly distinguishable. In Peterson/Puritan Inc., 240
NLRB 1051 (1979), the Board found inappropriate the petitioner's re-
quested unit limited to line mechanics, without passing on the appropri-
ateness of a unit of all maintenance employees as the petitioner was un-
willing to represent any other unit. In The F & M Schaeffer Brewing Co.,
198 NLRB 323 (1972), maintenance employees were subject to supervi-
sion primarily by production supervisors and performed repairs with the
aid of and in conjunction with the production employees, and production
employees often repaired their machines without assistance. Essentially
the same interchange that occurred in F & M Schaeffer existed between
production and maintenance employees in US. Plywood-Champion Papers.
Inc., 174 NLRB 292 (1969), cited by our dissenting colleague, and that
case is thus distinguished on the same grounds. We note additionally that
in the latter case, maintenance and production employees shared some
common supervision and, significantly, maintenance employees frequently
substituted for production employees.
nance departmental unit. Thus, as shown above,
the maintenance department has its own adminis-
trative offices, its own work areas, and its own su-
pervisory hierarchy. Hiring for the department is
done by its supervisors. The maintenance employ-
ees alone perform all the various support services
for the Employer's production operations and fa-
cilities, taking direction, for all practical purposes,
solely from the maintenance supervisors. Further,
and contrary to the Employer's contention, the
degree of employee interchange found to occur be-
tween maintenance department employees and pro-
duction employees cannot be said to blur the dis-
tinctiveness of the proposed unit. It is clear that the
"interchange" that occurs because of the operation
of the Employer's seniority system is permanent in
nature, and thus weighs less heavily than does tem-
porary interchange on the community of interest
shared by the maintenance employees.5
The Employer, in support of its contention that
the only appropriate unit is a companywide unit of
all employees, asserts that the toolmakers and tool-
room machinists are engaged full time in produc-
tion, not maintenance, functions, and that their in-
clusion in a proposed maintenance unit will
"threaten the Employer's ability to continue its
highly integrated, efficient production process."
We reject this contention. We do not consider
these employees to be engaged in repetitive pro-
duction operations. While the record reveals that
these employees do occasionally make small parts
that are eventually placed on the Employer's prod-
ucts by production employees, the performance of
such functions is not shown to be so integrated
with those of the production employees as to blur
the identity of the toolmakers and toolroom ma-
chinists as maintenance employees. 6 Rather, the
record reflects that toolroom machinists and tool-
makers are highly skilled employees whose func-
tions, like those of maintenance employees general-
ly, are for the most part to provide a support ser-
vice for the production process, the repair and fab-
rication of tools and dies. Additionally, the tool-
room machinists and toolmakers are subject to
common supervision with other maintenance de-
partment employees, have offices in the same area,
and have an adjoining work area. Thus, we find
that the toolmakers and toolroom machinists share
such a close community of interest with other em-
5 See Crown Simpson Pulp Company. 163 Nl.RB 796 (1967).
6 See National Carbon Company. A Division of Union Carbide and
Carbon Corporation (Edgewater Works), 107 NLRB 1486, 1488 (1954). See
also Precision Cast Parts Corp.., 224 NLRB 382, 383. fn 7 (1976).
716
FRANKLIN MINT CORPORATION
ployees in the maintenance department as to war-
rant their inclusion in a maintenance unit. 7
Accordingly, we find that the following employ-
ees comprise a distinct, separate, and cohesive
grouping appropriate for collective bargaining
within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act:8
All maintenance employees, toolroom machin-
ists, and toolmakers at the Employer's Frank-
lin Center, Rockdale and Concordville, Penn-
sylvania facilities, excluding office clericals,
professional employees, guards, all other em-
ployees, and supervisors as defined in the Act.
[Direction of Election and Exclesior omitted
from publication.]
MEMBER JENKINS, dissenting:
I would affirm the determination by the Acting
Regional Director that a unit of maintenance de-
7 Phillips Products Co., Inc., 234 NLRB 323 (1978): National Carbon
Company. supra at 1489. We note that Petitioner does not seek to repre-
sent the machinists in the die shop. However. the tool shop and the die
shop appear to be functionally integrated and both are engaged in the
preparation and production of dies The die shop machinists form the
single largest pool of potential toolroom machinists, with eight die shop
machinists having bid into toolroom machinist positions. Apparently,
they are the only employees outside the petitioned-for unit with enough
prior experience and skill to meet the Employer's requirements for the
toolroom machinist positions. Although the two shops are administrative-
ly separate, the die shop appears to be engaged in a support service, simi-
lar to that provided by the tool shop. However, the record is not fully
developed as to these employees and, therefore, we shall permit the die
shop machinists to vote subject to challenge. See National Carbon Com-
pany. supra at 1488, 1489 See also Lianco Container Corporation, 177
NLRB 907, 908 (1969); California Metal Trades Association and its
Member Companies, 139 NLRB 1308 (1962).
8 Verona Dyestuff Division, Mobay Chemical Corporation, 225 NLRB
1159 (1976); Crown Simpson Pulp Co., supra, American Cyanamid Co.,
supra.
partment employees is inappropriate. While it is
true that the employees who are grouped adminis-
tratively within the maintenance department have a
certain community of interests, I think the Acting
Regional Director was correct in concluding that
their interests as a group are not sufficiently sepa-
rate and distinct from production employees to
warrant separate representation. In addition to the
possession of a distinct group identity, an appropri-
ate maintenance unit normally consists of a homo-
geneous group of employees, having similar func-
tions and skills. U. S. Plywood-Champion Papers,
Inc., 174 NLRB 292, 295, 296, fn. 10 (1969). Here,
whatever degree of homogeneity the highly skilled
employees within this maintenance department may
have, over one-third of the department consists of
building custodians. These 25 custodians are among
the lowest paid of the Employer's employees, are
supervised separately from other maintenance em-
ployees, and as a group have experienced a signifi-
cant degree of permanent interchange with produc-
tion employees. They form too substantial a part of
the requested unit, and have too little contact with
the highly skilled mechanical and toolmaking em-
ployees, to be passed off as support personnel or as
any other category of employees whose function is
incidental to that of the main body of unit employ-
ees. Since none of the Employer's employees is
represented, it is premature to treat the custodians
as a residual group. Therefore, I find that a unit in-
cluding them in a separate unit with the highly
skilled and highly paid maintenance employees is
inappropriate.
717