Gibbs & Cox, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Nov 15, 1967

168 N.L.R.B. 220 (N.L.R.B. 1967)

220 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Gibbs & Cox, Inc. and Marine Technicians ' Guild,
Gibbs & Cox, Inc., Petitioner . Case 2-UC-10
November 15, 1967
DECISION AND ORDER
BY CHAIRMAN MCCULLOCH AND MEMBERS
FANNING AND BROWN
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9(b) of
the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, a
hearing was held before Herzl S. Eisenstadt, Hear-
ing Officer of the National Labor Relations Board.
Thereafter, the Employer and the Union filed
briefs.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connec-
tion with this case to a three-member panel.
The Hearing Officer's rulings made at the hearing
are free from prejudicial error and they are hereby
affirmed.
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board
finds:
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within
the meaning of the Act and it will effectuate the pur-
poses of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein.
2. The labor organization involved claims to
represent certain employees of the Employer.
3. This proceeding involves the Employer's
New York, New York, office, where it is engaged
in furnishing naval architectural and marine en-
gineering services to private concerns and to the
Government. Since 1946 the Petitioner has been
the certified bargaining representative of the follow-
ing unit:
All drafting employees (excluding engineers,
assistant engineers, scientific assistants, super-
visors and assistant supervisors), technical em-
ployees (excluding supervisors, engineers,
assistant engineers and material man A) and
model makers (excluding foreman) of the Em-
ployer, New York, New York, excluding ex-
ecutive, managerial, and supervisory em-
ployees ....
On March 13, 1967, the Petitioner filed a petition
seeking clarification of the above unit to include
therein specialists, and associate, assistant, and ju-
nior engineers, as well as some full engineers. Peti-
tioner contends that the work of these employees
differs only in degree from work currently being
performed by unit employees and that 14 unit em-
ployees who were elevated to positions in such
categories without the bargaining unit should be
returned to the unit.
The existing unit was certified in 1946 and con-
tains both employees who perform routine tasks
requiring only rudimentary knowledge and others
who possess professional degrees, and who engage
in complex drafting and scientific work. Following
the Board's certification of this unit containing
professional and nonprofessional employees, the
parties negotiated a contract on January 1, 1947.
Over the intervening 20-year period, the unit defini-
tion and appendices of included job classifications
were repeatedly amended to reflect newly
established job titles. The Petitioner has never
represented the engineering category employees in
issue under their present titles and they have not
been involved in collective bargaining.
As for the categories which Petitioner seeks to in-
clude in the unit herein, the present record is in-
adequate for determining whether all are profes-
sionally constituted, but it is apparent that many of
the employees are in fact professional employees
under the Act. While the existing unit of profes-
sional and nonprofessional employees was
established without a separate ballot among the
professionals, that was before passage of Section
9(b)(1) of the Act in 1947.' Were we to grant Peti-
tioner's request, however, we would now be adding
other professional employees without a separate
election as required by Section 9(b)(1). As the Act
precludes granting this relief, we shall dismiss the
petition for clarification.2
ORDER
It is hereby ordered that the petition to amend
and clarify certification be, and it hereby is,
dismissed.
I Sec 9(b)(1) provides ". That the Board shall not (1) decide that any
unit is appropriate for such purposes if such unit includes both profes-
sional employees and employees who are not professional employees un-
less a majority of such professional employees vote for inclusion in such
unit . "
L See Lockheed Aircraft Corporation, 155 NLRB 702, 713, cf A 0
Smith Corporation , 166 NLRB 845
168 NLRB No. 42