Mixermobile Manufacturers, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Feb 13, 1958

119 N.L.R.B. 1617 (N.L.R.B. 1958)

MIXERMOBILE MANUFACTURERS, INC. 1617
voting group votes for the Petitioner, they will be taken to have
indicated a desire to constitute a separate bargaining unit, and the
Regional Director conducting the elections herein is instructed to
issue as to each group a certification of representatives to the Peti-
tioner. In the event a majority of employees in any voting group
votes for the Intervenor, the Board finds their inclusion in the respec-
tive, existing production and maintenance units to be appropriate and
the Regional Director will issue a certification of results of election,
as to each group, to such effect.
[Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication.]
Mixermobile Manufacturers, Inc. and Local No. 11, Office Em-
ployees International Union, AFL-CIO, Petitioner. Case No.
36-RC-,1304. February 13, 1958
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before E. O. Strumpf, hear-
ing officer. 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-
member panel [Members Rodgers, Bean, and Jenkins].
Upon the entire i ecord 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 certain
employees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of employees of the Employer. -
4. Petitioner originally sought a unit of all office and clerical
employees. At the hearing, Petitioner stated as its alternative posi-
tion that it would represent a residual unit of all "time-clock" em-
ployees 1 not represented by any other labor organization, `or any unit
which the Board finds appropriate. The Employer's position is that
the only appropriate unit is one consisting of clerical employees
housed in the main office of one of its buildings -
The 'Employer is engaged in the manufacture of mobile cement
mixers in Portland, Oregon, where its plant consists of several build-
1 As'the record fails to show whjch employees, if any, are currently represented by any
bargaining agent we find , no basis for considering the Petitioner 's alternative residual unit.
119 NLRB-No 201 r
476321-58-vol 119-103
1618 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ings. The main office is located on the ground floor of one of the
buildings, in which are located the accounting, sales, and export de-
partments. The clerical employees in the main office are the book-
keeper, the bookkeeping machine operator, the sales secretary and the
telephone-receptionist. The mail clerk sorts and distributes mail, has
charge of outgoing mail and does some typing of Kardex cards. The
balance of her time, about 50 percent of her working day, is spent
in assisting other departments including printing, although she does
not assist in the printing processes. We find that the mail clerk is an
office clerical. Secretary to the purchasing agent I buys standard
vendor items such as locks, bolts, washers, and standard hardware
items from local dealers. She prepares but does not sign purchase
orders. She also types cards for the Kardex clerk and takes dictation
and letters from the purchasing agent and others in the engineering
department. We find that the secretary to the purchasing agent is
an office clerical. As all these employees are office clericals perform-
ing the usual and customary functions of their classifications, they
may constitute an appropriate unit.
The Petitioner would include other employees in the same group
with the office clericals, while the Employer objects to such inclusion.
Seven of these employees work in the parts department. Contrary
to the contention of the Employer, we find that certain employees
in the parts department and in the engineering department perform
the work of plant clericals and may form a second appropriate
unit. These employees are the parts expediters, parts coordinator,
and pricing clerk all of whom spend a considerable part of their
time in the plant or engineering department. The secretary to the
pricing clerk and the two parts clericals work as a team with the
other employees in the parts department filling customers' orders
for parts replacements. All of these employees properly belong
within a plant clerical unit.
Kardex clerk sets up the Kardex control system for raw mate-
rials control and operates it. His duties are to keep a running inven-
tory of raw materials on hand and to check all invoices received
against the packing slips and original purchase orders. He does
not physically receive the merchandise but works with the receivig
clerk. He goes to the plant regularly and receives information from
the receiving department. Under these circumstances, we find that
the Kardex clerk is a plant clerical.
The production control clerk, engineering clerks, and timekeeper
work in the engineering building, which is about 50 or 60 feet from
the main plant. The production control clerk (Loomis ) keeps records
2 Neither party seeks to include the purchasing agent in any unit , as it appears from
the record that the purchasing agent, who has an office in the same building as the engi-
neering department , exercises managerial responsibility.
MIXERMOBILE MANUFACTURERS, INC. 1619
and runs prints and makes regular checks of materials in the plant.
He works closely with employees in the parts department and has
little or no association with the employees in the main office.
The Employer claims that the engineering clerks are skilled drafts-
men and should be excluded as technical employees. One clerk
(Stewart) has been gathering information for preparing a parts book
for which he will make the drawings. He has prepared some draw-
ings and has had them reproduced by the printers, some of which.
are distributed with the Company's products. Hamblin, the other
engineering clerk, has his office in the plant where he keeps all printed
material. He is engaged in preparing a general parts book to match
each machine that comes off the line, to which he attaches an inspec-
tion report, a lubrication report, and a warranty card. While it
appears from the record that some drafting work is required of
each of these employees, there is insufficient evidence on which to
make a finding that they are technical employees. As they are engaged
mainly in keeping records and accumulating information, we find
that they are plant clericals and include them in the plant clerical
unit.
The timekeeper checks all timecards with foremen, calculates rates
of pay of plant employees, handles insurance, holiday pay, etc., and
is responsible for all computations from which the payroll is made up.
He also has a list of vacancies and receives applicants for employment.
He does no hiring on his own authority but in effect acts as a clearing
house for the district manager and shop superintendent. We find that
the timekeeper is a plant clerical.
The parties agree to the exclusion of the handyman. While it is
not clear that the Petitioner seeks to represent either the printers or
the photographer except as they would be a part of a residual unit,
which we find inappropriate, these employees have no interests in
common with either the office or plant clericals and we therefore
exclude them.
Traffic manager has the overall responsibility for arranging trans-
portation for the Company's products. He calls in flatcars, truck and
trailer outfits, and arranges for transport by ship where necessary.
He handles shipments to Alaska and, Canada. The Union agrees to
his exclusion.
According to the uncontradicted testimony, the assistant export
manager is familiar with European dealerships and problems and
works together with the export manager in preparing contracts.
Although she types contracts, she works with the export manager in
compiling the information to be incorporated in the contracts, assists
in determining policy and in drafting dealership contracts. We
therefore find she is a managerial employee.
16 ", 0 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Accordingly, we find that the following employees of the Employer
constitute units appropriate for purposes of collective bargaining
within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
Unit 1 (office clerical unit)
All office clerical employees at the Employer's Portland, Oregon,
plant, including the bookkeeper, bookkeeping machine operator, sales
secretary, telephone-receptionist, mail clerk and secretary to the pur-
chasing agent, but excluding all other employees, professional
employees, guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act.'
Unit 2 (plant clerical employees)
All plant clerical employees at the Employer's Portland, Oregon,
plant, including parts department employees, parts expediters, parts
coordinator, pricing clerks, Kardex clerk, production control clerk,
engineering clerks, and timekeeper, but excluding all other employees,
professional employees, guards and supervisors as defined in the Act.
[Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication.]
3 The parties agreed to exclude the following classifications : the comptroller , assistant
sales manager , export manager , parts and service manager , and production manager.
Felix Bonura and George Weidert , d/b/a Felix Bonura Com-
pany (Magnolia Broilers ) and United Packinghouse Workers
of America , AFL-CIO, Petitioner. Case No. 15-RC-1671.
February 13, 1958
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND CERTIFICATION
OF REPRESENTATIVES
Pursuant to a Decision and Direction of Election herein issued on
October 4, 1957,1 an election by secret ballot was conducted on October
22,1957, under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director
for the Fifteenth Region, among the employees in the unit therein
found appropriate by the Board. After the election, the Regional
Director served upon the parties a tally of ballots which showed that
of approximately 152 eligible voters, 137 ballots were cast, of which
110 were cast for the Petitioner, 24 against the Petitioner, , and 3 were
challenged. The challenged ballots were not sufficient to affect the
results of the election.
On October 25, 19577 the Employer filed timely objections to conduct
affecting the results of the election. In accordance with the Board's
1 Not reported in printed volumes of Board Decisions and Orders.
119 NLRB No. 203.