Roane-Anderson Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 21, 1949

83 N.L.R.B. 30 (N.L.R.B. 1949)

In the Matter of ROANE-ANDERSON COMPANY, EMPLOYER and LOCAL
UNION 760, INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS,
AFL, PETITIONER
In the Matter of ROANS-ANDERSON COMPANY, EMPLOYER and LODGE
No. 555, INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS, PETITIONER
9
Cases Nos. 10-RC-395 and 10-RC-442, respectively .Decided
April 21,19.49
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
Upon separate petitions duly filed, a consolidated hearing was held
before Marion A. Prowell, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rul-
ings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are
hereby affirmed.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor
Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with
this case to a three-member panel [Chairman Herzog and Members
Reynolds and Gray]. - '
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the
National Labor Relations Act.
2. The Petitioner in Case No. 10-RC-395, herein called the IBEW ;
the Petitioner in Case No. 10-RC-442, herein called the IAM; United
Gas, Coke and Chemical Workers, CIO, Intervenor in Case No. 10-
RC-395, herein called the Chemical Workers; and the American Fed-
eration of Labor, represented by the Knoxville Building Trades Coun-
cil,( Intervenor in the consolidated case, herein called the Council, are
labor organizations claiming to represent employees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of employees of the Employer, within the meaning of Section 9
(c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
1 The IAM and the IBEW, although stipulating that the American Federation of Labor
was a labor organization , contended at the hearing that it could not be a proper bargaining
representative , because only an International Union or an affiliated local could so act. As
the AFL has bargained with the Employer , and intends to continue bargaining through its
representative , Knoxville Building Trades Council , on wages, hours , and working conditions
of employees of the Employer , we conclude that the AFL is here an appropriate bargaining
representative . Matter of American Fruit Growers, Incorporated, 75 N. L R B. 1157.
83 N. L. R. B., No. 2.
30
ROA1NTE-ANDERSON COMPANY 31
4. The appropriate unit :
The IBEW seeks a unit of all electricians and apprentices, linemen
and apprentices, electrical troublemen, groundmen, and electrical fore-
men and lineman foremen without authority to hire or discharge, who
are employed by the Employer at its Oak Ridge, Tennessee, operations.
The Chemical Workers agree that these employees constitute an appro-
priate bargaining unit. The IAM requests a unit of all machinists
and apprentices, millwrights doing machinists' work, and welders
whose operations are incidental to, and in furtherance of the machin-
ists' work, and machinist foremen without authority to hire or
discharge.
The Employer and the Council contend that only the present bar-
gaining unit, consisting of all employees working in positions on the
Employer's Manual Schedule, is appropriate. The Employer, how-
ever, would exclude from the unit, as supervisors, those foremen in
the proposed units who are being bargained for presently, while the
Council, although it has not made its position clear on the record,
presumably would leave the present unit unchanged.
The Employer, under contract with the Atomic Energy Commis-
sion, performs the maintenance and operation functions for the Oak
Ridge, Tennessee, town site and military reservation.. It provides the
municipal services of street maintenance, garbage collection, sewage
disposal, water supply, and fire and police protection. It also supplies
and transmits electric energy for the Oak Ridge area, ,and acts as the
exclusive leasing agent for all Government-owned residential and
commercial properties in the area, furnishing all maintenance
services in connection therewith.
Following certification of the American Federation of Labor as the
exclusive bargaining representative of the Employer's manual em-
ployees pursuant to a Board-conducted election,2 the Council repre-
sented the AFL in negotiating and executing a contract with the
Employer, which became effective February 24, 1947, for an initial
2-year term. The employees here sought to be represented by the
IBEW and the IAM have been included in the coverage of that
contract..
The unit sought by the IBEW includes all electrical and lineman
foremen, electricians, electrical: troublemen; linemen, groundmen,
electrician and linemen apprentices .3 . There are approximately 75
employees in this- proposed craft unit, divided between 3 of the 11
departments in which employees on the Employer's Manual Schedule
2 Matter of Roane-Anderson Company, 71 N. L. R. B. 266.
2 There are no persons presently classified as electrical troublemen or groundmen, their
work being done by employees in other classifications , which have been included in the
proposed unit.
32 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
are employed. In the building maintenance department are 8 fore-
men, 41 electricians and 12 apprentices, who do all the interior elec-
trical repair work in the houses, stores, and public building on the
Oak Ridge town site. The hospital department has 1 electrician as-
signed to it. In the utilities department are 2 electricians and a
foreman who are engaged in repair and maintenance work on the
pumps and motors in the filtration, water, steam, and sewage dis-
posal plants operated by that department. Also assigned to the util-
ities department are 2 foremen, 3 linemen, and 9 apprentices who
work exclusively on outside transmission and distribution lines.
Electricians and linemen are never interchanged, but electricians as-
signed to one department may occasionally be transferred elsewhere.
The Employer contends that the work of the electricians and linemen
is so different that they are, in effect, separate crafts whose combi-
nation in a single unit would be inappropriate. In spite, however,
of the admitted difference in the respective work of the electricians
and linemen, we believe that the basic skills involved in handling
electric current are the same for both groups, and that essentially
they are both parts of the same craft, which should be afforded the
opportunity of voting for separate representation.
In the unit sought by the JAM, there are nine machinists and two
machinist-foremen, who work in three machine shops located in vari-
ous parts bf the Oak Ridge area. They are proficient in the use of
machine tools ordinarily found in well-equipped machine shops, and
are required to work to the extremely close tolerances usually required
of skilled machinists. Although, on particular repair projects, the
machinists may work in close conjunction with skilled workmen of
other crafts, there is no interchange of functions between them.
There are also two employees classified as millwrights 4 who, the
IAM contends, are properly part of a craft unit of machinists. One
operates the saane machine tools, and works to the same close tolerances
required of the machinists. The other is a welder, about 80 percent
of whose time is spent in welding for the machinists exclusively.
These two work in one of the machine shops, and are under the super-
vision of the machinist foremen stationed there. It appears that the
machinists and one millwright have similar duties requiring the
same high degree of skill and are all part of the same traditional
craft group to whom the Board has customarily granted the oppor-
tunity of voting for separate representation. Because the work of
the millwright who welds almost exclusively for the machinists is
4 Golden and Gates.
ROANE-ANDERSON COMPANY 33
so closely allied to the work of that group, we shall include him in
the group proposed by the IAM 5
In support of its contention that the units proposed by the IBEW
and the IAM are not appropriate, the Employer points to the past
history of collective bargaining on a broader basis and to the pos-
sibility that severance might upset its basic wage policies. In apply-
ing the principles of craft severance, the Board has held that
bargaining history on a more inclusive basis is not, in itself, a con-
trolling factor. However, it has, in a few cases, denied craft severance
where there was an extremely high degree of integration among the
employees in a particular industry." The facts in this case do not
persuade us that this Employer's business is so highly integrated that
recognized craft groups must be denied an opportunity for separate
representation.'
As we noted above in discussing the unit contentions of the parties,
the Employer did not contest the inclusion of those foremen whom the
the Petitioners want to keep in the proposed units, when it negotiated
its contract following Board certification of the AFL in November
1946, before the Act was amended. The record discloses, however,
that these foremen do very little manual work, spending practically
all their time in direction of their subordinates. Although the record
is not clear as to their power to initiate or recommend changes in
status of employees, we are satisfied that they fall within the statutory
definition of "supervisor" because they are in complete, responsible
charge of their shops or crews and of the employees assigned thereto.
We shall direct that separate elections be held in the following
groups of employees at the Employer's operations at Oak Ridge,
Tennessee, excluding from each group all clerical and professional em-
ployees, guards, and supervisors within the meaning of the Act. We
shall defer our determination as to the appropriate unit or units pend-
ing the results of the election hereinafter directed.
(a) All electricians, electrical troublemen, linemen, groundmen,
electricians and lineman apprentices, but excluding all electrician and
lineman foremen.
° Matter of St. Regtis Paper Company, 80 N L. R B 570.
° Matter of National Tube Company, 76 N. L . R. B. 1199; Matter of Ford Motor Company
( Maywood Plant ), 78 N. L. R B 887.
7 In Matter of Roane-Anderson Company, supra , where we found in •1946 that all em-
ployees on the Employer 's Manual Schedule constituted an appropriate unit, we dismiss the
petition of the IAM for a unit composed of all the Employer 's mechanics , machinists, mill-
wrights , and their apprentices and helpers , because it had not been shown that these
employees constituted either a recognized craft group or a division or department of the
Employer 's operations . We are satisfied , however, that by limiting its unit as indicated
above, the IAM has demonstrated the feasibility of severance here
34 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
(b) All machinists and machinist apprentices, including the ma-
chinist classified as a millwright and the millwright-welder who welds
for the machinists, but excluding all machinist foremen.
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
As part of of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the
purposes of collective bargaining with the Employer, separate elec-
tions by secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not
later than 30 days from the date of this Direction, under the direction
and supervision of the Regional Director for the Tenth Region,
and subject to Sections 203.61 and 203.62 of National Labor Relations
Board Rules and Regulations-Series 5, as amended, among the em-
ployees in the voting groups described in paragraph numbered 4,
above, who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately
preceding the date of this Direction of Elections, including employees
who did not work during said pay-roll period because they were ill
or on vacation or temporarily laid off, 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, and also exclud-
ing employees on strike who are not entitled to reinstatement, to
determine :
(1) Whether the employees in voting group (a) desire to be rep-
resented, for purposes of collective bargaining, by Local Union 760,
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL or by United
Gas, Coke and Chemical Workers, CIO, or by American Federation
of Labor, represented by the Knoxville Building Trades Council,
or by none;
(2) Whether the employees in voting group (b) desire to be rep-
resented, for purposes of collective bargaining, by Lodge No. 555,
International Association of Machinists, or by American Federation
of Labor, represented by the Knoxville Building Trades Council, or
by neither.
g The compliance status of Local Union 760, International Brotherhood of Electrical
Workers, AFL , and of Lodge No. 555, International Association of Machinists , has lapsed
since the hearing in this matter . In the event either fails to renew its compliance with
Section 9 ( f), (g), and ( h) within 2 weeks from the date of this Direction , the Regional
Director is to advise the Board to that effect . No election shall be held in either voting
.group unless and until the Petitioner therein has renewed its compliance.