General Electric Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 6, 1944

57 N.L.R.B. 81 (N.L.R.B. 1944)

In the Matter of GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY and INTERNATIONAL
FEDERATION OF ARCHITECTS, ENGINEERS, CHEMISTS & TECHNICIANS
(CIO)-CHAPTER 13
Case No. 4-R-1348.-Decided July 6, 1944
Messrs. Robert Paxton, C. H. Black, and V. L. Cox, of Philadelphia,
Pa., for the Company.
Messrs. Saul C. Walbaunt and Theodore Vincent, of Philadelphia,
Pa., and Mr. Martin Cooper, of New York City, for the Union.
Mr. Joseph E. Gubbins, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon petition duly filed by International Federation of Architects,
Engineers , Chemists & Technicians (CIO)-Chapter 13,,herein called
the, Union, alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen
concerning the representation of employees of General Electric Com-
pany, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, herein called the Company, the
National Labor Relations Board provided for an appropriate hearing
upon due-notice before Goeffrey J. Cunniff, Trial Examiner. On May
10, 1944, the Board ordered the record reopened and a further hearing
held for the purpose of adducing additional evidence with respect to,
the supervisory status of certain employees. Upon due notice to the
parties, said hearing was held at Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, on
May 25 and 26, 1944, before Geoffrey J. Cunniff, Trial Examiner.
At both hearings, 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.
The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are free from
prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. Following each hearing,
the Company filed a motion for the correction of certain errors in
,the transcript. No objection having been made, the motions are
hereby granted and the transcripts are ordered corrected accordingly.
All parties were afforded opportunity to file briefs with the Board.
57 N. L. R. B., No. 15.
601248-44-vol. 57-7 81 ' ,
82 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Upon the entire record' in the case, the Board snakes the following :
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
General Electric Company is a New York corporation with its prin-
cipal office at Schenectady; New York. The Company operates
plants located throughout the United States. This proceeding con-
cerns the employees of the Company working in its Philadelphia and
Darby, Pennsylvania, plants, where the Company is engaged in the -
_manufacture of switchgear and electrical control equipment: An-
nually,.the,Company uses raw materials at its Philadelphia and Darby
plants of'a value in excess of $10,000,000, of which approximately 60
percent is'received at such plants from points outside the Common-
wealth of Pennsylvania. The Company annually produces finished
products at these 2 plants of a value in excess of $10,000,000, of, which
approximately 80 percent is shipped to points outside the Common-
wealth 'of Pennsylvania. _
The Company concedes that it is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
International Federation of Architects, Engineers, Chemists &
Technicians (CIO)-Chapter 13, is a labor organization affiliated with
the Cangress of Industrial Organizations, admitting to membership
employees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION '
The Company has refused to grant recognition to the Union as the
exclusive bargaining representative of certain of its employees until
the Union has been certified by the Board.
A statement prepared by a Field Examiner, introduced in evidence
at the hearing, indicates that the Union represents a substantial num-
ber of employees in the unit'hereinafter found to be appropriate?
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 Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT ; THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
The Union requests a unit embracing all draftsmen and engineers
in the Company's Philadelphia and'Darby plants, excluding non-tech-
I The Field Examiner reported that the Union submitted 218 application cards bearing
names of persons appearing on the CommDy's pay roll of March 3, 1944 There'are approxi-
mately 455 emloyees in the unit alleged by the Union to be appropriate, of whom 134 are
engineers and the i emamder draftsmen Of the 218 application, cards submitted by the
Union , 29 bear names of engineers and 189 bear names of draftsmen.
GENERAL ELECTRIC' COMPANY 83
nic,al,'clerical, and supervisory employees. The Company is opposed
to any type of unit which would include engineers but does not ob-
ject to a unit confined solely to draftsmen. In the event that. the Board
finds that engineers may properly be represented for the purposes of
collective bargaining, the Company requests that they be included in
a separate unit.
The record shows that the duties of engineers and draftsmen are
technical in nature, that both, classifications work side by side, and
that the work of one group complements that of the other. Both
groups are salaried employees, enjoy the same privileges with respect
to sick and benefit plans, and have a common vacation plan in which
the hourly paid employees do not participate.
However, the record also shows that, in the main, engineers are
technical school graduates, or draftsmen who have by home study or
extension courses acquired the equivalent of a technical school edu-,
cation, while draftsmen, in general, have only the ordinary technical
skills associated with their work. Moreover, the-duties, responsibili-
-ties, and problems of engineers are substantially different from those
of draftsmen, in that the engineers develop ideas which they express
in rough sketches, while the draftsmen are required only to trans-
late such sketches into formal drawings and prints. ,The record fur-
ther shows that the salary of the average engineer is substantially
higher than that of the average draftsman.
'In view of these circumstances, we are of the opinion that the en-
gineers form a well-defined, homogeneous group of employees en-
titled to representation and an opportunity to voice their desire in
the choice of a 'bargaining agent in a voting group separate from that
of the • draftsmen. We are also of the opinion that if both the en-
gineers_and draftsmen, in separate voting groups, select the Union,
they may together constitute an appropriate unit. Accordingly, we
shall make no final determination of the appropriate unit at this time,
but shall defer such determination pending the results of the elections
hereinafter directed. I
There remains for consideration a dispute between the parties with
regard to section leaders of drafting. The Union seeks to include
them, whereas the Company urges their exclusion on the ground that
they are supervisory employees. The record shows that section lead-
ers of drafting schedule work for draftsmen, instruct and rate such
employees, and are responsible for the quality and quantity of their
work. They have authority effectively to recommend promotion, dis-
ciplinary action, and dismissal of, employees under their supervision.
We consequently find that section leaders of drafting are supervisory
employees, and as such, we shall exclude them.
We shall direct an election among the engineers in .the Company's
Philadelphia and Darby plants and a separate election among the
84 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
draftsmen in such plants, excluding no'n-technical and, clerical em-
ployees, section leaders of drafting, and all other supervisory em-
ployees with authority to hire, promote, discipline, discharge, or
otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or effectively
recommend such action, who were engaged during the pay-roll period
immediately preceding the date of the Direction of Elections, sub-
ject to the limitations and additions set forth therein, to determine
whether or not each group desires to be represented by the Union.
Upon the results of such elections will depend, in part, our determina-
tion of the appropriate unit. If the employees of both groups select
the Union as their bargaining representative, they shall constitute a
single appropriate unit; if, however, the employees of but one group
select the Union as their bargaining representative, they alone shall
constitute the appropriate unit.
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
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 Artice III, Section 9, of National Labor Relations
Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3, it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with General Electric
Company, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, separate elections by secret
ballot shall be conducted as soon, as possible, but not later than thirty
(30) days from the date of this Direction, under the direction and su-
pervision of the Regional Director for the Fourth Region, acting in
this matter as agent for-the National Labor Relations Board, and sub-
ject to Article III, Sections 10 and 11, of said Rules and Regulations,
among (1) all engineers in the Company's Philadelphia and Darby
plants; and (2) all draftsmen in the Company's Philadelphia and
Darby plants, who were employed during the pay-roll period im-
mediately 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 non-technical and clerical employees,
section leaders of drafting, and all other supervisory employees with
authority to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise' effect
changes in the status of employees, or effectively recommend such ac-
tion, and excluding any employees who have since quit or been dis-
charged for cause and have not been rehired or reinstated prior to the
date of the elections, to determine whether or not they desire to, be
represented by International Federation of Architects, Engineers,
Chemists & Technicians, (CIO)-Chapter 13, for the purposes of'col-
lective bargaining.