Hercules Powder Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 21, 1953

104 N.L.R.B. 259 (N.L.R.B. 1953)

HERCULES POWDER COMPANY (SUNFLOWER ORDNANCE WORKS) 259
2. The Teamsters submitted a statement from an employee of the Company which declares
that on or about January 4, 1953, an individual , unknown to the employee , stated to him that he
was sent by the Meat Cutters and would give him fifty dollars to swing his votes to the Meat
Cutters The employee replied that he would not desert his Union, the Teamsters . The next
morning , upon arrival at the plant , the same employee told a Meat Cutters' stewardess of the
offer , to which the stewardess replied that if he still wanted to swing votes to the Meat Cutters,
she would see that he received the fifty dollars.
The employee who was offered the money was not made available for interview and, accord-
ing to Mr Reynolds of the Teamsters , is unwilling or unable to make an attempt to identify
the individual making the offer
The Meat Cutters' stewardess denies that the employee involved ever spoke to her about the
Meat Cutters paying for votes
There is insufficient evidence of any offer of money to deliver votes and, therefore, the
undersigned Regional Director recommends that this objection be overruled.
3. Teamsters' president , Reynolds , alleges that he encountered great difficulty prior to the
election in obtaining admission to the Company ' s Denton , Maryland , plant in order to check the
Board ' s election notices . Further Reynolds alleges, "Ihaveknown of occasions when Mr. Jack
Birl, President of Local No . 199, A . F. of L . was given the privilege of entering and leaving
the plant at will and that on these occasions , has conferred in the private office of management
and at times was given the opportunity to call his stewards off their jobs to take part in the
discussions."
The Company denies that Birl was treated anymore favorably than Reynolds insofar as entry
into its plants for the conduct of legitimate union business was concerned.
There is no evidence that Birl was permitted in the plants to engage in any activity which
would affect the results of the election while Reynolds was denied this privilege . The under-
signed recommends that this objection be overruled.
For reasons stated in paragraph 1, above , the undersigned recommends that the election
held on January 5, 1953 , be set aside and that a new election be ordered
HERCULES POWDER COMPANY (SUNFLOWER ORDNANCE
WORKS) and INTERNATIONAL HOD CARRIERS', BUILDING
AND COMMON LABORERS' UNION OF AMERICA, PRODUC-
TION EMPLOYEES' LOCAL NO. 605, SUNFLOWER ORD-
NANCE WORKS, AFL, Petitioner . Case No. 17-RC-1523.
April 21, 1953
DECISION AND ORDER
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Harry Irwig,
hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the
hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby
affirmed. i
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-member panel [Chairman Herzog and Members Styles
and Peterson].
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds:
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning
of the Act.
2. The labor organization involved claims to represent em-
ployees of the Employer.
t At the hearing , the Employer moved to dismiss the petition on the ground that the unit
requested by the Petitioner is inappropriate. The hearing officer referred the motion to the
Board . For the reasons set forth infra, the motion is hereby granted.
104 NLRB No. 25.
260 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
3. No question affecting commerce exists concerning the
representation of employees of the Employer within the mean-
ing of Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act, for the following reasons:
The Petitioner seeks to represent a unit of the Employer's
telephone operators. The Employer contends that the requested
unit is inappropriate because the telephone operators constitute
only a segment of a larger group of office clerical employees
in its accounting department.
The Petitioner represents a unit of the Employer's produc-
tion and maintenance employees. There is no history of collec-
tive bargaining for any of the Employer's nonproductive employ-
ees.
The Employer is engaged in the production of military ex-
plosives at a Government-owned plant at Lawrence, Kansas.
The Employer's operations are organized into various depart-
ments, which are divided into divisions, and the latter, in turn,
are divided into sections. t The employees involved in this pro-
ceeding are part of the general services section of the Em-
ployer's accounting department.
The employees sought by the Petitioner work in the telephone
office, which is housed in a separate building.4 There are 13
telephone operators, 1 teletype clerk,$ 4 telephone shift super-
visors, 1 assistant chief operator, and 1 chief telephone oper-
ator working in the telephone office. Althoughthese employees
work under separate immediate supervision, they are subject
to the same general supervision as the other employees in the
general services section. The telephone office regularly
operates on three shifts. Although there are a limited number
of employees in the other service departments who work on all
shifts, most of them work on the day shift only.
Identical personnel policies are applied to all nonexempt
salaried employees, and the Employer has a uniform wage-rate
system and job evaluation plan for all these employees. All
enjoy the same employee benefits and privileges such as
vacations, insurance, medical services, and welfare plans.
The employees sought by the Petitioner do not constitute a
traditional bargaining group such as we have recognized may
be separately represented. It is clear that the telephone oper-
ators constitute but a segment of a broader group of office
clerical employees with similar working conditions and inter-
ests. We are of the opinion that the interests of the telephone
operators are not sufficiently severable and distinct from those
of the Employer's other accounting department employees to
2 There are 6 nonproductive departments on the same level as the accounting department,
and 3 general divisions in the accounting department. The general accounting division is
divided into 3 sections , 1 of which is the general services section.
S There are five units in the general services section, including the stenographic , filing,
telephones , message center , and office machinery and reproduction.
4The telephone building was constructed as a separate fireproof building for security
reasons . One of the reasons it is set off from the other buildings is that in case of a disaster,
as a bad fire or an explosion, the Employer will be able to maintain all types of communica-
tions necessary.
sThe parties agree that the teletype operator should be excluded from any unit of telephone
operators.
SOUTHERN FRUIT DISTRIBUTORS, INC. 261
warrant establishing them as a separate unit. The only apparent
reason for the Petitioner's request for a unit of only the
telephone operators, is the extent of its organization of the
Employer's service employees. Section 9 (c) (5) of the Act
precludes a unit finding on that basis alone. 6 We therefore find
that the unit requested by the Petitioner is not appropriate.
Accordingly, we shall dismiss the petition.
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition filed herein be,
and it hereby is, dismissed.
6Hampton Roads Broadcasting Corporation (WGH), 98 NLRB 1090; Kress Dairy, Inc., 98
NLRB 369.
SOUTHERN FRUIT DISTRIBUTORS, INC. and INTERNATIONAL
UNION OF UNITED BREWERY, FLOUR, CEREAL, SOFT
DRINK & DISTILLERY WORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO,
Petitioner . Case No. 10 -RC-1893. April 21, 1953
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND CERTIFICATION OF
REPRESENTATIVES
Pursuant to a Decision and Direction of Election issued by
the Board on August 16, 1952 (not reported in printed volumes
of Board decisions), an -election was held among certain em-
ployees of the Employer under the supervision of the Regional
Director on January 16, 1953. Upon the conclusion of the elec-
tion a tally of ballots was furnished to the parties showing that
out of approximately 371 eligible voters, 163 cast their ballots
for and 116 against the American Federation of Labor, the
Intervenor.'
Thereafter on January 21, 1953, the Employer filed objec-
tions to conduct affecting the results of the election alleging
in substance that: (1) The Intervenor by means of a sound
truck or loudspeaker electioneered within the hearing of its
employees eligible to vote, during the time that the balloting was
taking place; (2) the Intervenor reimbursed certain employees
for expenses asserted to have been incurred in union activities,
without requiring an accounting; (3) the Intervenor gave finan-
cial benefits to certain employees to induce them to work on
behalf of the Union; (4) it persuaded former union members to
seek reemployment in the Employer's plant for the purpose of
persuading and coercing employees to vote for the Union; (5) it
distributed benefits, consisting of meals and refreshments, to
induce the employees to vote for the Union; and (6) it promised
employees that, if selected as their representative, it would
get them a wage increase.
'About 10 days before the election the Petitioner requested and the Regional Director
granted permission to have its name removed from the ballot.
104 NLRB No. 39.
283230 0 - 54 - 18