Potomac Electric Power Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 20, 1952

99 N.L.R.B. 219 (N.L.R.B. 1952)

POTOMAC ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY 219
Accordingly, we find that all inside employees at the Employer's
Pittburgh, Pennsylvania, operations, excluding office, clerical, pro-
fessional, and outside employees, guards, and supervisors as defined
in the Act, constitute a unit appropriate for purposes of collective
bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this
volume.]
POTOMAC ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY and CLIFFORD W. SCHMITZ, JR.,
PETITIONER , and ELECTRIC UTILITIES UNION OF WASHINGTON, D. C.,
Case No. 5-RD-66. May $0, 1952
Decision and Direction of Election
Upon a petition for decertification duly filed under Section 9 (c) of
the National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before David C.
Sachs, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hear-
ing 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 Houston, Murdock, and Styles].
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 Petitioner, an employee of the Employer, asserts that the
Union is no longer the representative, as defined in Section 9 (a) of
the Act, of the employees designated in the petition. The Union, a
labor organization, is the currently recognized representative of the
employees in question.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of the employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section
9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The Petitioner seeks to have the Union decertified as the bar-
gaining representative of all engineer A's, assistant engineers, junior
engineers, cost engineer A's, assistant cost engineers, junior cost
engineers, and engineer-surveyor. The Petitioner contends, and the
Union denies, that employees in the above categories are professional
employees within the meaning of Section 2 (12) of the Act, and that
such employees together constitute an appropriate unit separate from
the unit covered by the Union's contract with the Employer.2 The
Employer takes no position in this matter.
3 The name of the Union appears as amended at the hearing.
2 There is no contention that the contract constitutes a bar to this proceeding.
99 NLRB No. 29.
220 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
The Employer is engaged in the production, sale, and distribution
of electrical energy. The approximately 47 employees sought by the
Petitioner and 10 or 12 engineering aides constitute the Employer's
engineering staff." A Bachelor of Science degree in engineering,
usually electrical engineering, is required for all of these classifications
except the engineering aides.
Since 1937 the Union has been in contractual relationship with the
Employer for a company-wide unit including the employees'involved
in this proceeding.
Junior engineers, assistant engineers, engineer A's: The junior
engineers are recent engineering graduates who spend about a year
gaining experience in the various departments of the Employer. At
the conclusion of this training they are promoted to the classification
of assistant engineer. And after an additional 2 or 3 years they are
qualified for the position of engineer A. Although the work varies
in the different departments of the Employer, all engineer A's are
sufficiently well trained to design or lay out any project that is
assigned to them by their supervisors. The engineers in the planning
bureau study the entire electrical system of the Company with regard
to the distribution of load and power requirements and make general
plans for the expansion of facilities. These plans are, in turn, sent
to the distribution engineering department whose engineers are re-
sponsible for developing the details for the construction of new trans-
mission circuits, street lighting, traffic signs, conduits, and similar
projects. The engineering draftsmen draw up the necessary plans
for construction of substations, manholes, and 'overhead structures.
The generating department, which is composed of graduate mechani-
cal engineers, is responsible for the operation of existing power plants
as well as construction of new power plants and the equipment
therefor.
The engineer-surveyor leads a survey crew 4 on the more compli-
cated assignments which call for a knowledge of engineering as well
as electric utility equipment and construction methods. The crew's
experience ranges from 2 years of civil engineering courses and 4
years of surveying to high school graduates.
Junior cost engineers,5 assistant cost engineers, cost engineers: The
cost engineers keep the records of all of the Employer's property and
technical equipment for evaluation purposes. When jobs are com-
pleted, they analyze each one and distribute the costs thereof. They
furnish day-by-day cost information to the Employer's departments
and various governmental agencies. In addition, these engineers pre-
s As indicated infra, a survey crew of four employees is associated with the engineer-
surveyor.
4 Surveyor A, surveyor B, instrumentman , and chainman.
5 As there was no junior cost engineer employed at the time of the hearing , we are not
making any finding regarding the unit placement of this category.
POTOMAC ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY 221
pare special inventory and cost studies which, like their other duties,
require engineering knowledge and experience.
Commercial and governmental service junior, assistant, and A
engineers: The engineers in the commercial department render engi-
neering service to customers, particularly in such specialized fields of
activity as cooking, refrigeration and air-conditioning, and welding
and heat application. They make personal contacts and field inspec-
tions to determine customer requirements. They also make electrical
lay-outs and application sketches and consult with the electrical engi-
neering department to determine types of service available and the
feasibility of meeting the customers' service requirements. Similarly,
the function of the governmental service engineers is to deal with
District of Columbia and Federal officials with respect to many tech-
nical problems.
Engineering aides: As already noted, this group of employees do
not have a degree in engineering. However, some aides have taken
home-study courses and have completed 1 to 3 years of college engi-
neering.e Although many of the aides do a great deal of routine work,
a number of them handle some fairly difficult assignments. Thus,
while the beginner's rate is below that of junior engineer, the top
engineering aide is paid more than assistant engineers.
It is clear from the foregoing that the work of the engineers is
mainly intellectual and varied in character, involves' the constant
exercise of discretion and judgment, and requires the type of knowl-
edge customarily acquired in scientific courses in institutions of higher
learning. We find therefore that the engineers are professional
employees, within the meaning of the Act and 'may constitute a unit
appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining, and may prop-
erly be the subject of a decertification petition.7
There remains the question whether the engineering aides and the
survey crew should be included with the professional employees.
These employees perform work of a more routine nature and are, at
the most, highly skilled employees. Nor do they possess the same
additional qualifications as the engineers. We do not find that these
employees are professional employees. However, they have a close
community of interest with the engineers and, as the entire engineer-
ing group is composed predominantly of professional employees, we
shall include the engineering aides and the survey crew in this group.8
6 It is contemplated that two of these aides will be put in an engineering classification
when they receive their degree.
7 The Arthur A. Johnson Corporation and Mason and Hanger Company , Incorporated,
97 NLRB 1466; Mountain States Telephone and Telegraph Company, 83 NLRB, 773 ;
E. It. Squibb & sons, 83 NLRB 792; Union Electric Power Company, 83 NLRB 872.
e Federal Telecommunications Laboratories , Inc, 92 NLRB 1395; Boeing Airplane Com-
pany, 86 NLRB 369; Mountain States Telephone and Telegraph Company, supra.
222 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS. BOARD
Accordingly, we shall direct an election by secret ballot to be held
among all junior engineers, assistant engineers, and engineer A's at
the Employer's plant in Washington, D. C., Maryland, and Virginia,
including cost engineers,9 commercial and governmental service exgi-,
neers, engineering aides, survey crew, engineer-surveyor,10 but exclud-
ing all other employees of the Employer and all supervisors as defined
in the Act."- If the employees in the voting group do not select the
Union, the Union will be decertified as to them; if, on the other, hand,
they select the Union, they will be taken to have indicated their de-
sire to be included with the nonprofessional employees in the over-
all unit now.represented by the Union.
'[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this
volume.]
0 See footnote 5, supra, as to the junior cost engineers.
10 As the record contains insufficient evidence to determine whether this individual is a
supervisor , we shall permit him to vote subject to challenge.
11 As the voting group described herein is larger than that sought by the Petitioner, the
Regional Director is authorized to permit the withdrawal of the ,petition upon the timely
request of the Petitioner.
SEMET-SOLVAY DIVISION, ALLIED CHEMICAL AND DYE CORPORATION and
UNITED GAS, COKE AND CHEMICAL WORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO. Case
No. 9-CA-415. May 21, 1952
Decision and Order
On November 14, 1951, Trial Examiner Alba B. Martin issued his
Intermediate Report in the above-entitled proceeding, finding that the
Respondent had engaged in and was engaging in certain unfair labor
practices and recommending that it cease and desist therefrom and
take certain affirmative action,,as`set forth in the copy of the Inter-
mediate Report attached hereto. Thereafter, the Respondent filed
exceptions to the Intermediate Report and a supporting brief.
The Board 1 has reviewed the rulings made by the Trial Examiner
and finds that no prejudicial error was committed. The rulings made
by the Trial Examiner are hereby affirmed. The Board has con-
sidered the Intermediate Report, the exceptions and brief,2 and the
1 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].
2 The Respondent's request for oral argument is hereby denied because the record and
the exceptions and brief, in our opinion , adequately present the issues and the positions of
the parties.
99 NLRB No. 48.