Smith & Barnett

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Feb 23, 1950

88 N.L.R.B. 740 (N.L.R.B. 1950)

In the Matter of SMITH & BARNETT, EMPLOYER and UNITED GAS, COKE
AND CHEMICAL WORKERS OF AMERICA, C. I. 0., PETITIONER
Case No. 9-RC-662.Decided February 03,1950
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before Seymour Gold-
stein, 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 National Labor
Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with
this case to a three-member panel [Chairman Herzog and Members
Houston and Reynolds.]
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The business of the Employer :
The Employer is a West Virginia corporation with its only place
of business in Huntington, West Virginia. It sells office and engineer-
ing supplies, does blueprinting and photostatic work, repairs survey-
ing and blueprinting instruments, and manufactures mine spades.
The Employer's purchases of raw materials, supplies, and equipment
during 1949 amounted to between $60,000 and $75,000, all of which
were received from sources outside West Virginia. The Employer's
total sales for 1949 amounted to about $125,000, of which approxi-
mately 20 percent represents sales of goods and services to customers
located outside the State. A substantial portion of the Employer's
sales in and outside the State are made to coal mining companies which
are engaged in interstate commerce.'
Contrary to the contention of the Employer, we find that it is en-
gaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Rela-
tions Act.
2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain em-
ployees of the Employer.
1 Such as Consolidation Coal Company and West Virginia Coal and Coke Company in
West Virginia, and Blue Diamond Coal Company in Kentucky.
88 NLRB No. 151.
740
SMITH & BARNETT 741
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.
4. The Petitioner seeks to represent a unit of all employees of the
Employer, excluding office and clerical employees, salesmen, profes-
sional employees, guards, and supervisors. The Employer agrees with
the Petitioner as to the appropriateness of the unit. The Petitioner
contends, however, that one employee, classified as supervisor of the
reproduction department, is not a supervisor as defined in the Act.
The Employer takes no position on this point.
There are five employees in the reproduction department : One dark
room operator, one blueprint operator, one photocopy operator, and
two apprentices. The supervisor spends about 25 percent of his time
directing the work of these employees. He assigns work to them, and
is at all times available to answer their questions and consult with them
about their duties. He is held responsible for the over-all work of the
department. No employee is sent to work in the reproduction depart-
ment without the approval of the supervisor. Although the supervisor
does not hire employees, it seems clear that he has authority effectively
to recommend the discharge or transfer of employees in his depart-
ment. In view of these facts, we find that the reproduction department
supervisor is a supervisor as defined in the Act. We shall therefore
exclude him from the unit.
We find that all employees of the Employer at its plant in Hunting-
ton, West Virginia, including employees engaged in reproduction,
maintenance, repair, shipping, and messenger work, but excluding the
reproduction department supervisor, office and clerical employees,
salesmen, professional employees, guards, and other supervisors as
defined in the Act, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of
collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the
purposes of collective bargaining with the Employer, an election by
secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than
30 clays from the dale of this Direction, under the direction and super-
vision of the Regional Director for the Region in wltich this case was
heard, and subject to Sections 203.61 and 203.62 of National Labor
Relations Board Rules and Regulations, among the employees in the
unit found appropriate in paragraph numbered 4, above, who were
employed during the payroll period immediately preceding the date
,of this Direction of Election, including employees who did not work
742 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
during said payroll period because they were ill or on vacation og
temporarily laid off, but excluding those employees who have since
quit or been discharged for cause and have not been rehired or rein-
stated prior to the date of the election, and also excluding employees
on strike who are not entitled to reinstatement, to determine whether
or not they desire to be represented, for purposes of collective bargain-
ing, by United Gas, Coke and Chemical Workers of America, C. 1. 0.