Stromberg Carlson Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Feb 25, 1969

174 N.L.R.B. 762 (N.L.R.B. 1969)

'762 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Stromberg Carlson Corporation ' and International
Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO,
Petitioner . Cases 14-RC-6055 and 14-RC-6056
February 25, 1969
DECISION AND ORDER
BY CHAIRMAN MCCULLOCH AND MEMBERS
FANNING AND BROWN
Upon petitions duly filed under Section 9(c) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, a
hearing was held on November 4, 1968, before
Hearing Officer Victor R. Witte, Jr., of the
National Labor Relations Board. The Hearing
Officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from
prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Thereafter, the Employer filed a brief with the
Board.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the
National Labor Relations Board has delegated its
powers in connection with these cases to a
three-member panel.
Upon the entire record in these cases, the Board
finds:
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within
the meaning of the Act and it will effectuate the
purposes of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein.
2. The labor organization involved claims to
represent certain employees of the Employer.
3. No question affecting commerce exists
concerning the representation of employees of the
Employer within the meaning of Section 9(c)(1) and
2(6) and (7) of the Act for the following reasons:
The Petitioner seeks to represent employees of the
Employer engaged in installing "crossbar" telephone
equipment at facilities at Mascoutah, and Millstadt,
Illinois, in Case 14-RC-6055, and at the facilities at
O'Fallon, Missouri, in Case 14-RC-6056. These
operations commenced in 1968 and are scheduled
for completion in February 1969. The maximum
number of employees engaged in the installation
work at each of these facilities has never exceeded
twenty. The Employer contends that the only
appropriate unit is one comprised of all employees
engaged in the installation of telephone equipment
regardless of location or the type of equipment
being installed. There is no bargaining history for
the installers.
The Employer is engaged in the installation of
telephone equipment at various sites throughout the
United States and elsewhere. No permanent
facilities are maintained by the Employer at these
work sites. The facilities at which the equipment is
installed are owned by the Employer's customers.
The Employer has in excess of 300 installers
divided into five job classifications. These employees
The name of the Employer appears as amended at the hearing.
are assigned and transferred by the Employer from
its' Rochester., New York, headquarters from jobsite
to jobsite throughout and outside the United States
as 'individuals and ^ not as members of a team or
crew. They perform their work on the premises of
the Employer's customers where they install
telephone equipment either manufactured or
purchased by the Employer. The normal practice in
staffing these work projects is for the Employer to
assign a smaller number of employees to commence
the work, to assign a greater number of employees
during the time when the work is at its peak level,
and then to reduce the work force while the
installation is phasing out by transferring installers
no longer needed at the particular project to other
jobs at which the Employer is installing equipment.
Thus, individual installers are transferred by the
Employer from jobsite to jobsite as its needs dictate,
so that installers may be assembled at an
installation facility from many other facilities at
which the Employer is completing its work, may
then be transferred in and out of installation
facilities while the work of installing the equipment
is in progress, and then, as the various projects are
phasing out, the employees are transferred from the
project they are working on to other projects on
orders from Rochester, New York.
Wages are established within a minimum to a
maximum rate range for each of the five job
classifications of installers. These rates are
determined at the Employer's headquarters in
Rochester. Other benefits, such as insurance pension
plans, also are uniform for all installers varying only
when amount of wage or length of service is a
factor. These benefits are determined at the
Employer's headquarters in Rochester Other
working conditions, such as mileage and per diem
allowances are established in Rochester. Labor
relations are also centrally administered from the
Employer's Rochester headquarters. With regard to
industry practice, the record shows that installers
are generally ' represented on nationwide basis.
Specifically, the installers of North Electric,
Western Electric, and Automatic Electric are
represented on such a basis.
As noted above, the Petitioner indicated its
interest in representing only "crossbar" installers
and not "XY" installers. In this connection, the two
main types of installations made by the Employer
are "crossbar" and "XY" installations. These are
different types of equipment performing the same
function of providing a base for receiving and
transmitting telephone messages. Each facility at
which the machinery is installed uses only one of the
basic product lines, whether, it be an all "crossbar"
or all "XY" installation. Installers interchangeably
work on installing various product lines, switching
from one product line to another as they are
transferred from - one facility to another.
Specialization as to a particular product line is
limited to the level of foremen and management and
174 NLRB No. 116
STROMBERG CARLSON CORP. 763
specialists based in Rochester.
In view of the foregoing, particularly the evidence
showing that the individual installers are assigned to
a job on the basis of need rather than transferred
from job to job as a crew, the fact that installers are
transferred to and from various projects while work
is still in progress, and the fact that installers
interchangeably install various product lines without
specialization, we conclude that there is no
identifiable group of installers located at a work
project for the entire work period which could
constitute an appropriate unit for bargaining
purposes. Under these circumstances, we find that
separate units of employees installing "crossbar"
telephone equipment at the petitioned-for work sites
are not appropriate for bargaining purposes. We
shall therefore dismiss the petitions.'
ORDER
It is hereby ordered that the petitions in Cases
14-RC-6055 and 14-RC-6056 be, and they hereby
are, dismissed.
:In view of our decision herein, we find it unnecessary to determine
whether foremen of the Employer are supervisors within the meaning of
the Act