United States Gypsum Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 30, 1953

105 N.L.R.B. 931 (N.L.R.B. 1953)

UNITED STATES GYPSUM COMPANY 931
and we shall therefore exclude him , as a supervisor, from
the unit herein found appropriate.'
We therefore find that all regular full-time and part-time
selling and nonselling employees at the Employer's Baton
Rouge , Louisiana, retail store known as Sandy ' s, including
sales clerks, cashiers , the window trimmer, the maid, the
porter, and the bookkeeper , but excluding the shoe department
supervisor , the store manager, and any other supervisors as
defined in the Act, constitute a unit appropriate for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section
9 (b) of the Act.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication,]
9Charles Livingston & Sons, Inc , 86 NLRB 30, and cases cited therein
UNITED STATES GYPSUM COMPANY and LOCAL 278,
UNITED GAS, COKE AND CHEMICAL WORKERSOFAMER-
ICA, CIO, Petitioner. Case No. 13-RC-3032. June 30, 1953
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Jewel C.
Maher, 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-member panel [Members Murdock, Styles, and
Peterson].
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds:
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning
of the Act. The instant case involves only the Employer's
East Chicago, Indiana, plant.
2. The labor organization involved claims to represent
employees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the
representation of employees of the Employer within the mean-
ing of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
.4. The Petitioner seeks to represent the following employees
at the Employer's East Chicago, Indiana, plant: All lead
mechanics , perlite tube operators , board machine operators,
board kiln operators, board head takeoff men, grainboard
machine operators , board asphalt emulsion operators , shingle
wet machine operators , shingle hydropress operators , shingle
punch press operators , glatex machine operators , glatex kiln
i The Employer's motion to dismiss the petition , referred to the Board by the hearing
officer, is denied for the reasons hereinafter set forth in paragraph numbered 4
105 NLRB No 132.
932 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
operators , and glatex dip and bundle operators . These em-
ployees are known as "key operators ." The Employer contends,
principally, that all employees in the requested classifications
are supervisors and that the Board may not therefore certify
the Petitioner as their representative. -
The Employer, an Illinois corporation , is engaged at its
East Chicago, Indiana, plant , in the manufacture of gypsum
products , asphalt emulsion , asbestos cement siding , and other
products . The supervisory hierarchy at this plant is headed up
by the works manager and proceeds in descending order
through the departmental superintendents , the general foremen,
and shift foremen to the key operators here in dispute. In
addition to 38 admitted supervisors and the 43 key operators
involved in the present proceeding , there are 408 production
and maintenance employees at the plant.
Bargaining history: In March 1946 the Petitioner and the
Employer agree , and the Board found, that an appropriate
unit consisted of all production and maintenance employees,
including gang leaders : Thereafter, in December 1948, the,
Board excluded from the production and maintenance unit the
head takeoff men, the dip and bundle operators , and the AA
mechanics and electricians .' On July 10,, 1950, pursuant to a
stipulation of the parties , the Board excluded all of the afore-
said key operators whose status is now in issue.' (Subsequent
collective-bargaining agreements have excluded key operators
from the unit.) On August 1, 1950 , the Petitioner filed a petition
seeking the key operators; in February 1951, the Board dis-
missed the petition on the ground that the key operators were
supervisors within the meaning of the Act because they
responsibly directed, and effectively recommended changes in
status of, other employees.5 In negotiating its last contract
with the Employer, the Petitioner requested that the key
operators be added to the bargaining unit . When the Employer
declined, the instant petition was filed . Contending that the
status of the key operators was notfully litigated at the hearing
on its prior petition, the Petitioner urges the Board to re-
consider , in the light of the instant record , its prior finding
that the key\operators are supervisors.6
2 66 NLRB 619
379 NLRB 194
4Case No 13-RC-1257, not reported in printed volumes of Board decisions
5 93 NLRB 91
6 The Petitioner contends that because of its economic condition in 1950, it did not retain
counsel and was unable properly to prepare for that case, and that the record was not
adequate as it did not completely or accurately show the functions and duties of the key
operators. In the prior proceeding, key operators from only 3 of the 13 disputed classi-
fications testified, and none of their subordinates testified in the instant case, key oper-
ators in all 13 disputed classifications testified with respect to their duties and respon-
sibilities and, in most of these classifications, at least 1 subordinate also testified None
of the foremen testified in the prior proceeding; only 1 foreman testified in the instant
proceeding. The Employer's higher supervisory personnel testified in both proceedings
UNITED STATES GYPSUM COMPANY 933
General Considerations
Key operators , like production employees , punchtime clocks,
work at an hourly rate of pay , suffer a loss in pay when they
are late or absent because of illness , and receive no bonuses.
They devote most of their time to manual work. Foremen, on
the other hand, do no manual work , do not punch time clocks,
are paid on a monthly salary basis , are not docked for tardi-
ness or absence , and occasionally receive bonuses. Key
operators are paid more than their crew members.' Key
operators receive pay increases at the same time and in the
same amount as production employees , whereas increases to
foremen are not geared in amount or time to those paid to
production employees . ( Thus, foremen who perform the same
work on different shifts receive various rates of pay , whereas
all key operators in the same classification receive the same
rates of pay .)" Key operators and other employees receive 2
weeks' vacation after 5 years of service ; foremen receive 2
weeks ' vacation after only 2 years of service.
When a production employee substitutes for a key operator,
he receives the full pay of the operator , although the Em-
ployer concedes that the substitute has no supervisory re-
sponsibility during this period. Foremen do not relieve key
operators but key operators do relieve crew members. The
key operators are permitted to park their autos in the fore-
men's parking lot (inside lot); however , production employees
are also permitted to park in the inside parking area when
the outer parking lot becomes full.
All key operators except the lead mechanics operate a
machine and have specific production or maintenance duties
to perform.
The key operators were invited to the annual supervisors'
meetings in 1951 and 1952 , and to a special meeting concerning
the quality of production in 1952. They were also invited to
attend a series of meetings concerning human relations in
supervision and another series which concerned general
economics and certain financial information about the Em-
ployer. Although the former and present works manager,
Rump and Neely , respectively , testified that it was important
for supervisory personnel 'to attend these meetings , many of
the key operators were excused from attending and others who
failed to attend were not disciplined therefor . The record shows
further that none of the key operators who failed to attend was
subsequently briefed with respect to matters discussed at
7At the time of the hearing this differential ranged from 10 cents per hour in the case
of the hydropress and wet machine operators and lead mechanics to 30 cents per hour in
the case of the glatex machine operators.
"Although the Employer refused to disclose the salaries of its supervisory personnel,
the record shows that the lowest paid salaried foreman earns $435 monthly, exclusive
of any bonus ; the highest paid key operators, the lead mechanics. earn $2 . 18 per hour
Some production employees earn more than most of the key operators.
934 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
these meetings . While 95 percent of the foremen completed
the human relations course, only half of the key operators
completed the course.
While the key operators have attended a few safety meetings
held only for them and admitted supervisors , they also attend
regular monthly safety meetings with production employees.
In 1949 , based on a job-evaluation study, the key operators,
contrary to the ' usual practice , received for the most part a
larger increase than the production workers . The Employer
contended at the hearing that this disparity in their increase
was due , at least in part, to new supervisory duties given to
the key operators at that time . However , the Employer
acknowledged that these employees were generally more
skilled than the members of their crews and that this differ-
ence in skill was also reflected in the ner4 pay differential:
Moreover , many production employees received larger in-
creases at that time than some key operators.
Works Manager Rump testified that early in 1949 he in-
structed the department heads and foremen as to "additional"
supervisory responsibilities to be exercised by the key oper-
ators , and that he personally told most of the operators in
July 1950 and, again , in 1951 that , in view of the Board deci-
sions mentioned above, they "were part of management."
However , he did not inform any of the key operators as to the
precise nature of their supervisory powers and, except as
indicated below in the discussion of particular key operators,
there i s no evidence in the record that they were so informed
by any other representative of management.
The record shows that promotions up to and including the
position of key operator are made principally on the basis of
seniority ;' promotions to the rank of foreman are made on the
basis of individual merit.
Works Manager Neely testified that recommendations con-
cerning disciplinary action are made in the first instance by
the key operators , that the foreman will discuss the matter
with the head of the department , " and they [department head
and foreman ] will make the decision as to whether or not the
man should be disciplined upon the key operator's recommen-
dations ." Neely stated that the key operator ' s recommendation
is normally followed . However, elsewhere in his testimony,
Neely indicated that adoption of the key operator ' s recommen-
dations depends on the outcome of independent investigations
by the foreman. 10 Neely testified also that it is the practice for
key operators to act on requests for leave by crew members.
Key operators have made a number of recommendations
which were followed concerning the hiring of new employees.
9 Management representatives testified that ability was also a factor but that seniority
was usually followed. Employee witnesses testified that seniority was the only factor The
contract, itself, was not put in evidence
10 Thus, Neely cited one instance where a key operator 's recommendation of disciplinary
action was rejected after investigation by the foreman
UNITED STATES GYPSUM COMPANY 935
However, Shingle Plant Superintendent Keessen stated that the
Employer ' s practice is to consider recommendations con-
cerning the hiring of new employees from all its employees,
and the record shows that the Employer has hired persons
recommended by its production employees . In the prior pro-
ceeding, Rump and Keessen testified that key operators may
make recommendations , and that they are effective " if right."
They also stated that other production employees may make
recommendations and that the Employer gives its better jobs
to persons "who do their work well and receive such favorable
comments."
Disputed Categories
° Perlite tube operators : This operation takes place in the
mill department . Each of the 4 perlite tube operators is
assisted by a skip loader , and frequently by 1 or -more perlite
baggers . Two operators , a bagger , and a skip loader testified
as to their duties . The skip loaders work on the first floor, the
operators work on the third floor , and the baggers work on the
second floor . The skip loaders shovel the perlite ore from a
boxcar into a wheelbarrow , wheel it to a storage , bin or put it
into the skip hoist , which is elevated to the perlite tube. There,
the operator subjects the ore to high temperatures in the tube
causing the ore to expand rapidly and to form a lightweight
aggregate . It is then used in the production of structolite
plaster or bagged for shipment by the baggers.
The tube operator cannot observe the performance of the
members of his crew, except for those few occasions when
he goes down to the - lower floors . It takes a skip loader,
according to Mill Superintendent Hepler, only 1 to 2 weeks to
learn his job.
Daniels, who has been a tube operator since 1950 , was told
in 1952 that he was a supervisor , that he was responsible for
the safety of the skip loader and the bagger, and that he should
report any individual who would not work. He was not told,
however, that he could recommend changes in the status of
his crew members. Tube operator Oliver was told at about the
time the hearing began that he was in charge of his crew and
could recommend suspensions , discharges , and promotions.
However, neither of these operators has ever recommended a
change in the status of their crew members . As a result of
these recent instructions , Oliver stated that he now tells the
skip loader where to unload the ore and that he tells the
baggers to throw away oversized bags.
The tube operators have also transmitted instructions to
their crew , at the direction of the foremen or mill engineer.
Skip loader Stevenson and former bagger Miller testified that
they had taken all their orders from the foremen and not from
the perlite operator . The record shows that the foreman has
replaced loaders and baggers , without consulting the tube
operators . The tube operators work on Sundays when there is
291555 0 - 54 - 60
936 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
no foreman in the mill . However , certain admittedly non-
supervisory employees also work . in the mill on Sunday,
without any supervision . It is clear from the foregoing that,
at least until shortly before the instant hearing-, these opera-
tors did not have any of the statutory indicia of supervisors.
Upon the present record it cannot be determined whether the
recent grant to them of supervisory authority was made in
good faith or solely to influence the Board ' s action in this case.
In view of our doubt on this point , we will permit them to vote
subject to challenge."
Key Operators on Main Machine in Board Plant
1
The plaster that is made in the mill is used for the produc-
tion of gypsum board products , which are made on the main
machine of the board plant . Each of the three foremen is in
charge of the main machine during his shift. ( Only one of these
foremen, Sinclair , testified at the hearing. ) The machine itself
is divided into three parts , the wet end, the kiln section, and
the takeoff section. A key operator is in charge of each of
these sections . Their duties and responsibilities are discussed
below, as follows:
(1) Machine operator on wet end of main machine : In this
operation the ingredients of the gypsum board are mixed and
formed to produce board of specific thickness. Machine opera-
tor Smeberg and crew member Nordmark testified concerning
the duties and responsibilities of the machine operator. His
primary responsibility is to see that the board is properly
formed and edged and that the paper is properly lined with
the board . He keeps the machine properly adjusted to insure
that the gypsum board meets specifications ; checks each 2
hours to see that the proper amount of water , soap, blocks,
and starch i s used for the board ; ' keeps his area clean and
passes on to the crew instructions received from the foreman.
Each of the other 3 or 4 crew members has a specific job to
perform. Thus , the mixer man has to keep the folders clean,
see that paste is running on the edges , and that the slurry does
not set up too fast. The edgeman makes minor adjustments in
the machinery and sees that the edges are kept perfectly
straight . The paperhanger puts paper on spindles, keeps it
trimmed, and keeps fiber on the fiber machine . The supply
man assists the paperhanger , mixes paste and soap, and sees
that starch is going into the board . Occasionally , there is also
a fiber man on the crew.
Any member of the crew can ring for the millwright when
the machine is out of order , without consulting the operator.
The foreman has asked Smeberg's opinion , as well as the
opinion of other members of the crew , concerning the ability
of "the man for the job. " When a former crew member re-
turned from the Army, the foreman asked Smeberg whether
"See Cherokee Brick and Tile Company, 100 NLRB 612
UNITED STATES GYPSUM COMPANY 937
he preferred the returning employee or the present employee.
Despite Smeberg ' s request that he keep his regular crew
member , the employee was transferred off his shift a week
later . The operator frequently passes on to the crew instruc-
tions which he received from the foreman but gives no inde-
pendent orders to the crew. Although he has been told he was
a supervisor , the crew members have never been so informed.
The foreman reprimands the crew members directly for any
errors, and the crew members consult directly with the fore-
man. Foreman Sinclair testified that, after investigating the
facts, he rejected a machine operator's recommendation as to
disciplinary action against a member of the crew.
(2) Kiln operator on main machine : The board is cut and
dried in the kiln section . Kiln operator Bundy and knifeman
J. Woolard testified concerning the duties and responsibilities
of these operators . The kiln operators light the kiln fires,
maintain certain temperatures , and regulate the speed at which
the board goes through the kiln . There are two other members
of the crew ; a knifeman and his helper . The knifeman cuts the
board into specified lengths, checks the dimensions of the
board, and tells the operator to check the kiln whenever he
believes that a defective board has gone into the kiln. These
duties are performed before the board reaches the kiln. The
knifeman is assisted by his helper , to whom he gives routine
directions.
Bundy has been a kiln operator since 1947. Although he was
told for the first time in 1951 that he was a supervisor, he
received no raise in pay at that time. The foreman gives him
instructions to pass on to the crew . In the 6 years that he has
been a kiln operator, his advice as to the efficiency of a crew
member was 'sought on only 1 occasion, when the foreman asked
him which of 2 men should replace a knife helper. He made no
recommendation , but stated that one of the men had more
seniority . He occasionally works as much as 600 feet away
from the knifeman . He has never recommended changes in
status or disciplinary action for the knifeman or his helper.
When knifeman Woolard apologized to the foreman for having
to bother him with questions, the foreman did not suggest that
he ask the key operator but told Woolard to call him (the
foreman) "for any little thing no matter how small." Although
the kiln operator has told him on occasion that his knife was
not working properly, Woolard has received the same informa-
tion from his helper.
While the kiln operator substitutes for the foreman in his
absence, the record does not show that this occurs with any
degree of regularity.
(3) Head takeoff men: After the board comes out of the kiln,
it is taken off the machine and bundled and stacked for ship-
ment. This operation is directed by the head takeoff man, who
works with a crew consisting of 2 bundlers , 2 stackers, and a
relief man . The head takeoff man's duties consist of operating
and adjusting the cascade (an automatic device which takes the
938 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
board from the kiln ), carrying glue and filling the glue pots,
carrying paper to put on the machine , making-splices in paper,
changing rolls , sorting board , and cleaning up. New employees
,are usually trained by another crew member whose job they
are to learn.
Although head takeoff men McDonald and Ralph were told in
1950 that they were supervisors , they were not told that they
could effectively change, or recommend changes in, the status
of other employees , and their subordinates have not been in-
formed of their supervisory status. Mattingly , a former bundler
on the takeoff operation , testified that he never received orders
from the head takeoff man and was never told that the key oper-
ator was a supervisor.'2
In the 5 years that McDonald and Ralph have been key oper-
ators they have made a limited number of recommendations.
These recommendations have not been consistently followed and
the record does not show what weight was given to them. Thus,
McDonald stated that while he has not reprimanded the mem-
bers of his crew, he has reported them to the foremen when
they refused to work , and the foreman in turn has reproved
them. On one occasion , he recommended that a crew member
be given an increase , but this was not carried out. Ralph also
recommended a wage increase , which was not granted. Ralph
has also reported employees for their failure to perform their
work" and has made several personnel recommendations.
Two of these recommendations consisted of a request to
transfer an employee into the crew , another concerned the
transfer of a man out of the crew because he did not speak
English and could not be understood by Ralph, and two con-
cerned promotions . Except for one of the promotions, all of
these recommendations were put into effect. Ralph stated,
however, that with respect to promotions " we go by seniority
pretty close. " Ralph, a witness for the Employer , further
stated, when asked whether his recommendation would normally
be followed , that it would be up to the foreman , that "it depends
on what grounds I had. " He added that he did not know whether
his recommendation to recall a former employee would be
followed because "they would have his record to show whether
he was a good man or not."
Foreman Sinclair stated that he would consider recommenda-
tions from all. production employees as well as from the
machine operator , kiln operator , and head takeoff man. Although
a limited number of recommendations were made by these key
operators , some of which were followed, the record indicates
that , before acting on these recommendations , the Employer
makes an independent investigation . Thus , Sinclair testified
that, as a result of an independent investigation by him, a key
operator ' s recommendation to discipline an employee was not
12 Another crew member, Kmley, testified that he was not told that the key operator was
a supervisor until after the hearing had begun
130n one of these occasions, the foreman told crew member Kinley that if he could not
perform his job, he would be replaced.
UNITED STATES GYPSUM COMPANY 939
followed . Sinclair stated , also , that he personally evaluates
the qualifications of the crew members and that he is suffi-
ciently familiar with the employees on his shift to make per-
sonnel changes on the basis of his own knowledge.
Under these circumstances , we find that the key operators
here under consideration do not have the power effectively to
recommend changes in status of other employees , and that they
do not responsibly direct other employees . Accordingly, we
find that the board machine operator , board kiln operators,
and head takeoff men are not supervisors.
Other Key Operators in Board Plant
The speciality board foreman is in charge of the grain board
operation and the making of asphalt emulsion. There is a key
operator on each of these operations ,- as follows:
(1) Asphalt emulsion operator: Operator Tiller, the only
asphalt emulsion operator , has held this position since 1948.
He is assisted by only one employee, a supply man . Tiller is
supplied with a formula which contains the ingredients to be
used in making asphalt emulsion , a product used in certain
types of gypsum board. He makes batches of the asphalt
emulsion throughout the day, tests the product, and reports
the results of these tests to the laboratory . He informs the
foreman when he needs materials but does not sign the requi-
sitions.
Tiller determines when it is necessary that he work overtime;
his helper works overtime with him. The record does not show
that this is done at Tiller's request. Occasionally, he-assists
his helper in loading the car. When the foreman needs Tiller's
helper, he transfers him without consulting Tiller. Tiller
stated that it is not necessary to give his helper orders, that
his helper does his " routine" job without instructions, and
that he (Tiller) directs him only in the performance of things
which "comes up outside of his routine job." Tiller occasionally
requests extra help from the foreman and, in the absence of
the foreman , from the grain board operator.
On one occasion the foreman asked Tiller ' s opinion of an
employee's ability. Tiller replied that he thought the man was
good but that he couldn't "judge that myself," that the foreman
"was better qualified" to decide, and that he could not make
any recommendation.
Tiller spends all of his time engaged in manual production
duties. It does not appear that he directs his helper in anything
more than the most routine functions. As the record shows
that he neither effectively recommends personnel action nor
responsibly directs the activities of his helper, we find that he
is not a supervisor.
(2) Grainboard operator: The Petitioner concedes that this
operator is a supervisor . The grainboard crew of 12 em-
ployees applies predecorated paper to gypsum board. There
is 'only one grainboard operator . He reports to the specialty
board foreman and has been told that he is in charge of the
940 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
crew. He assigns the men on his crew to various jobs , directs
their work , and spends only about 3i hours daily performing
manual labor . He testified that he is always consulted before
a man is transferred from his crew . He has effectively
recommended the hiring of new employees , and the transfer
and discipline of members of his crew . As an example of his
'authority , he cited one occasion in which his recommendation
resulted in the foreman changing his mind about rehiring a
former employee . As he effectively recommends changes in
the status of his subordinates , we find that the grainboard
operator is a supervisor within the meaning of the Act, and we
will exclude him.
The Lead Mechanics
There are three categories of lead mechanics : Mill lead
mechanic , board lead mechanic , and authority maintenance
lead mechanic.
(1) The mill lead mechanic: This mechanic directs the work
of a crew of 15 employees in maintenance work in the mill and
packing departments . The Petitioner concedes that he is a
supervisor . His crew reports to him each morning and he
assigns them to various jobs throughout the plant , basing the
assignment of each employee on his particular skill. He has
recommended increases and promotions for crew members
which were followed , has disciplined a member of his crew
without consulting his foreman , assigns overtime , and makes
temporary transfers of members of his crew to other crews.
In case of emergencies during off -duty hours , he calls mem-
bers of his crew at their homes and orders them to report for
work.
In view of the foregoing, we find , in accord with the agree-
ment of the parties , that the mill lead mechanics are super-
visors.
(Z) The board lead mechanic : This mechanic directs three
employees in maintenance work in the board plant . There is
no other evidence in the record which would warrant a finding
that he is a supervisor . Accordingly , we find that he is not a
supervisor.
(3) The authority maintenance lead mechanic : This mechanic
directs the work of 17 maintenance employees , whoinstall new
equipment and make major repairs and overhauls throughout
the plant . He is responsible for seeing that the new equipment
is" installed in conformity with specifications , and that the
installation work is otherwise properly done . In view of the
size of his crew and the nature of the work he directs , we find
that this lead mechanic responsibly directs the work of his
crew , and is , therefore , a supervisor.
Key Operators in Shingle Plant
The shingle plant , consisting of a shingle division and glatex
division , is located in a building separate from the board plant.
UNITED STATES GYPSUM COMPANY 941
Here, the "base product" for the glatex material and the
asbestos cement shingles is made. Each of the 3 shift foremen
in the shingle division is in charge of the plant operations during
his shift. They report to a general foreman, who reports to the
shingle plant superintendent. The shingle division is divided
into 3 main sections: The wet machine, the hydropress, and
the punch press. There are 2 punch presses. On each shift,
there is 1 wet machine operator, I hydropress operator, and
2 punch press operators.
The glatex division of the shingle plant operates 7 days a
week, 24 hours a day, and requires 4 shifts of employees. On
each shift there is a machine operator, a kiln operator, and
a dip and bundle operator. The 4 shift foremen report to the
general foreman of the glatex division, who reports to the
shingle plant superintendent. All key operators in the shingle
division and glatex division of the shingle plant are discussed
below, as follows:
(1) Wet machine operators: In the wet machine section, the
asbestos cement and other ingredients are added to the board.
Operator Lloyd Farmer stated that his duties consist of
adjusting the machine and the motors and pumps connected
with it; inspecting "the sheets" for thickness and weight;
checking the water temperature; and, in general, inspecting
the machine and cleaning up his area. If the machine was not
running properly, he would find out why; if the delay was due
to a particular individual, he would not discipline any 1 on his
crew of 6 employees, although he might report the cause of
the delay to the foremen.
Wet machine crew members are usually directly repri-
manded for their mistakes; operator Farmer has been repri-
manded for their mistakes only when he overlooked them in
the inspecting phase of his work. Farmer was recently informed
that he could recommend promotions and layoffs. During the
6 years of his service with the Employer as an operator, he
has recommended only 2 promotions, which were put into
effect. However, there was no evidence 'as to the extent to
which the Employer relied on Farmer's recommendations in
making these promotions. As noted above, promotions are
based principally on seniority.
Upon the entire record, we find that these operators are not
supervisors.
(2) ydropress operators: After the "sheet" is formed in
the wet end of the shingle plant, it is placed into an oven and
then into,a large hydropress. The hydropress crew includes
the hydropress operator, the lift-box operator, and his helper.
The hydropress operator operates the hydropress, which
removes water from, and imprints a pattern on, the shingle.
The press is hand controlled. The lift-box operator and his
helper operate the equipment which removes the sheet from
the press, and stack it on pallets.
Hydropress operator Jarrett has been so employed for 5
years. He testified that while he had been told in 1951 that he
was supervisor and was invited to submit suggestions, he was
942 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
never told that he had the power to recommend a change in
status for either of the other two crew members. On one
occasion he recommended that an employee be hired, and this
was done. On another occasion he reported a member of the
crew who was not properly performing his job.14 The foreman,
not Jarrett, thereupon instructed the employee as to the
proper method of performing his job. If an employee was
absent, Jarrett would report it to the foreman, who would
secure a replacement. He has made no other recommendations
or reports during his 5 years of service.
Another hydropress operator, L. Woolard, testified that the
foreman does not hold him responsible for the other crew
members, that he gives no orders to his crew and that he took
no orders from Jarrett when he relieved a member of Jarrett's
crew. He was never told he was a supervisor. He was never
informed that he had any supervisory duties or powers and
has never been consulted concerning the transfer or promotion
of anyone on the crew. He performs manual labor during his
entire shift.
Relief operator Turack, who has worked as a member of the
crew of all three hydropress operators, testified that promo-
tions are determined only by seniority, that he had never been
told he should take orders from the hydropress operators, and
that he considers the foreman his immediate supervisor.
We find that the hydropress operators do not responsibly
direct the other crew members, but spend all of their time in
manual work. Upon the entire record, we find that these opera-
tors are not supervisors.
(3) Punch press operators : After leaving the hydropress,
the large s eets are cut into smaller, standard- size shingles
by the 2 punch presses. There are -2 operators on each shift,
each of whom has 3 helpers--a pusher and 2 catchers. Punch
press operators Handlin, Schneider, and A. Woolard, and punch
press helpers Jaryzak and Lipsik testified concerning the duties
and responsibilities of these operators.
The operator and the pusher take sheets off a pallet and pull
them over a conveyor into the punch press. The press, which
is operated manually by the punch press operator, cuts the
shingles. The catchers catch the shingles as they come off the
press.i As the catchers work on the opposite side of the machine,
the operators cannot see them, inasmuch as they are busy
operating the press. The operator also makes out a daily
report concerning the day's production, inspects the production,
and notifies the foreman when production is defective.
Although the three operators who testified were told they
should report employees "who don't feel like working," none
of them has ever recommended a change in status for any of
the members of their crews. The two crew members testified
that they were never told they should take orders from the
operators and that none of the operators has ever given them
orders or assigned them to another job. Indeed, the record
14 He merely reported the facts and made no personal recommendation.
UNITED STATES GYPSUM COMPANY 943
shows that the foreman does not generally reprimand operators
for mistakes of the crew , that he gives orders directly to
members of the crew, and that he assigns crew members to
other jobs without consulting the operator.
In September 1952 , after a meeting with the crew , operator
Handlin was reprimanded by Superinte -ndent Keessen for not
"sticking up for management." During the meeting , however,
Keessen told the crew, as testified by Jaryzak, that " if there
was any trouble and we have anything that is bothering us we
are to go to our foreman and try to iron it 'out, instead of
mingling between the girls and getting the trouble all started
up...:",
When operator Woolard asked her foreman that a man be
removed because he had violated a safety rule which could have
resulted in the loss of Woolard ' s hand, her foreman stated,
"No, you are going to stick right there and work with him.""
It does not appear that the punch press operators responsibly
direct their crews , inasmuch as they are engaged exclusively
in the operation of the press and during such times cannot see
2 of the 3 other members . Upon the entire record , we find that
these operators are not supervisors.
(4) Glatex machine operators ( gun tenders ): After the shingles
leave the punch press , they are stored for curing . They are
then fed into automatic feeders and are sprayed with a
ceramic coating . This operation is directed by the machine
operator . He checks the spray guns to see that they are oper-
ating correctly , makes adjustments when necessary, and
returns shingles which did not get enough paint. He works with
a crew consisting of 2 feeder 's, 2 takeoff girls , and a trolley
operator . " The 2 feeders scrape foreign particles off the
shingles and feed them into the feeder box. They are cautioned
by the operator when too many foreign particles are left on
the shingles . The 2 takeoff girls catch the shingles and sort
out the defective ones . The trolley operator transfers the cars
of shingles onto the trolley and makes outa report showing the
type and amount of shingles in the car.
Glatex machine operators A. Dobos and M. Dobos testified
concerning their duties.
Operator M. Dobos , a witness for the Employer, testified
that he was told in 1950 that he was a supervisor and respon-
sible for the quality of the product and the production of the
crew . He was not told , however, that he could recommend
discharge , promotions , or discipline . Although he has been told
he could recommend the transfer of an employee from the
crew , he has not in the 5 years that he has been a key operator
made such a recommendation . In 1950 he reported that two
employees were- slowing down production , but did not recom-
15 This incident occurred shortly before Woolard testified at the instant hearing.
16 It is not clear from the record whether the paint millman is also a member of this
crew.
944 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
mend any action with respect to them. The foreman said he
would speak to these employees and transferred them the next
day.
A. Dobos, Petitioner' s witness and son of M. Dobos, testi-
fied that he had been a machine operator for a total of approxi-
mately, 3 years, and that he was responsible for the quality of
the product but was never told that he could make any recom-
mendations concerning personnel actions. On one occasion,
when he was asked if he was satisfied with his help, he stated
that he was dissatisfied with a member of the crew . The fore-
man thereupon spoke to the employee about her performance.
Subsequently, A. Dobos again complained that she was unsatis-
factory and recommended that she be transferred, but no
action was taken prior to her voluntary departure about a month
later . On another occasion , however , when A. Dobos brought
defective work to the foreman and asked permission to inter-
change two members of the crew, the foreman agreed.
Crew member Ross testified that she had never received
orders or directions from any of these key operators and that
she recognized only the foreman as her supervisor . Upon the
entire record , we find thatthese operators are not supervisors.
(5) Glatex kiln operators : After leaving the spray line, the
shingles are baked in the kiln. The kiln operator is assisted
by only one employee, a kiln puller.
Kiln operator Gunlogson , kiln puller Hittson , and relief
operator Olson testified concerning the duties of the kiln
operators . They place the shingles in the kilns and bake them
at a specified temperature . At the end of each 4 hours, they
make a report concerning the baking process. They also assist
the kiln puller, whose job is to load and unload the shingles.
The record indicates that when the foreman assigned Hittson
to the kiln puller job, she received no instructions except
perhaps from another kiln puller , who merely handed her a
hook and said , "Let's go."
Although Joe Hrivak, dip and bundle operator , testified that
he had attended a meeting with Gunlogson at which they were
both told that they were supervisors, Gunlogson denied that
she had been told this, and there is no evidence that she has
recommended any changes in status of other employees. How-
ever , she admitted that she was asked on one occasion whether
she was satisfied with "her crew," She testified that she does
not give orders to the kiln puller. Hittson and Olson testified
that they do not , and were never instructed to, take orders
from the kiln operators . Nor were Hittson and Olson told during
the time they substituted for the operator that they were in
charge of the puller. The foremen have made inquiries of
both Gunlogson and Hittson as to the performance of another
kiln puller. Hittson has made recommendations directly to the
foreman concerning equipment and the hiring or retaining of
personnel . When new or extra girls are placed on the crew,
their duties are usually explained to them by the foreman, but
UNITED STATES GYPSUM COMPANY 945
occasionally the key operator or puller informs them of their
duties.
Upon the entire record , we find that these operators are not
supervisors.
(6) Glatex dip and bundle operators : After leaving the kiln,
the shingles are normalized in the dip tank and then inspected,
bundled , and piled on pallets ready for shipping . Two dip and
bundle operators , Hrivak and Dwardy, and two shingle pushers,
Youngblood and Kalamas , testified concerning the duties of
these operators . Their duties consist of making minor repairs,
checking to see that their full crew of seven persons is present,
making out a report for the day's work , putting the coding into
the stamping machine, bringing up supplies , checking to see
"what we are running ," counting, and analyzing the reason for,
defective boards, and recording the total on a tally sheet. They
also call poor work to the attentior of the responsible crew
member. These operators spend only about half their time
performing manual work and spend the remainder of their time
observing the performance of the crew.
Two crew members , Youngblood and Kalamas , stated that
they had never been given orders by these operators and that
the foreman reprimands them directly . On several occasions,
the foreman asked them for an opinion of the work of another
crew member.
Hrivak testified that the foreman told the employees on his
crew that he (Hrivak ) was their supervisor , and that when a
crew member complained to the foreman because Hrivak had
reprimanded him, the foreman stated, "You are working for
him, if he sees you have it coming, he can do it." These oper-
ators have attended meetings at which only dip and bundle
operators and other admitted supervisory personnel were
present. On these occasions , they discussed the dip and bundle
operation and were asked whether they were satisfied with
their crews . In 1948, they were informed that they were super-
visors and that they were responsible for the efficient operation
of the crew . These operators have recommended that employees
be transferred off the crew , which recommendations were
adopted , and the foremen -have consulted with them before
making personnel changes in their crews . On at least one
occasion, the foreman has upon the advice of the operator
withheld making a contemplated personnel change. Accordingly,
we find that these operators are supervisors , and we shall
exclude them.
Several of the above categories of key operators have been
found not to be supervisors . From the record as a whole, it
appears that the functions and employment interests of these
nonsupervisory categories are similar to those of the produc-
tion and maintenance employees . Accordingly , we find that
they may appropriately be included in the existing production
and maintenance unit, and we shall direct an election in the
following voting group:
946 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
All perlite tube operators ," board machine operators,board
kiln operators , head takeoff men, asphalt emulsion operator,
shingle wet machine operators , hydropress operators, punch
press operators , glatex machine operators ( gun tenders),
board lead mechanic, and glatex kiln operators , excluding the
mill and authority maintenance lead mechanics , the grain-
board operator , the dip and bundle operators and all other
employees.
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.]
17 As already indicated , the vote of these eniployees will be subject to challenge. If it
is determined , in resolving any challenges to their ballots, that they are supervisors, they
will be excluded ; otherwise , they will be included.
ANDREWS INDUSTRIES , INC., Petitioner and INTERNA-
TIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF BOILERMAKERS, IRON
SHIPBUILDERS AND HELPERS OF AMERICA , LOCAL 27,
AFL and LOCAL 618, AUTOMOTIVE , PETROLEUM &
ALLIED INDUSTRIES EMPLOYEES, AFFILIATED WITH
INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS,
CHAUFFEURS , WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS OF
AMERICA, AFL . Case No. 14 - RM-79. June 30, 1953
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Joseph H.
Solien , hearing officer . The hearing officer's rulings made
at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby
affirmed.
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds:
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the Act.
2. International Brotherhood of Boilermakers , Iron Ship-
builders and Helpers of America , Local 27, AFL , herein
called the Boilermakers , and Local 618, Automotive , Petro-
leum & Allied Industries Employees , affiliated with Inter-
national Brotherhood of Teamsters , Chauffeurs , Warehousemen
and Helpers of America , AFL, herein called the Teamsters,
are labor organizations claiming to represent employees of
the Employer.
3. The Employer filed a petition for a unit of all employees
at its St. Louis , Missouri , plant, excluding office clerical and
professional employees , guards , and supervisors . The Boiler-
105 NLRB No. 115.