Wisconsin Electric Power Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Feb 19, 1954

107 N.L.R.B. 1204 (N.L.R.B. 1954)

1204 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
activity will increase shortly after the date of this Decision and
as the Employer has agreed to reemploy Newton and Evans
before it hires any new employees in their work classifications,
and is still using employees in such classifications, we find
that they have a reasonable expectation of reemployment in
the near future and that they are therefore eligible to vote in
the election.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
Member Rodgers took no part in the consideration of the
above Decision and Direction of Election.
WISCONSIN ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY and LOCAL NO.
317, INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS,
AFL, Petitioner. Case No. 13-RC-3606. February 19,
1954
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Robert G. May-
berry, 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 the case, the Board finds:
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the mean-
ing of the Act.
2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent
certain employees of the Employer. i
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 supplant Division 998 as bargain-
ing representative for a unit composed of three groups of
employees of the Employer: Plant maintenance men; janitors,
watchmen, elevator operators, and matrons; and the non-
clerical employees in the central stores division. Division 998
agrees with the Petitioner that its present bargaining unit is
appropriate. Local 2 seeks to add the storekeepers, stock
disbursers and receivers, and appliance deliverymen of the
iDivision 998, Amalgamated Association of Street, Electric Railway and Motor Coach
Employees of America, AFL, referred to herein as Division 998, intervened on the basis
of its contract interest. Local 2, United Association of Office, Sales and Technical Employees,
referred to herein as Local 2, was permitted to intervene on thb basis of an interest showing
over the objections of the Petitioner and Division 998. The authorization cards on which Local
2 relies were obtained between the date of the first hearing in this matter and the date of the
continued hearing. Since they were acquired before the close of the hearing, we affirm the
hearing officer's ruling permitting Local 2 to intervene. Virginia-Carolina Chemical Corpora-
tion, 101 NLRB 1336.
107 NLRB No. 262.
WISCONSIN ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY 1205
central stores division (all the nonclerical employees), who
are currently part of Division 998's unit, to its own existing
contract unit of clerical, sales, technical, stores, and appliance
repair employees. The Employer agrees with Local 2 on the
merger of these employees into Local 2's unit, but also con-
tends that the other two groups in the Petitioner's proposed
unit should be established as separate appropriate units.
The Employer is a public utility generating and supplying
electric power in and around Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The
plant maintenance employees, approximately 40 in number, do
carpentry and masonry work, painting, and cleanup work at all
the Employer's buildings and installations. They are part of
the plant engineering department. Maintenance work on the
steam and electrical equipment and machinery is performed by
employees represented either by the Petitioner inapowerplant
unit, or by International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers in
an electrical system unit. The janitors, watchmen, elevator
operators, and matrons, approximately 35 in number, work at
the Employer's main office building, known as the Public
Service Building, in Milwaukee. The nonclerical employees of
the central stores division, approximately 5 in number, are
engaged in receiving and shipping materials and supplies at
the Public Service Building only. The 2 latter groups are part
of the Employer's purchases and stores department.
The employees in the Petitioner's proposed unit have been
represented since 1938 by Division 998, pursuant to a certifi-
cation of the Wisconsin Employment Relations Board. There
have been no substantial changes in the composition of the unit,
or in the nature of the work performed by the constituent groups
of employees since that date. Each of the three groups is under
separate immediate supervision, although the supervisors of the
central stores division and the service employees inthe Public
Service Building both report to the same official at the next
higher stage of management. There is no interchange of
employees among the three groups.
Despite the heterogeneous nature of the present unit, we
believe that the long and uninterrupted bargaining history on
behalf of all the employees in such unit establishes its appro-
priateness as a residual unit. We see no cogent reason for
establishing separate units for each of the three groups of
employees constituting the present residual unit. Although
merger of these groups with other existing units is possible,
the only request for such merger has been made with respect
to the nonclerical employees in the central stores division.
This issue is treated hereinafter.
The nonclerical employees of the central stores division
handle all shipments received in or leaving the Public Service
Building, keep stock of small electric appliances and appliance
parts, check them out to the appliance repair or merchandise
divisions, and deliver appliances to the Employer's customers.
The storeroom where they work is close to the display space
12 06 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
where merchandise is sold , and to the appliance repair work-
shop. Their work requires close contact with the clerical
employees in the central stores division , the appliance repair-
men, and with sales personnel , all of whom are represented
by Local 2 in a single unit . Similar handling and stores func-
tions are performed by storekeepers at the powerplants and
in the electrical distribution department who are also repre-
sented in the same unit by Local 2.
Under all the circumstances , and with particular regard to
the advantages to the parties in bargaining for a unit in which
are included all similar and related job classifications, we
believe that the nonclerical employees of the central stores
division may be represented as part of the unit for which Local
2 is the bargaining agent . However, in view of the historical
pattern of bargaining for these employees , it would not be
consistent with Board policy to permit the requested merger
without first granting this group an opportunity , by means of a
separate election , to express their desires on this question.R
We therefore direct separate elections in the following voting
groups:
(A) All storekeepers , stock disbursers and receivers, and
appliance deliverymen in the central stores division at the
Employer ' s Public Service Building in Milwaukee , Wisconsin,
excluding supervisors as defined in the Act.
(B) All building maintenance employees in the' Employer's
plant engineering department , and all building service employ-
ees in the purchases and stores department at the Employer's
Public Service Building in Milwaukee , Wisconsin , excluding
guards' and supervisors as defined in the Act.
We have found that the employees in voting group (A) may
appropriately be represented as part of the unit for which Local
2 is the bargaining agent or as part of the residual unit cur-
rently represented by Division 998. However , we have not
found that these employees may constitute a separate appro-
priate unit . We find , therefore, that it is necessary in this
case to modify the procedure for tallying the votes cast in
Globe type elections.
If a majority of the employees in voting group ( A) above vote
for Local 2, they will be taken to have indicated their desire to
be included in the unit now represented by Local 2, and the
Regional Director conducting the election herein is instructed
to issue a certification of results to that effect.
On the other hand , if a majority of the employees in voting
group ( A) do not vote for Local 2, that group will be appro-
priately included in the same unit with employees in voting
group (B) and their votes will be pooled with those in voting
2 The National Supply Compnay, 101 NLRB 73.
sThe two watchmen at the Public Service Building control entry to the building during non-
office hours, and are responsible for enforcing rules of the Employer relating to protection
of its property. We find that they are guards and exclude them from the unit.
PHILLIPS PETROLEUM COMPANY 1207
group ( B)4, and the Regional Director conducting the election
herein shall issue a certification of representatives to the
labor organization selected by a majority of employees in the
pooled group, which the Board in such circumstances finds to
be a single unit appropriate for purposes of collective - bargain-
ing.
[Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication.]
4If the votes are pooled, they are to be tallied in the following manner: the votes for Local
2 shall be counted among the valid votes cast but neither for nor against any union seeking to
represent the more comprehensive unit; all other votes are to be accorded their face value,
whether for representation in a union seeking the comprehensive unit or for no union. See
the dissenting opinions of Board Members Murdock and Peterson in Pacific Intermountain
Express Co., 105 NLRB 480.
PHILLIPS PETROLEUM COMPANY and EASTERN IDAHO
METAL TRADES COUNCIL, AFL, Petitioner . Case No.
19-RC-1399. February 19, 1954
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Howard E.
Hilbun, 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 mean-
ing of the Act.
2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent cer-
tain employees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the
representation of employees of the Employer within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
Contentions of the Parties
The Petitioner, Eastern Idaho Metal Trades Council, AFL,
seeks to represent in a single unit all operating and maintenance
employees at the Employer's Arco, Idaho, atomic energy pro-
ject operations, including heavy equipment repair shop
employees, purchasing and warehouse department employees,
transportation department employees, scientific assistants,
experimental machine shop employees, and cafeteria
employees, but excluding office clerical employees, technical
employees, guards, and supervisors.
The Employer and Oil Workers International Union, CIO,
herein called the Oil Workers, contend that a single unit which
107 NLRB No. 266.