Revere Copper and Brass, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 29, 1946

69 N.L.R.B. 989 (N.L.R.B. 1946)

In the Matter of REVERE COPPER AND BRASS, INCORPORATED. EMPLOYER
and OFFICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION, LOCAL 22, A. F. OF
L., PETITIONER
Case No. 5-R-2'362.-Decided July 29, 1946
Messrs. John H. Eikenberg and E. G. Skavdahl , of Rome, N. Y.,
for the Employer.
Mr. J. Howard Hicks, of Washington, D. C., for the Petitioner.
Mr. F. G. Dunn, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at Balti-
more, Maryland, on June 4, 1946, before Charles B. Slaughter, Trial
Examiner. The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are
free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations
Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
Revere Copper and Brass, Incorporated, is a Maryland corporation
engaged in the processing and manufacture of aluminum, magnesium,
brass, and copper products. In connection with these operations it
maintains and operates two plants located in Chicago, Illinois, two
in Rome, New York, one in Detroit, Michigan, one in New Bedford,
Massachusetts, and two in Baltimore, Maryland. The Canton plant
at Baltimore, Maryland, is the only one involved in this proceeding.
During the first quarter of 1946 the Employer purchased raw
materials for use at its Canton plant valued in excess of $2,640,800,
approximately 59 percent of which was shipped to the plant from
points outside the State of Maryland. During the same period the
Employer manufactured products at the Canton plant valued in ex-
cess of $4,223,600, approximately 89 percent of which was shipped to
points outside the State of Maryland.
69 N. L. it B., No. 122.
989
990 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the American
Federation of Labor claiming to represent employees of the Employer.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Employer refuses to recognize the Petitioner as the exclusive
bargaining representative of employees of the Employer until the
Petitioner has been certified by the Board in an appropriate unit.
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the
representation of employees of the Employer, within the meaning of
Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNITS
A. Contentions of the parties
The Petitioner seeks a unit of all office and clerical employees, all
laboratory technicians, and all plant guards of the Employer at its
Canton plant, excluding all supervisory employees., As an alterna-
tive, in the event the Board finds that the employees outlined above do
not properly fall in a single unit, they request three separate units of
office and clerical, employees; all laboratory technicians; and all plant
guards. The Employer contends that the unit is inappropriate, first,
because the employees sought herein do not by themselves constitute
an appropriate bargaining group in view of their functional integra-
tion with employees of the same categories employed at the Employ-
er's main plant at Baltimore, Maryland, herein called the Tube plant,
and secondly, because the employees sought herein consist of hetero-
geneous groups that should not be represented in a single unit. The
inclusion or exclusion of certain categories is also in dispute.
B. Functional considerations
The Employer's Tube plant and Canton plant are approximately 41/2
miles apart and together comprise the Baltimore Division. The Can-
ton plant manufactures sheet and roll copper, and magnesium; the
Tube plant manufactures aluminum, copper, and brass tubes. Their
production processes are not interdependent. The Baltimore Divi-
sion is under the executive direction of a vice president. Under the
vice president are a general works manager in.charge of division
production, and a treasurer in charge of division administration, both
1 There are approximately 67 employees in the appropriate unit.
REVERE COPPER AND BRASS, INCORPORATED 991
of whom have their offices at the Tube plant. Although the industrial
engineering and methods departments are under the general over-all
supervision of the general works manager, they come under the imme-
diate supervision of the assistant public works manager, in charge
of the Canton plant. The pay roll, cost, personnel, engineering, and
production departments at both the Canton and Tube plants are under
the general supervision of the treasurer. However, the employees in
the afore-mentioned departments at the Canton plant are under the
immediate supervision of assistant department heads, whose authority
includes hiring and firing subject to review by the central office. It
is conceded that these assistant department heads handle employment
problems independently and rarely are subject to being overruled by
higher authority. Although the record indicates that a high percent-
age of the present employees at the Canton plant at one time worked in
the Tube plant, this is due to the fact that the Canton plant began
operation only a few years ago and former employees of the Tube plant
formed a nucleus for the new organization. However, there is little
or no interchange of employees between the two plants.
There has been no history of collective bargaining among the em-
ployees sought herein, and the Petitioner has confined its organization
to employees in the Canton plant. The production and maintenance
employees are presently being represented in separate units for the
Tube and Canton plants. In view of the physical segregation of the.
two plants, the separate supervision, the general absence of interchange
of employees, And the present state of union organization, we are of the
opinion that the employees of the Canton plant alone at this time may
constitute separate appropriate units as hereinafter determined.2
C. Composition o l the units
As indicated above, the Petitioner would prefer a single unit of
office and clerical employees, laboratory technicians, and plant guards,
whereas the Employer contends that these employees have nothing in
common either in the skill required or the type of work performed.
The plant guards are deputized, armed, and perform monitorial
functions. Their duties are clearly neither clerical nor technical in
nature. These employees are presently excluded from the production
and maintenance unit. In view of these factors, we shall establish a
separate unit of plant guards.
The record reveals that the Employer's requirements for its techni-
cal employees include either college training or its equivalent. It
further appears that the technical employees receive higher salaries
than clerical employees and that there is no interchange of personnel
between the two groups. In view of the disparity of background, work.
2 Matter of Ford Motor Company, 66 N. L. R. B. 1317.
992 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
and interests of the two groups of employees, we are of the opinion
that they may be most effectively represented in separate units.3
We shall, accordingly, establish one unit of plant guards, a second
unit of office and clerical workers, and a third unit of technical
employees.
D. O fee and clerical unit
The following employees are in dispute, the Petitioner desiring to
include them and the Employer contending that they should be
excluded.
Telephone operator: This employee performs the usual duties of
a telephone operator. There is nothing in the record to warrant the
Board's deviating from its usual. practice of including telephone
operators in an office and clerical unit.4 We shall include her in the
unit.
Typist clerk in the industrial engineering department: This em-
ployee does the typing for the industrial engineering department, and
it is contended that because of the fact that the industrial engineer is
often called upon to give his opinion on cost production, job descrip-
tions, job evaluations, and other matters pertaining to labor relations,
which opinions are typed by this employee, that she should be excluded
from the unit. However, there is no showing that the industrial en-
gineer exercises managerial functions in the field of labor relations.
All matters pertaining to labor relations are determined by the Em-
ployer's general office in Rome, New York. Recommendations from
the Canton and Tube plants come from the general works manager and
his assistants, based in some instances on the opinions of the industrial
engineer. Inasmuch as the typist clerk does not assist and act in a con-
fidential capacity to a person who exercises managerial functions in
the field of labor relations we shall include her in the unit.
Paymaster: This employee checks time cards to determine the
hours worked by employees, inserts the information on pay-roll cards,
prepares reports on the number of employees working on each shift
and absentee reports on salaried employees, keeps accounts for pay-
roll deductions, and has charge of the Employer's petty cash fund.
The Board has consistently held that access to pay-roll information
alone was not sufficient to bring an employee within its definition of
a confidential employee.5 We shall, therefore, include him in the
unit.
Secretary in the research laboratory: The duties of this employee
are clearly the routine secretarial tasks in regard to research matters
a Matter of Aluminum Company of America, 61 N. L. R. B. 1066.
4 Matter of Gould & Eberhardt Company, 66 N. L . It. B. 1326.
5 Matter of Aluminum, Company of America, supra.
REVERE COPPER AND BRASS, INCORPORATED 993
in her department. Therefore, we find that she is not a confidential
employee, and we shall include her in the unit.
Secretary in the personnel department: This employee is the sec-
retary to the assistant personnel manager in charge of the Canton
personnel office. Besides her usual secretarial duties, she attends
management conferences on labor relations policies and types up the
minutes of such conferences. She performs a similar function with
regard to grievance cases that reach the personnel department level.
In view of these functions, we find her to be a confidential employee
and we shall exclude her from the unit."
Foreman, shipping "K" siding: The record indicates that this em-
ployee has the authority to effectively recommend changes in the
status of employees under his supervision; we shall, therefore, exclude
him from the unit.
E. The technical unit
Laboratory technicians, shift leaders, laboratory assistants,
spectroscopists, mill-methods man, scrap-control man, and employees
in the engineering department: The Employer did not contest the
inclusion of these employees as supervisory or confidential, contend-
ing only that because of their educational and technical requirements,
they should not be included in a unit with office and clerical employ-
ees. Inasmuch as their background, work, and interests are similar,
we shall include them in the separate unit of technical employees.
Senior time-study engineers: These two employees are under the
supervision of the industrial engineer. The general wage level of
employees is set by collective bargaining but the Company has an in-
centive wage plan, approved in their collective bargaining contract
with the production and maintenance workers, which represents on
the average about 25 percent of an employee's wage. The time-study
engineers set the standards and thus determine the amount of bonus
to be paid to the individual employee, subject to review by the in-
dustrial engineer. In the event an employee is dissatisfied with his
bonus, the time-study engineer has a conference with him and either
adjusts the bonus or explains why the first computation was correct.
If the employee is still dissatisfied and resorts to grievance procedure,
the time-study engineer must appear at the grievance committee
meeting on behalf of the Company and defend his action in determin-
ing the employee's bonus. We are of the opinion that the duties
and interest of these senior time-study engineers differ substantially
from those of the other employees in either the technical or clerical
units. Accordingly we shall exclude them .'
6 Matter of Midland Bank of Minneapolis , 68 N. L. R. B. 580.
7 Matter of Wagner Electric Corporation, 67 N. L. It. B. 1104.
701592-47-vol. 69----64
994 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
We find that the following employees of the Employer at its Canton
plant, excluding all supervisory employees with authority to hire,
promote, discharge discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status
of employees, or effectively recommend such action,' constitute separate
units appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining, within the
meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
(1) All plant guards.
(2) All office and clerical employees, including the telephone opera-
tor, the typist clerk in the industrial engineering department, the
paymaster, and the secretary in the' research laboratory, but excluding
the senior time study engineers,the secretary in the personnel depart-
ment, and the foreman at the shipping "K" siding.
(3) All research laboratory technicians, the shift leaders, labora-
tory assistants, spectroscopists, the scrap-control man, the mill-meth-
ods man, and employees in the engineering department, but excluding
the senior time-study engineers.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the put-
poses of collective bargaining with Revere Copper and Brass, Incorpo-
rated, Baltimore, Maryland, an election by secret ballot shall be con-
ducted as early as possible, but not later than thirty (30) days from
the date of this Direction, under the direction and supervision of the
Regional Director for the Fifth Region, acting in this matter as agent
for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Article III,
Sections 10 and 11, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regu-
lations-Series 3, as amended, among the employees in the units
found appropriate in Section IV, above, who were employed during
the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of this Direction,
including employees who did not work during said pay-roll period
because they were ill or on vacation or temporarily laid off, and includ-
ing employees in the armed forces of the United States who present
themselves in person at the polls, but excluding those employees who
have since quit or been discharged for cause and have not been rehired
or reinstated prior to the date of the election, to determine whether
or not they desire to be represented by Office Employees International
Union, Local 22, A. F. of L., for the purposes of collective bargaining.
MR. JonN M. HOUSTON took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Direction of Election.
" The parties agreed that the industrial engineer, the research director , the production
control men , and the chief engineer should be excluded as supervisory employees . We shall
exclude them.