Salt River Valley Water Users Assn.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 10, 1941

32 N.L.R.B. 460 (N.L.R.B. 1941)

In the Matter of SALT RIVER VALLEY WATER USERS ASSN. and INTER-
NATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS LOCAL B-266,
A. F. L.
Case No. R-2439.-Decided Juwe 10, 19-111
Jurisdiction : land reclamation and electric power cooperative.
Investigation and Certification of Representatives : existence of question: stip-
ulated; laborers engaged in seasonal work for a period of six months during
previous calendar year held eligible to vote pursuant to the stipulation of the
parties ; special provisions as to conduct of election authorized in view of the
stationing of employees at widely separated locations; election necessary.
Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : employees in various classifications
which may be described as production, distribution and maintenance employees,
excluding certain classifications of clerical, office, and supervisory employees ;
agreement as to-major supervisory employees excluded notwithstanding
desires of sole union involved for their inclusion-minor supervisory employees
included over the objection of the Company-clerical employees whom the
union desires to include because they handle material in addition to performing
clerical work excluded since they are clearly clerical workers and since clerical
and othee workers generally have been excluded from the unit z anjeros in-
cluded over the objection of the Company since they have no supervisory
duties and the only union involved desires their inclusion-hydrographers and
gauge reader included although parties made no contentions with respect to
them since their duties do not appear to be different from employees included
in the unit-chemist (field tester) included over Company's objection since his
functions do not differ from other employees included in unit-janitor at one
of the Company's branches excluded although parties made no contentions as
to him since janitors in the general office have been excluded from the unit
pursuant to the agreement of the parties.
Definitions
Non-profit corporation operating a Federal Reclamation Project held not
to be the United States within the meaning of Section 2 (2) of the Act.
Mr. Greig Scott, Mr. Edwin D. Green, Mr. Lin B. 0i me, Mr. F. C.
llensliaw, and Mr. Harry Lawson, of Phoenix, Ariz., for the Company.
Mr. Gene Gaillac, of Los Angeles, Calif., and Mr. Alfred Shackel-
ford, of Tucson, Ariz., for the I. B. E. W.
Mr. lPoodrow J. Sandler, of counsel•to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On February 17, 1941, International Brotherhood of Electrical
Workers Local B-266, affiliated with the American Federation of
32 N. L. R. B., No. 94.
460
SALT RIVER VALLEY WATER USERS ASSN. 461
Labor, herein called the I. B. E. W., filed with the Regional Director
for the Twenty-first Region (Los Angeles, California) a petition al-
leging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the
representation of employees of Salt River Valley Water Users' Asso-
ciation, Phoenix, Arizona, herein called the Company, and requesting
an investigation and certification of representatives pursuant to Sec-
tion 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein
called the Act. On March 15, 1941, the National Labor Relations
Board, herein called the Board, acting pursuant to Section 9,(c) of the
Act and Article III, Section 3, of National Labor Relations Board
Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, ordered an investigation
and authorized the Regional Director to conduct it and to provide for
an appropriate hearing upon due notice.
On March 20, 1941, the Regional Director issued a notice of hearing,
copies of which were duly served upon the Company and upon the
I. B. E. W. Pursuant to notice, a hearing was held on March 31 and
April 1, 1941, at Phoenix, Arizona, before W. G. Stuart Sherman, the
Trial Examiner duly designated by the Chief Trial Examiner. The
Company was represented by counsel and its representatives, the
I. B. E. W. by its representatives; both participated in the hearing.
Full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses,
and to introduce evidence bearing upon ,the issues was afforded all
parties. At the opening of the hearing the Company contended that
the Board did not have jurisdiction over it because the Company "is
an instrumentality of the United States and its sole purpose is for the
operation of a Federal Reclamation Project . . . and for the further
reason that we are not engaged in commerce within the meaning of the
Act." The Trial Examiner reserved ruling on this objection and stated
that the Board would rule thereon. For the reasons set forth in Section
I, infra, the objection is hereby overruled. During the course of the
hearing the Trial Examiner made several rulings on motions and on
objections to the admission of evidence. The Board has reviewed the
rulings of the Trial Examiner and finds that no prejudicial errors were
committed. The rulings are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Salt River Valley Water Users' Association is a mutual non-profit
corporation, organized in 1903 under the corporation laws of the then
Territory of Arizona. The Company operates a Federal Reclamation
462 DECISIONS O1' NATIONAL LABOR 'RELATIONS 'BOARD
Project known as the Salt River Project,"in south central Arizona,
and has its principal office in Phoenix, Arizona. Shareholders of the
Company are landowners on the Project who have subscribed to,the
Company's articles of incorporation:' Each acre, of, land entitles its
owner to one share of stock in the Company. The Company performs
four major functions: it (a) delivers water to the lands of its share-
holders and furnishes them with electric power for domestic purposes;
(b) drains the land of its shareholders; (c) sells surplus power,,de-
veloped by its power plants; and (d),pays off annually its debt'to- the
United States,' as hereinafter described.'
The Company entered - into-,a. contract with the United States on
June 25, 1904, which provided for, the construction of the Project works
by the United States, and in which the Company guaranteed the re-
payment by its members to the United States of its cost of construction.'
Pursuant to the terms of the contract, the United States acquired ex-
isting irrigation works in the Salt River Valley, from various. canal
companies, converted them into one system of irrigation, and, con-
structed Roosevelt•Dam and three diversion dams, power plants, power
lines, and drainage and irrigation -pumps. ' The electrical power de-
veloped was used by the United- States for project purposes arid, the
surplus was sold to private individuals and corporations. '
On September 6,, 1917, the United States turned over to the Coin-
pany the care, operation,'and maintenance of the Project•by a contract
of'that date wherein the Company agreed to repay the 'United States
its cost of construction over a period of years. . By the terms.of,the con-
tract the United States is accoided certain protections : the right is
reserved to it to proceed against the. individual landowners for their
share of the cost pursuant to the terms of the Reclamation Act; the
Company can make no substantial- change in the Project works without
the consent of the Secretary of the Interior; herein, called the Secretary,
any, damage to the Project resulting from' its, operation is
borne by the Company; the Secretary can inspect the Project from
time to time, and the Company must, bear the cost of the inspection;
the Secretary can terminate the agreement any time he reasonably
believes that the Government's security is being impaired ; the Com-
pany must have the Secretary's approval of all its contracts for the
sale or lease of power covering a period of more than 1 year; and the
Secretary may make rules and regulations "to carry out the true intent
. .. of the (reclamation) law and this agreement." In a later contract
i This project was created pursuant to the so-called Reclamation Act, 43 U. S C. A ,
371 et seq. '
By 1917 the Company had repaid the United States 'over $5,000 ,000. ., ,
SALT RIVER VALLEY WATER USERS ASSN. ,463
the Company•and the United States agreed that if 'any . installment of
the construction charges remains unpaid 30 days after its due date, the
United States can take immediate possession of the power plants and
repay itself from'the•revenues'it.collects.') • r , . .
The Project is approximately 45 miles long and varies in width
from 10 to 20 miles. More than 150,000 people live within its limits.
The average ^ gross crop value of the area is approximately $18,000,-
000 a year, but varies greatly from year' to year. Of the 250,000
acres of land served by the Company within the Project, 242,000
are owned by the Company's shareholders. All the works operated
by the Company, whether built by the Compliny or by the United
States, are owned by the United States.
The Company annually purchases supplies, having an average ap-
proximate value of from $500,000 to $750,000,' consisting principally
of cement, electric power poles, copper wire, lumber, transformers,
and repair parts and supplies'for electrical machines. None of these
supplies are produced in Arizona and the. Company purchases all,or
most of them outside the State.
The- Company contends, that, the. Board does not-have jurisdiction
over it, claiming that it is an "instrumentality of the United States"
and therefore not an employer within, tlie, meaning of the Act. • • How-
ever, it is clear from' the foregoing facts concerning the Company
and its business that aside from the visitatprial and other powers and
rights which the United States may exercise as a means of pro-
tecting its investment iii the Project-and which do not differ sub-
stantially from rights normally exercised by mortgagees or other
creditors-the United States has no substantial control or, supervi-
sion of the Company's affairs. It is obvious that, in turning over
the operation, maintenance, and control of the Project to the Com-
pany, the United States "has avoided, rather than assumed, the re-
sponsibilities of an employer." 5 It 'is the Company, not the United
States, that hires, discharges, and pays the employees, and if these
employees desire to bargain collectively they must do so with the
Company and not with the United States.s_ •
3 The Company, in taking over the Pioject works, also took over all contracts between the
United States and various persons, firms , and corporations for the sale of power. Pursuant
to these contracts , the Company sells the surplus power generated at 'its several power
plants and the revenue obtained is used to operate and maintain the Project works and to
liquidate the indebtedness of the Company to the United States and others The two
largest users of the Company's power are the Centuil Arizona Light and Power Company,
which serves the city of Phoenix and vicinity and other towns in the Salt River Valley; and
the Inspiration Consolidated Copper Company of Inspiration, Arizona.
4In 1939 and 1940 , however , the Company purchased supplies having an approximate
,,a1ue of $900,000
5Matter of Cosmopolitan Shipping Company, Inc . and National Matine Engineers' Bene-
ficial Association , Local No. 33 , 2 N. L. R. B . 759, 762
' In our recent decision in Matter of Joseph R . Gregory (an individual ) and United Trans-
port Workers Industrial Union Local 800. a/l,ated 'w ,tlo C. 7 G , 31 N L R B 71, we
held that the respondent, who transported United States mail under contract with the
464 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
We find that the Company is not the United States within the
meaning of Section 2 (2) of the Act. We further find that the Com-
pany is an employer within the meaning of Section 2 (2) of the Act.
The Company further contends that the Board lacks jurisdiction
over it on the ground that it is "not engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the Act." However, in view of our findings herein con-
cerning the nature of the Company's operations, we must reject its
contention that it is not subject to the Act.7
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local B 266,
affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, is a labor organi-
zation admitting to its membership employees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
At the hearing all parties stipulated that a question concerning
representation has arisen by reason of the fact that early in 1941 the
I. B. E. W. claimed to represent a majority of the Company's em-
ployees and "requested recognition" and that the Company replied
United States , was not "the United States " within the meaning of the Act. We so held
despite the fact that the United States , through the Postmaster , reserved a certain amount
of control over the personnel employed by the respondent . We there said , in part.
Congress , in the various Civil Service, Classification and other Acts, has established
provisions governing the conditions of employment in various branches and agencies of
the government Employees of these bodies would, in the final analysis , have to seek
adjustment of many matters properly the subject of collective bargaining from the Con-
gress itself. The respondent 's employees are not within the protection of these stat-
utes ;nor could the Post Office Department under the terms of the respondent 's contract
entertain requests for or bind the respondent in collective bargaining with representa-
tives of the respondent 's employees These matters lie wholly within the determina-
tion of the respondent . We find that the respondent is not the United States within
the meaning of Section 2 (2) of the Act. [Italics supplied.]
See also Fleming v. Gregory, 36 Fed. Supp. 776 (Dist. Ct E. D. La, 1941) where the
court considered the application of the Fair Labor Standards Act to Joseph R Gregory, who
was also involved in the above -cited Board case. The court there held that he was not
exempt from the provisions of the Act, saying:
But it does not appear reasonable . . . to conclude that . . . the private mail con-
tractor ' s hired help automatically become employees of the United States. Under the
definition of "employee" contained in the Act, none of such hired help can be employees
of the United States unless they were employed by the United States, as "employer."
All that the United States has done is to make a contract for the carrying of the mail
with the mover , and he, in order to carry out said contract (for which he alone is
responsible ), has hired or "employed" the persons referred to in the complaint; they
are his "employees" .. .
° See National Labor Relations Board v. Newport News Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Co., 101
F (2d) 841 (C. C. A. 4), reversed on other grounds , 308 U. S 241, enf'g as mod , Matter
of Newport News Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Co . and.Industrial Union of Marine & Shipbuild-
ing Workers of America, 8 N. L. R. B. 866 ; National Labor Relations Board v. Sunshine
Mining Co ., 110 F. (2d) 780 (C. C. A. 9), enf'g Matter of Sunshine Mining Co . and Inter-
national Union of Mine, Mill & Smelter Workers, 7 N L. R. B. 12Z2; National Labor Rela-
tions Board v. Santa Cruz Fruit Packing Co., 303 U. S. 453, aff'g 91 F ( 2d) 790 (C. C. A.
9), enf 'g as mod. Matter of Santa Cruz Fruit Packing Company, a corporation , and Weigh-
ers, Warehousemen and Cereal Workers, Local 38-44, International Longshoremen 's Asso-
ciation, 1 N. L. R. B. 454 ; Consolidated Edison Co v National Labor Relations Board, 305
U. S. 197, aff'g as mod . 95 F. (2d ) 390 (C. C. A. 2), enf'g Matter of Consolidated Edison
Company of New York, Inc., et al . and United Electrical and Radio Workers of America,
affiliated with the Committee for Industrial Organization, 4 N. L R. B. 71.
SALT RIVER VALLEY WATER USERS ASSN. 465
that it desired proof of such majority representation, either by means
of membership cards or by Board certification.
A statement prepared by the Regional Director and introduced into
evidence at the hearing indicates ' that the I. B. E. W. represents a
substantial number of employees in the unit hereinafter found to be
appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining."
We find that a question has arisen concerning the representation of
employees of the Company.
IV. THE EFFECT OF THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION UPON
COMMERCE
We find that the question concerning representation which has
arisen, occurring in connection with the operations of the Company
described in Section I above, has a close,-intimate, and substantial
relation to trade, traffic, and commerce among the several States and
tends to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce
and the free flow of commerce.
V. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The I. B. E. W. requests a unit consisting of "all production, distri-
bution and maintenance employees including zanjeros but excluding
clerical and office workers in the Company's general office 9 and also
supervisory employees above the rank of foreman." In general the
Company does not dispute the appropriateness of such a unit.
The parties disagree, however, as to the inclusion or exclusion of
certain classifications of supervisory and clerical employees as well
as of certain miscellaneous classifications of employees. In the Com-
pany's list of employees as of March 29, 1941, the employees are
divided into three large groups : irrigation division, power division,
and "general project." 10
A. Included in the appropriate whit
Production, distribution, and maintenance employees.-The parties
agree that the various classifications of employees listed in Appendix
8 There are approximately 600 employees in the appropriate unit In his statement the
Regional Director reported that the I . B. E. W. claims to represent 512 employees in the
appropriate unit; that in support of such claim it submitted to him 34 authorization cards
(signed in January and February 1941 ), all bearing apparently genuine signatures of
employes on the Company 's pay roll of March 6 , 1941, and 468 membership application
cards ( most of which were signed between December 1940 and March 1941, but none earlier
than June 1940 ), of which 434 bore apparently genuine signatures of employees on the
Company's pay roll of March 6, 1941. In all , 468 cards appeared to be signed by
employees of the Company.
By "general office" is meant the Company ' s main office and overflow office buildings in
Phoenix and its branch office in the city of Mesa, Arizona . Clerical workers in other parts
of the Project are either included in the appropriate unit by agreement or are in dispute.
10 This third group consists of those employees who do not work wholly in either the
irrigation or the power division.
466 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
A, and which may generally be described as "production, distribution
and maintenance employees," should be included in the unit. We shall
include the employees listed in Appendix A'in the unit:
B., Excluded from,the- appropriate unit
Clerical, once, and supervisory employees.-The Company aiid the
I. B. E. W. agree that certain 'classifications of 'clerical, office, and
supervisory employees should be, excluded from the unit. These em-
ployees are listed in Appendix B herein, and we shall exclude them
from the unit.
C. In dispute
(1) Supervisory employees
Sub foremen (irrigation division; have direct charge of laborers
in canal maintenance crews),. These employees are in charge of
gangs of laborers or "ditch workers" who clean ditches and cut grass.
They are assigned by the camp foremen 11 to take the gangs out, to
do the work. Harry J. Lawson, . the Company's general superin-
tendent and chief engineer, testified that if subforemen are dissatis-
fied with laborers' in their gangs they can "send them in, discharge
them." One of the" subforemen, however, a member of the I.' B.
E. W., testified 'that he'does not have the right to discharge employees
and that he can merely remove an employee from his gang if he 'is
dissatisfied with him. The I. B.'E: W. contends that these subfore-
men should be included in the unit. The Company generally con-
tends that employees who can "let men go" are supervisory and
should be excluded from the ' appropriate unit. We find that these
subforemen have but minor supervisory powers and since the I. B.' E.
W. admits them to membership,' ive shall' include them in the unit.
Pump foreman (irrigation division).-This employee is a working
foreman who works with and has direct charge of the pump main-
tenance crew.12 He has power to remove men from his crew if he
is dissatisfied with their work. He is under the supervision of the
"general pump foreman" who has supervision of all pump mainte-
nance.13 The I. B. E. W. contends that the pump foreman should be
included in the appropriate unit, since he is a working foreman and
not a department head. The Company contends that he is a super-
visory employee who has, the power to "let men go" and that he
11 We have excluded the camp foremen from the appropriate unit in accordance with the
agreement of the parties
12 The record does not reveal how many men are in this crew. ' However, the Company's
list of employees lists only 4 employees who are engaged in pump repaif and 10 employees
who both operate and service pumps.
13We have excluded the general pump foreman from the unit in accordance with the
agreement of the parties.
SALT RIVER VALLEY WATER USERS ASSN . 467
should therefore be excluded from the appropriate unit. We find,
however, that the pump foreman is a working foreman and does not
exercise major supervisory functions and, since the I. B. E. W. admits
working foremen to membership, we shall include the pump foreman
in the appropriate unit.
Sub f oremen (power division ; in charge of linemen, groundmen,
and tree trimmers). These employees go out with crews consisting
of as many as 15 linemen, grinders, and tree trimmers. They have
the right to discharge employees and do not work with the men except
in emergencies. They are under the supervision of the general super-
intendent of line maintenance, who supervises all line maintenance
and construction.14 We are of the opinion that these subforemen are
not major supervisory employees of the Company. The Company
desires their exclusion from the unit; the I. B. E. W. their inclusion.
We shall include them in the unit.
Subforemen .(power division; in charge of electricians and helpers
in various crews). These employees are in charge of crews of elec-
tricians and helpers that work in the field .15 They do not as a rule
work with the men and they have the right to discharge men. They
report directly to the superintendent of power maintenance or, if he
is not available, to the foreman in charge of the electric repair shop.16
The Company desires their exclusion from the unit; the I. B. E. W.
their inclusion. We shall include them in the unit.
Subforemen (power division; assistant to general foreman in direct
charge of metal shop). This employee supervises the work done by
the metermen in the shop and in the field and also works along with
the men. He receives his instructions from the general meter fore-
man, who is in charge of the meter shop,17 and replaces him when he
is away from the shop. This subforeman is in charge of three or
four men, does not have the right to hire or discharge employees, and
merely executes the orders of the general meter foreman. He must
report daily on the progress of his job. The Company desires his
exclusion from the unit; the I. B. E. W. his inclusion. We shall
include him in the appropriate unit.
Chief operators (power division; in charge of operators at various
hydro-electric plants). Each of these employees works at one of the
Company's hydro-electric plants, where he supervises the work of
operators, whom he has the right to discharge. At each of the two
14 We have excluded the general superintendent of line maintenance from the unit, in
accordance with the agreement of the parties.
1G The Company lists 4 such subforemen and 30 electricians and helpers in the power
division. The average crew would therefore appear to consist of 7 or 8 employees.
'"Both the superintendent and the foreman are excluded from the appropriate unit.
IT This foreman is excluded from the appropriate unit.
448692-42-vol. 32--31
468 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
largest plants (Roosevelt and Horse Mesa) there are from 7 to 10
ordinary operators, and-at the smaller plants 3 or 4, under the chief
operator's supervision. In the-smaller plants the chief operators work
ai regular shift with the ordinary operators, but this is not usually
so at the larger plants. The Company has a superintendent of power
who i has charge of the, entire power, i division, a superintendent'. of
power-plants who has charge of -the hydro-electric plant operations,
and , two , additional superintendents, each of whom is in charge of the
two,largest power plants and other. ,project' works at the Roosevelt
and Horse Mesa Dams, all of whom have greater authority than the
chief operators."" The Company desires the exclusion of the chief op-
erators from-the unit; the I. B. E. W.itheir inclusion. We shall in-
clude:the chief 'operators in the unit.
Assistant chief operator. (power division; at Roosevelt). This em-
ployee replaces the chief operator at. the` Roosevelt hydro-electric
plant when the latter is called away from the plant. The I. B. E. W.
desires his inclusion in the unit;, the Company, his exclusion. Since
we have included the chief operators we shall also include the assist-
ant -chief operator, in the appropriate unit.
Chief operators (power division; substation and switching station).
Each of these employees is in charge of one of the Company's substa-
tions' and switching stations and has three or four men under his
supervision with whom he works and whom he may "send in" if they
are riot doing their work properly. The chief operators are the dis-
patchers for the system, in which capacity they transmit instructions
to other employees on the Project.' Alvin E. Schorneck, an assistant
operator in one of the substations, testified that his chief operator
at times performs the same duties as he does and is paid the same
wages as he except that the Company furnishes the chief operator with
a house to live in. Schorneck • further, testified that the chief opera-
tor has a "little more authority,' than the regular operators "because
he "L gets' the orders during the day time, writes them in 'the book,
and we read them and operate accordingly." The chief, operators
are under the immediate supervision -of the superintendent of power
plants. The; Company desires , their exclusion from the unit; the
I: B.,E. W. their inclusion.' We shall includO them in the unit.
`,Foreman, (power division-; power canal'). This employee 'has
charge" of the operation and maintenance of the power canal which
extends 19 miles along the, banks of the Roosevelt reservoir and is
used by the Company as part of its general power supply., He super-
vises the canal maintenance crew of four or five men and reports
directly, to the superintendent of power. It is not clear from the
Is All these superintendents have been excluded from ilie appropriate unit.
SALT RIVER VALLEY WATER USERS ASSN. 469
record whether or not he actually works with the men.19 Although
Lawson testified that this employee's job required "an amazing amount
of technical and engineering skill and ability," he also testified that
the foreman was not a trained engineer. The Company desires his
exclusion from the unit; the I. B. E. W. his inclusion. We shall in-
clude him in the appropriate unit.
Electrician supervisor (power division). This employee is in
charge of repairing electrical equipment of the Company's domestic
customers. As a rule he has from two to four men working under
his supervision and he works along with them. The Company
desires his exclusion from the unit; the I. B. E. W., his inclusion.
We shall include him in the unit.
Pipe-plant foreman (general project). This employee is in charge
of the manufacture of concrete pipe in a plant which the Company
maintains exclusively for such manufacture. He appears to have
complete charge of the plant, does not work with the men, and has
the power to discharge them. The I. B. E. W. desires his inclusion
in the unit; the Company, his exclusion. Since this employee is
apparently in complete charge of the Company's pipe plant, he
appears to have supervisory authority of sufficient importance to
warrant our excluding him from the unit. We shall exclude him
therefrom.
Shop foreman (general project; Cross Cut machine shop). This
employee is in charge of all the machine shop work on the project,
supervises approximately 60 employees in the machine shop, and
has the right to discharge them. He does not work with the men and
has certain employees under his supervision who "lay out" the work
for the other employees in the shop. The I. B. E. W. desires his
inclusion in the unit; the Company, his exclusion. In view of the
large number of employees supervised by this shop foreman, we are
of the opinion that he is a major supervisory employee of the
Company and shall accordingly.exclude him from the unit.
Warehouseman (general project; Cross Cut warehouse). This
employee is in charge of the branch warehouse at the Cross Cut dam.
Under his supervision are two men who have clerical and book-
keeping duties and whom he may "let go." He is responsible for and
actually handles materials coming in and going out of the warehouse.
19 Lawson testified as to this, as follows
Q. (By Mr. GAILLAC.) Does he make assignments or does he definitely run gangs on
a repair job?
A. Well, when there are repairs to be done, it is usually an emergency and every-
body digs in and does what he can.
Q. He goes right on the job with the men?
A. He gets the men on the work. He does not necessarily stay with the crew that
is working all the time . He has probably three or four working up and down the
canal at different places. He is a supervisory man.
470 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
The Company desires his exclusion from the unit; the I. B. E. W.,
his inclusion. We shall include him in the unit.
(2) Clerical and office employees
Clerks (general office-16th Street branch). Though designated
a ,s "clerks," these employees are in fact timekeepers who work under
the supervision of the chief timekeeper. The Company contends that,
they should be excluded from the appropriate unit. The I. B. E. W.
claims that until just prior to the hearing these employees had had
"combination jobs" involving clerical work and the handling of
material, and that since they might do such "combination" work
again at sometime in the future they should be included in the unit.
However, one of the timekeepers testified at the hearing that he does
only office work. Moreover, Lawson testified that these positions are
"definitely set up as . . timekeeping" and "will not be com-
bination jobs again." Since these employees are clearly clerical
workers and since we have excluded clerical and office workers
generally from the unit, we shall exclude them from the unit.
Clerks (general office-Cross Cut branch) (general office-Roose-
velt branch). The Company desires the exclusion of these employees
from the unit. The I. B. E. W. desires their inclusion and claims
that they do "combination" work, i. e., that they handle material in
addition to doing clerical work. The evidence does not support this
contention, however, and since these employees are clerical employees
we shall exclude them from the unit.
(3) Miscellaneous classifications
Zanjeros.-The chief watermaster of the Project supervises four
water masters, each of whom is in charge of one of the Project's four
irrigation division 20 Each water master has under his supervision
approximately 16 zanjeros, each of whom has supervision and direct
control of the delivery.of water to the farmers in his division. There
are no employees under the zanjero's supervision, however. The zan-
jero receives orders for water from individual farmers and reports to
his water master the total amount of water which has been ordered for
the day. If orders come in and the available supply of water is in-
sufficient, the zanjero may determine who is entitled to receive water
first. He may also cut off the farmer's supply of water if the farmer
has ordered more than he needs. The I. B. E. W. desires the inclusion
of the zanjeros in the appropriate unit. Although it is not clear from.
the record, we infer from Lawson's testimony that the Company
desires their exclusion from the appropriate unit. Inasmuch as the
ao The parties are in agreement that the chief water master and the four water masters
are to be excluded from the unit, and we have so excluded them.
SALT RIVER VALLEY WATER USERS ASSN. 471
zanjeros have no supervisory duties and since the only union involved
desirestheir inclusion , we shall include them in the unit.
Chief h,ydrographer.-This employee has supervision over the meas-
urement of water on the Project and reports directly to Lawson.
Neither of the parties made any contention at the hearing as to the
exclusion or inclusion of this employee . Although the testimony as
to his duties is meager, he appears to be a major supervisory employee
of the Company and we shall exclude him from the unit.
Hydrographers and gauge reader.-The hydrographers "perform
the duty of measuring water." The gauge reader "reads stream
gauges on the river." The parties made no contention at the hearing
concerning these employees . The duties performed by these employees
do not appear to differ materially from those of other employees whom
we have included in the unit as production, distribution , and mainte-
nance employees . We, shall include the hydrographers and gauge
reader in the unit.
Chemvist ( field tester ; power division): This employee does the
routine chemistry work of the Project. He tests samples of field oil
and also tests water for acidity and solid matter . He is not a chemical
engineer and has had no professional training in chemistry. The
I. B. E. W. claims that water testers are usually included in units that
it has organized in other plants and that this employee should be in-
cluded in the appropriate unit. The Company contends that he should
be excluded as a "professional man." We are of the opinion that his
functions do not differ materially from those of other production, dis-
tribution , and maintenance employees of the Company. We shall
accordingly include him in the unit.
Janitor (Mesa branch).-No testimony was introduced at the hear-
ing concerning this employee and the parties made no contentions
with respect to him. However, since we have excluded the janitors in
the general office from the unit, pursuant to the agreement of the
parties, we will exclude this janitor from the unit as well.
We find that the production, distribution , and maintenance em-
ployees of the Company listed in Appendix A, including subforemen,
pump foreman , chief operators , assistant chief operator (at Roose-
velt), power canal foreman, electrician supervisor , warehouseman (at
Cross Cut), zanjeros , hydrographers , gauge reader , and chemist (field
tester), but excluding the employees listed in Appendix B, pipe-plant
foreman, shop foreman (Cross Cut machine shop ), clerks ( general
office-16th Street branch, Cross Cut branch and Roosevelt branch),
chief hydrographer , and janitor ( Mesa branch ), constitute a unit
appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining , and that such
unit will insure to employees of the Company the full benefit of their
right to self -organization and to collective bargaining and otherwise
effectuate the policies of the Act.
472 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS, BOARD
VI. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
We find that the question concerning representation which liis
arisen can best be resolved by an election by secret ballot.
The I. B. E. W. desires eligibility to vote in the election to be
determined as of the time of the filing of the petition herein. It
predicates its desire for the use of such date upon the claim that since
the filing of the petition the Company has altered the duties of some
employees "in order to confuse the issue." The evidence, however,
does not support this contention. The Company has made no con-
tention concerning the data as of which eligibility to vote in the
election should be determined. We see no reason to depart from our
usual practice, and accordingly shall direct that all employees in the
appropriate unit who were employed by the Company during the
pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of our Direction of
Election, subject to such limitations and additions as are set forth in
the Direction, shall be eligible to vote.
The Company employs in its irrigation division approximately
205 laborers who are engaged in cleaning ditches and cutting grass.
The work is seasonal and the laborers are mostly transient. Concerli-
ing these employees, the parties stipulated at the hearing that "in
determining whether such laborers are eligible to vote in the National
Labor Relations election . . . only those laborers who have served
an equivalent of six mouths work during the calendar year 1940, shall
be eligible to vote." We shall provide accordingly in our Direction
of Election.
Since it appears that the employees of the Company are stationed
in widely separated locations , we authorize the Regiolal Director for
the Twenty -first Region to determine in his discretion the exact times
and places and the procedure for giving notice of the election and for
balloting . We expressly authorize the use of the United States mail
for such purposes , and the use of agents , if feasible , to travel -through-
out the Project to conduct the election at appropriate places, collecting
the votes in sealed envelopes for delivery to the Regional Director.
Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and the entire record
in the case , the Board makes the following:
CONCLUSIONS OF LAw,
1. A question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the repre-
sentation of employees of Salt River Valley Water Users' Association,
Phoenix, Arizona, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2
(6) and (7) of the Act.
2. The production, distribution, and maintenance employees of the
Company listed in Appendix A, including subforemen, pump fore-
man, chief operators, assistant chief operator (at Roosevelt), power
canal foreman, electrician supervisor; warehouseman (at Cross Cut),
SALT RIVER VALLEY WATER USERS ASSN. 473
zanjeros, hydrographers, gauge reader, and chemist (field tester), but
excluding the employees listed.in Appendix B, pipe-plant foreman,
shop foreman (Cross Cut machine shop), clerks (general office-16th
Street branch, Cross Cut branch, and Roosevelt branch), chief hydrog-
rapher, and janitor (Mesa branch), constitute a unit appropriate
for the purposes of collective bargaining, within the meaning of
Section 9 (b), of the Act.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
By virtue of and pursuant to' the power vested in the National
Labor Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Re-
lations Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 8, of National
Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended,
it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation authorized by the
Board to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bar-
gaining with Salt River Valley Water Users' Association, Phoenix,
Arizona, an election by secret ballot shall be conducted as early as
possible, but not later, than thirty (30) days from the date of this
Direction of Election, under the direction and supervision of the
Regional Director, for the Twenty-first Region, acting in this matter
as agent for the National Labor Relations Board and subject to
Article III, Section 9, of said Rules and Regulations, among the
production, distribution, and maintenance employees' listed in Appen-
dix A of Salt River Valley Water Users' Association, Phoenix,
Arizona, who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately
preceding the date of this Direction of Election, including subfore-
men, pump foreman, chief operators, assistant chief operator (at
Roosevelt), power canal foreman, electrician supervisor, warehouse-
man (at Cross Cut), zanjeros, hydrographers, gauge reader, chemist
(field tester), and those, who did not work during said pay-roll
period because they were ill or on vacation or in the active military
service or training of the United States, or temporarily laid off, but
excluding the employees listed in Appendix B, pipe-plant foreman,
shop foreman, (Cross Cut machine shop), clerks (general office-16th
Street branch, Cross Cut branch, and Roosevelt branch), chief hydrog-
rapher, janitor (Mesa branch), those laborers in the irrigation
division who did not work an equivalent of 6 months for the Com-
pany during 1940, and those who have since quit or been discharged
for cause, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented
by International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local B-266,
affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, for the purposes
of collective bargaining.
474 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
APPENDIX A
Irrigation division
Gate tenders
Carpenters (carpenter
irrigation structures)
Carpenter helpers
Tool grinders
Laborers
Pump operators
w o r k- Pump station operator
Assistant pump station operator
Mechanics (pump repair)
Mechanics' helpers (pump repair)
Power division
Operators (hydro-electric plants)
Forebay operator
Machine tenders and oilers
Road maintenance
Laborer (semi skilled, Roosevelt
power plant)
Diesel operators
Diesel oilers
Operators-substation and switch-
ing station
Patrolman (power canal)
Gateman (power canal)
Linemen (line repair and
struction)
Patrolmen
con-
General
Mechanics (general repair work
garage)
Truck drivers
on all work)
(general hauling
Porters (service cars and tire re-
pairs)
Clerks (warehouses)
Watchmen (16th Street yard)
Truck driver (utility delivery
man for warehouses)
Laborers (semi-skilled in yard)
Laborers (semi-skilled
pipe)
Machinists
Machinists' helpers
Welders
concrete
Patrolmen helpers
Groundmen
Tree trimmers
Truck drivers (in connection with
line crews and tree trimmers)
Electricians
Electrician helpers
Service man (repairs domestic
equipment)
Clerk (stock clerk electric shop)
Metermen
Electrician (meter shop)
Meterman helper
Clerk (stock .clerk and other
records at meter shop)
Project
Blacksmiths
Truck drivers (machine shop util-
ity)
Operators (bulldozer, drag line,
tractor and similar equipment)
Watchmen (machine shop yard)
Operator-substation and pump-
ing plant (joint power and irri-
gation duty)
Carpenters (general carpenter
work under utility foreman)
Truck driver (utility crew)
Mechanics' helpers (general work
with utility crew)
Laborers (semi-skilled-u t i 1 i t y
crew)
SALT RIVER VALLEY WATER USERS ASSN. 475
APPENDIX B
Irrigation division
Chief clerks (general office depart-
ments)
Clerks (general office)
Superintendent of irrigation
Assistant superintendent of irri-
gation .
Chief water master
Water masters
Superintendent of townsite de-
liveries
Assistant superintendent of main-
tenance
Camp foremen
General pump foreman
Power division
Engineer (supervision of all
power department engineers
and draftsmen)
Draftsmen (power department)
Clerks and stenographers (general
office)
Collector (general office)
Chief clerk (general office depart-
ment)
Salesmen (promote sales of equip-
ment to domestic consumers)
Superintendent of power
Superintendent of power plants
Superintendents (Roosevelt and
Horse Mesa Dams)
Superintendent (Diesel and steam
plants)
Assistant engineer (in charge
Diesel and steam plant mainte-
nance and operation)
Superintendent of power mainte-
nance
General Superintendent of line
maintenance
Shop foreman (in charge electric
repair shop for equipment other
than meters)
General meter foreman
General Project
Paymaster
Purchasing agent (general office)
Claim agent (general office)
Right-of-way a g e n t (general
office)
Assistant right-of-way a g e n t
(general office)
Engineers (civil-field and office)
Draftsmen (office)
Rodmen
Assistant surveyman
Chief accountant
Chief timekeeper
Chief clerk (general office depart-
ment)
Mail carrier
Janitors (general office)
Watchman (general office)
Telephone operator (general
office)
Chemists (soil and water analysis)
Clerks and stenographers (gen-
eral office)
Clerks general office-Mesa
branch)
Clerk (garage records)
Superintendent of transportation
Superintendent of warehouses
Master mechanic (supervises
Cross Cut machine shop and all
heavy machine repairs through-
out project)
Utility foreman (supervision of
miscellaneous maintenance and
construction)