Truscon Steel Co.Download PDFNational Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsAug 7, 195195 N.L.R.B. 1005 (N.L.R.B. 1951) Copy Citation TRUSCON STEEL COMPANY 1005 Gary branch plant operates under a plant superintendent. Clerical employees of Gary make up the Employer's payroll, and do some of its accounting work. Each plant involved herein has a hiring office. At the time of the hearing, held on May 25, 1951, the Employer, Illinois, and Gary were erecting a new building, otherwise and here- inafter called the Blue Island plant, to which they expect to transfer their operations about August 1, 1951 .1 After the transfer, approxi- mately 85 production and maintenance employees of the three con- cerns will punch the same time clock and have the same general work- ing conditions. The two plant superintendents will be retained. The Employer's president will determine policy with respect to hours and conditions of employment, wages, and similar matters for all em- ployees, and conduct all labor negotiations. There will be common hiring and purchasing offices, and common office clerical and main- tenance employees. The Employer, Illinois, and Gary will contrib- ute their proportionate shares to the payment of common overhead expenses, including those for maintenance, taxes, water, heating, lighting, fuel, and wages of office clerical employees. Employees at the Gary main plant will prepare and file income tax returns cover- ing the corporations, and withholding and social security tax re- turns covering employees at the Blue Island plant, and will make up its payroll. Under these circumstances, we are of the opinion that no useful purpose will be served if we proceeded with a determination of rep- resentatives at this time.2 We shall therefore dismiss the petition herein, without prejudice to the filing of a new petition after opera- tions have begun at the Blue Island plant. Order Upon the entire record in this case, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that the petition be, and it hereby is, dismissed without prejudice. 1 The operations of the Gary main plant will not be transferred to the Blue Island plant. z International Harvester Company, Chattanooga Works, 73 NLRB 436 and cases cited therein. TRUSCON STEEL COMPANY and UNITED STEELWORKERS Or AlrERICA, CIO, PETITIONER . Case No. 8-RCi-1,212. August 7, 1951 Decision and Direction of Election Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National La- bor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Bernard Ness, hearing 95 NLRB No. 116. 1006 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 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, Reynolds, 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 organization involved claims 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. 4. The appropriate unit : The Petitioner seeks to represent a separate unit of those office and clerical employees employed in the shop offices and warehouse of the Employer's Youngstown, Ohio, plant, which is engaged in the manufacture of steel reinforcing and building products and bar mat. In the alternative, the Petitioner would add these employees to the production and maintenance unit which it currently represents. The Employer contends that these employees are confidential employees. The Employer's office and clerical employees are divided into two main groups : The operating department employees and the general office employees. The latter group of employees work in the general office building in the sales, executive, and administrative divisions, under the ultimate direction of the executive vice president. The operating department employees are under the over-all supervision of the works manager, and are further divided into two groups, those who work in what is known as the plant operating building; and those who work in offices located. in the plant proper and in the warehouse. It is this latter group-the clericals in the plant office:; and in the warehouse-that the Petitioner seeks to represent. The employees working in the plant operating building include primarily (1) those employees assigned to the works accounting department, which accumulates the cost of the manufactured product including labor costs and makes up the payroll for all hourly rated production' and maintenance employees, and (2) the production department planners and their typists, who plan the sequence.of the operations of the work to be done in the plant. In addition to typists, the clericals employed in the plant operating building include employees classified as clerks, comptometer operators, duplicator operators , and messengers. TRUSCON STEEL COMPANY 1007 Included in the group of clericals assigned to the plant proper and to the warehouse whom the Petitioner now seeks to represent, are the following categories : (1) Timekeepers.-Although these employees are assigned to the works accounting department, they work exclusively in the plant, accumulating time records of the production and maintenance employees in the machine shop, shipping department, and electrical department. (2) Dispatchers.-These employees work throughout the plant and in offices located in production departments. They routinely assign all work performed in the plant and apply base and incentive rates established by the industrial -engineering department, noting such rates on production tickets given to the employees. The dispatchers report all time data to the accounting department and production data to the production department, and make such reports as may be required by their supervisor, the superintendent of the production department. The clerical work necessary for these reports is per- formed by the 10 clerks assigned to the dispatchers. (3) Receiving and general stores department clerks.-They are under the supervision of the superintendent of stores and raw stock, and perform clerical duties related to keeping track of materials received, on order, and on hand, disbursements, and stock balances. (4) Clerks in the shipping department.-Two of these clerks pre- pare bills of lading, make daily reports of shipments, and order trucks for shipping purposes. One clerk orders and classifies all freight cars for outbound shipping, maintains service cards records, deter- mines debit and credit balances, checks demurrage reports and expense reports, and keeps storage records. Another clerk cuts sten- cils and runs tags for LCL shipments,' receives and distributes mail, and operates the ditto machine. The remaining, three clerks in this department plan and assemble truck and car shipments and make reports on partial shipments. (5) The machine shop clerks.-One of these clerks is primarily a planner for the machine shop department. ' The other clerk makes up requisitions, does typing. and general clerical work as directed. (6) Warehouse clerks.-These employees work in the office of the warehouse located about 3 blocks from the plant, operated by the Employer's parent corporation, Republic Steel Corporation," and ' Although this warehouse is operated nominally by Republic Steel , employees located there are hired and paid by the Employer , and are frequently interchanged with the Employer 's plant employees when layoffs occur. The Petitioner has represented the nonclerical employees of this warehouse as part of the production and maintenance unit of the Employer ' s employees. 1008' DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD perform the clerical duties usually 'associated with warehouse activities. No issue has been raised as to the appropriateness of a unit con- fined to the above six categories of employees, and excluding the cler- ical employees assigned to the plant operating building. In an earlier proceeding involving the same plant,'. the Board directed an. election in a. "plant clerical" unit which. embraced both groups of employees 3 We note, however, that in that case no party raised the issue of the appropriateness of including both groups, and the particular job duties of the clericals in the plant operating building were apparently not fully litigated. On the more complete evidence before us in the instant proceeding we are satisfied that the employees in the plant operating building are essentially office clericals as distinguished from those in the group sought to be represented by the Petitioner, whose duties clearly stamp them as plant clericals. The record before us further establishes that the two groups have little contact with each other, are paid on a different basis, are never interchanged except for an occasional permanent transfer, and are separately supervised. Under all the circumstances we conclude that the unit sought by the Petitioner is not rendered inappropriate by the exclusion of the cler- icals in the plant operating building. Nor do we find any basis for the Employer's contention that the clericals in question are confidential employees. There is no evidence that they have access to confidential data concerning labor relations or otherwise act in a confidential capacity to management officials charged with responsibility in the field of labor relations. Absent such functions they are not confidential employees as the Board has construed that term.4 Under well-established principles plant clericals may appropriately be included in the production and maintenance unit. Accordingly, we shall direct an election in the following voting group : All plant clerks at the Employer's Youngstown plant and warehouse including timekeepers, dispatchers, clerks assigned to dispatchers, receiving and general stores department clerks, shipping department clerks, ma- chine shop clerks, and warehouse clerks, excluding all general office employees, clerical employees of the plant operating building, the salaried raw materials clerk, guards, professional employees, and supervisors as defined in the Act. 2 Truscon Steel Company, 88 NLRB 331. 2 No union won that election. ' Foster Wheeler Corporation, 94 NLRB 211 . Truscon Steel Company, supra. However , the parties stipulated , and we find , that the salaried raw materials clerk acts in a confidential capacity to persons exercising managerial responsibility in the field of labor relations . As such we shall exclude this employee from the voting group. DEALERS ENGINE REBUILDERS, INC. 1009, . If a majority of these employees vote,for the Petitioner, they will be taken to have indicated their desire to be included in the production and maintenance unit currently represented by the Petitioner, and the Petitioner, may bargain for such employees as part of the existing unit. [Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this volume.] DEALERS ENGINE REBUILDERS , INC. and LODGE No. 325, INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS . Case No. 32-CA-148. August 8, 1951 Decision and Order On April 12, 1951, Trial Examiner John H. Eadie issued his In- termediate Report in the above-entitled' proceeding, finding that the Respondent had engaged in and was engaging in certain unfair labor practices and recommending that it be ordered to cease and desist therefrom and take certain affirmative action, as set forth in the copy of the Intermediate Report attached hereto. Thereafter the Re- spondent and the charging union filed exceptions to the Intermediate Report and supporting briefs. The Board 1 has reviewed the rulings made by the Trial Examiner at the hearing and finds that no prejudicial error was committed. The rulings are hereby affirmed. The, Board has considered the Intermediate Report, the exceptions and briefs, and the entire record in the case and hereby adopts the findings, conclusions, and recom- mendations of the Trial Examiner, with the following additions and modifications : 1. We agree with the Trial Examiner's conclusion that the Re- spondent refused to bargain with the Union in violation of Section 8 (a) (5) and .(1) of the Act on and after February 14, 1949. The Union was certified as the collective bargaining representative on November 29, 1949. By letter of December 1, 1949, the Union requested aprompt bargaining conference and enclosed-a copy of their proposed contract. No reply was received. After a number of phone calls and personal visits to the Respondent, a bargaining conference was finally held almost 2 months after the initial request, on January 20, 1950,. at the office of Wayne Owen, the Respondent's attorney. When the Union requested discussion of their proposed i Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, the Board has delegated its _ powers in respect to this case to a three -member panel [ Members Houston , Reynolds, anc] Styles]. 95 NLRB No. 125. Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation