NCR Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 19, 1978

236 N.L.R.B. 215 (N.L.R.B. 1978)

NCR CORPORAT1ION
NCR Corporation and Lc.aal Union No. 9 (ACA) In-
ternational Brotherhood of Teamsters, Petitioner.'
Case 20-RC 14388
May 19. 1978
DECISION ON REVIEW AND ORDER
BY MN1MBERS JFNKINS. PENI.I.O. AND[ MIlRPtly
On November 1, 1977, the Regional Director for
Region 20 issued a Decision and Direction of Elec-
tion in the above-entitled proceeding in which she
found appropriate the Petitioner's requested unit of
all field engineers at the Employer's San Francisco
branch office. Thereafter, in accordance with Section
102.67 of the National Labor Relations Board Rules
and Regulations, Series 8, as amended, the Employer
filed a timely request for review of the Regional Di-
rector's decision contending that in finding the peti-
tioned-for unit appropriate the Regional Director de-
parted from established Board precedent and made
findings of fact which are clearly erroneous. The Pe-
titioner then filed a statement in opposition to the
Employer's request for review.
On December 14, 1977, the National Labor Rela-
tions Board by telegraphic order granted the request
for review and stayed the election pending decision
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 reviewed the entire record in this
case with respect to the issue under review and
makes the following findings:
The Employer is a Maryland corporation engaged
in the manufacture, sale, and service of business ma-
chines, electronic data processing equipment, and re-
lated services and supplies throughout the United
States with its principal place of business in Daston,
Ohio. The sales and service of the Employer's ma-
chines are handled by its domestic marketing divi-
sion which, as a result of an administrative reorgani-
zation effective January I, 1974, is divided into
approximately six "vocations," including field engi-
neering. The field engineering vocation is itself divid-
ed into 14 separate geographical regions, each head-
ed by a regional director, which are then subdivided
into approximately 98 districts. each having a district
manager. Each district is further divided into one or
more branch offices.
i Ihe namnes of the F mployer .and Petlitiner i ppe.l r a., amended at the
hearing
The Employer's Pacific Region No. I includes the
San Francisco field engineering district which covers,
generally. 14 counties along California's northwest
coast. IThe district maintains an office in San Fran-
cisco and has six branch offices located at San Fran-
cisco, Oakland, Foster City. San Jose, Monterey, and
Santa Rosa, and a subfacility located at Eureka
which is connected to the Santa Rosa branch office.
I he district office is centrally located, sharing office
facilities with the San Francisco branch office and
being approximately 15 miles from Oakland: 25 from
Foster ('ity: 55 from San Jose and Santa Rosa: 130
from Monterey. and 285 from Eureka. All branch
offices have a branch manager. except San Francisco
which is staffed intead by three field managers who
have the salme authorit, as branch managers.-
There are 130 field engineering employees in the
San Francisco district 30 at San Francisco: 25 at
Oakland: 26 at [Foster City: 28 at San Jose: 8 at
Monterey: 10 at Santa Rosa: and 3 at Eureka. The
Petitioner seeks to represent in a separate unit the 30
field engineering employees at the San Francisco
branch office. The Employer contends that only a
districtwide unit including all field engineering em-
plo)ees in its San Francisco district is appropriate.
There is no history of collective bargaining among
the employees in the units involved herein.
The Employer's operations are characterized by a
high degree of centralized control and administration
at the district level. Thus, the San Francisco district
manager is responsible for administering all field en-
gineering operations in his district's territory. At his
office. the district manager maintains the personnel
and pasroll records for each branch, inventory rec-
ords for the entire district. and the overall district
budget. [le personally xisits all branch offices ap-
proxinmately once a month and speaks to the branch
managers by telephone on a daily basis. He has final
authority over the operations of the individual
branch offices. including the authority to hire and
fire. handles all major disciplinary matters, sets wage
rates, grants promotions and demotions and perma-
nent or temporary transfers, as well as employee
training requests. He also has complete authority to
determine the boundaries of each branch within his
district. to make the initial assignment of an employ-
ee to a branch location, to establish extra shifts. and
to make performance appraisal ratings and salary ad-
justments. The district manager is also responsible
for allocating the district's authorized manpower lev-
els 'ithin the district, as well as allocating inventory
and service vehicles among the branch offices. Hle
must also authorize all major capital expenditures
2 1hcre is al- a held nin ge¢ in the Oakland, San .hoe. and I o-er CI(
hranch offlh t,.
236 Nl.RB No. 29
215
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
and purchases. including the purchase and major re-
pair of company vehicles.
On the other hand, the authority of branch and
field managers is limited to such areas as setting va-
cation schedules, granting holidays and other time
off, approving overtime, and arranging temporart
transfers with other branch managers whenever mu-
tually agreeable. Branch and field managers hav e no
power to take any independent action with respect to
the personnel matters entrusted to the district man-
ager, such as the hiring, firing, or promotion of em-
ployees, and their recommendations in these areas
must be submitted to and approved by the district
manager.
The record also reflects the integrated operation of
the branch offices. Thus, although the field
engineer's basic duty is to respond to customers' calls
to repair or install the Emloyer's equipment within
his branch, frequently employees from one branch
are assigned to a customer's call in another branch.3
These temporary assignments are due primal-il? to
the unequal distribution of employees throughout the
district who possess particular skills, 4 overlapping va-
cation schedules. employee illness, and heavy cus-
tomer demand within a particular branch. Tempo-
rarv transfers are usually on a one-call basis but mas
last as long as 2 weeks. And when a field engineer is
on assignment to another branch, he often contacts
and works with other engineers within that branch.
especially those who have previously worked on the
particular equipment to which he has been assigned).
District employees have also been permanently
transferred from one branch office to another.
A San F:rancisco field engineer testified tha li hhad been asIigrlcd t
calls in other branches Ito or three inmes during 1976. A former ()aklalild
field engineer stated Ihit lie had worked In other branches ,ithin the dlitrict
five or six times during his last year ais n engineer I hus, if all 131) dlitrlot
field engineers make i;nxxhere frnoml two six teinlpilr;lr transfers ;1 \e1.
emplolsce interchange anllong the various branches occurr .apprlrxiliil;li 5
to 13 tiles per neek
4 he approlimatelN 310 lectronic daita processing ( I)P) cnlgi neei 1i tile
San Francisco district are cinctentrated at the Foster (Cits branch Slffice,
with onlv 2 EI)P trained emrploees alt Monlere., 2 at Santa Rosa, aiind I it
Fureka. In addition. the San Francisco district has three field engineerilig
specialist one in Oakland who is an expert on Ihe Emploxer' 255 726
svstem. an electronic cash register with computer, and ltvo in I oiter (' Its.
one being an on-line specialist and the other a computer specialist .Because
of their specialized training, Ihese engineers are subject to assignlment all -
where in the district rwhen needed.
In addition, three branch offices. San Francisco.
Oakland, and Foster City, dispatch their employees
after 5 p.m. on weekdays and on weekends and holi-
days through a shared answering service. The other
branch offices, however, have their own individual
answering service. Also, all field engineering employ-
ees within the district, who have been designated as
branch instructors, are sent for new product training
at the Employer's Day ton, Ohio, training center. The
remaining employees are trained in groups of two or
four persons in classes held at the district office with-
out regard to branch assignment. Moreover, all field
engineering employees throughout the district receive
the same fringe benefits and are paid an hourly wage
rate and their hours for each work shift are the same.
Upon these facts we find that the requested single
branch unit is inappropriate for the purpose of col-
lective bargaining. In reaching this conclusion, we
rel? particularly on the evidence of the centralized
management of labor matters at the district level, the
limited personal authority of each branch or field
manager, the integrated operation of the branch of-
fices, the frequent interchange of employees, and the
fact that employee functions and terms and condi-
tions of employment are identical. Kirlin's Inc. of
(cntral Illinoi., 227 NLRB 1220 (1977); Laws.Yon Milk
Compamn'y1 Divli.sion. on, olidated Foodsv Corporation,
213 NLRB 360 (1974); Home Erterminating Conpca-
n., 160 NLRB 1480 (1966). We have also given due
consideration to the evidence of geographical separa-
tion of the branches but, in view of the foregoing
factors, we are unable to give it controlling signifi-
cance.
As we have found the requested unit to be inap-
propriate. and as the Petitioner has made no alterna-
tive unit request, we shall dismiss the petition.
ORDER
It is hereby ordered that the petition be, and it
hereby is. dismissed.
I hat iocca;lronall s there ina'x be no contactl heblneen the visiting field
engineer and other branch emtplosees is not significant in slew of the fact
thi;ll ordinaril ;Ia field engineer respoind Io a cusrtomerxs call w lithin his ow,n
hranch on an indiidual basis
216