Sperry Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 28, 1951

94 N.L.R.B. 1724 (N.L.R.B. 1951)

•1724 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
afterthought, but that the Respondent regarded Staiger as having responsibility
for the direction of the machine shop during the period under cons ideration."
Upon all the evidence, I conclude and find that Staiger's authority over
employees in the machine shop was such as to meet the statutory test of a super-
visor with authority responsibly to direct production employees." In reaching
this conclusion, I am aware that as an hourly rated employee, with working
• conditions the same as others in the machine shop, and with a rate of pay not
substantially different, Staiger may, with some reason, have looked upon himself
• and have been looked upon by others in the shop as having interests more closely
allied with rank-and-file employees than with management. But this factor,
while not without significance In all cases, in my judgment is not alone sufficient
to overcome the other facts here present that combine to bring Staiger within the
category of a "supervisor" as Congress has chosen to define that term.
For reasons earlier set forth, the finding here made that Staiger was aa
supervisor within the meaning of Section 2 (11) is dispositive of all issues in
this case. Upon the record as a whole, I find that the Respondent has not
violated Section 8 (a) (1) and (3) of the Act. Accordingly, I shall recommend
that the complaint herein be dismissed in its entirety.
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and upon the entire record
in the case, I make the following:
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. International Association of Machinists is a labor organization within the
meaning of Section 2 (5) of the Act.
2. Tri-Pak Machinery Service, Inc., the Respondent herein, is engaged in com-
merce within the meaning of Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
3. The Respondent has not engaged in unfair labor practices within the mean-
ing of Section 8 (a) (1) and (3) of the Act.
Recommendations
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, and
upon the entire record in the case, I recommend that the complaint against
Tri-Pak Machinery Service, Inc., Harlingen, Texas, be dismissed in its entirety.
"Thus, in support of a recommendation that Staiger's rate be increased from $ 1.25 to
$1.35 an hour, Partain on a "change request" dated May 18, 1951, gave this reason :
Because Earl now has the responsibility of the machine shop and all the die work
he is worth more to Tri-Pak. He is doing a good job managing and also turns out
a good quantity of work himself.
12 See Chautauqua Hardware Co., 92 NLRB 1518; Warren Co., 90 NLRB 588; Accurate
Threaded Products Company, 90 NLRB 1364; National Food Corp., 88 NLRB 1500.
SPERRY GYROSCOPE COMPANY, DIVISION OF SPERRY CORPORATION and
LOCAL 450, INTERNATIONAL UNION OF ELECTRICAL, RADIO, AND
MACHINE WORKERS, CIO, PETITIONER. Case No. 2-RC-3179.
June 28,1951
Decision and Order
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Lloyd S. Greenidge
and Lewis Moore, hearing officers. The hearing officers' rulings made
at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
94 NLRB No. 241.
SPERRY GYROSCOPE, COMPANY 1725
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, the Board
has delegated its power in connection with this case to a three-member
panel [Chairman Herzog and Members Reynolds and Murdock].
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 labor organization involved claim(s) to represent employees.
of the Employer.
3. No 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, for the following
reasons:
The Petitioner requests a unit of all clerical employees in the Em-
ployer's departments 4320 and 5620, including stenographers, typists,
blueprint file clerks, and clerks grades 1, 2, and 3. The Employer:
opposes the unit claimed on the ground that it is only a segment of a
broader group of similar clerical employees.
All clerical employees at the Employer's plant are hired through
a central employment office, and standards for employment are uni-
formly applied irrespective of.the department to which the applicant:
may be assigned. Plant-wide seniority and a uniform wage scale
exist for all the Employer's unrepresented clerical employees," in-
cluding the 50 in departments 4320 and 5620. Transfers of clerical.
employees in and out of departments 4320 and 5620 occur frequently.
It is clear that the clerical employees whom the Petitioner seeks to
represent constitute but a segment of a broader group of clerical
employees with similar skills, duties, working conditions, and inter-
ests. In analogous situations, the Board has declined to find a frag-
mentary unit, such as the Petitioner here requests, appropriate.2
The Petitioner, however, contends that a different conclusion is
warranted here for the following reason. The Petitioner, pursuant
to a consent election, has since 1945 represented the clericals of the
E'mployer's production- and control division. These,,are ' the only
clerical employees now represented for purposes of collective bar-
gaining. The Petitioner urges that this bargaining history demon-
strates the appropriateness of the petitioned for or other small units
of clerical employees throughout the plant. We do not agree. It,
is well established that units which parties agree to for purposes of
consent elections do not necessarily set a controlling pattern to be
followed in cases decided by the Boards
'The record discloses that there is a total of 387 clerical employees in the. plant, of
which only a small group in the production and control division is currently represented
by the Petitioner.
2 See Boeing Airplane Company (Wichita Division), 94 NLRB 344; Alabama Power
Company, 93 NLRB No. 190, not reported, in printed volumes of Board decisions; Con-
solidated Vultee Aircraft Corporation, Fort Worth Division, 92 NLRB 1290.
8 See Hoffman Radio Corporation, 90 NLRB 2014, and cases there cited.
1726 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
On the basis of the foregoing, we find that the unit requested by
the Petitioner is inappropriate. We shall, therefore, grant the Em•
ployer's motion to dismiss the petition.
Order
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition filed herein be, and it hereby
is, dismissed.
PACIFIC VENEER & PLYWOOD CORPORATION AND LUMBER & SAWMILL
WORKERS UNION, LOCAL No . 2667, AFL, PETITIONER. Case No.
19-RC-731. June 28, 1951
Decision and Order
'Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Howard McIntyre,
hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing
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-mem-
ber 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 labor organizations involved, claim to represent employees
of the Employer.
3. No question affecting commerce exists concerning the repre-
sentation of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Sec-
tion 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act, for the following
reasons:
The Petitioner seeks a single-employer unit covering the Employer's
plant in Bellingham, Washington. The Employer and Intervener
urge that only a multiemployer unit consisting of all members of
the Plywood & Door Manufacturers Industrial Committee, herein-
after called the Committee, is appropriate.
In Springfield Plywood Corporation,' the Board dismissed a peti-
tign for. a single-employer unit filed by the Petitioner herein on the
ground that the employer members of the Committee constituted a
multiemployer unit. The Employer herein has been a member of
' At the hearing, Plywood Box Shook & Door Council District No. 9, International Wood-
workers of America, CIO , hereinafter called the Intervenor , filed a motion to dismiss the
petition on grounds relating to the compliance status of the Petitioner . The fact of
compliance by a labor organization which is required to comply , is not litigable by the
parties. Moreover , the Board is administratively satisfied that the Petitioner is in
compliance . See Sunbeam Corporation , 92 NLRB 844 ; Swift & Company, 94 NLRB 917;
cf. Highland Park Manufacturing Company, 71 S. Ct. 489.
2 61 NLRB 1295.
94 NLRB No. 243.