Wm. Cameron & Co., Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 31, 1952

98 N.L.R.B. 969 (N.L.R.B. 1952)

WM. CAMERON & CO., INC. 969
All dump truck driVers, flat rack drivers, fuel truck drivers, grease
truck drivers, powder truck drivers, water truck drivers, truck service-
men, truck greasemen, truck oilers, and tire service and repairmen,
-at the Employer's Ray Mines operations in Ray, Arizona, excluding
office, clerical, and professional employees, guards, watchmen, and
supervisors as defined in the Act.
If a majority of the employees select the Petitioner 9 as their
representative, they will be taken to have indicated their desire to
be represented in a separate unit, and the Regional Director conducting
the election directed herein is instructed to issue a certification of
representatives to the Petitioner for the unit described above which
the Board, under such circumstances, finds to be appropriate for
the purposes of collective bargaining. If it majority select the Smelter
Workers, they will be taken to have indicated their desire to be included
in the production and maintenance unit at the Employer's Ray Mines
division currently represented by the Smelter Workers, and the
Regional Director shall issue a certificate of results of election to
such effect.
'[Test of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this
volume.]
9 The Boilermakers and IBEW requested , at the hearing , that their names be omitted
from the ballot The request is hereby granted The record is not clear whether the
Operating Engineers and the IAM desire to participate in the election . Neither union
has presented a showing of interest within the craft group . Accordingly, we shall not
accord either union a place on the ballot . However , we shall permit them to participate,
if they so desire , upon proper notice, supported by an adequate showing of interest as of
the date of the hearing herein , to the Regional Director within 10 days after issuance
of this Decision and Direction of Election . International Harvester Company, 71 NLRB
390
W,,I. CAMERON & CO., INC. and LOCAL No. 968, INTERNATIONAL BROTH-
ERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, CHAUFFEURS , WAREHOUSEMEN & HELPERS OF
AMERICA, AFL, PETITIONER
WM. CAMERON & CO., INC. and MILLMEN'S LOCAL UNION 724, UNITED
BROTHERHOOD OF CARPENTERS AND JOINERS OF AMERICA, AFL, PETI-
TIONER. Cases Nos. 39-RC-410 and 39-RC-414. March 31, 1952
Decision and Direction of Election
Upon petitions duly filed, a consolidated hearing was held before
Clifford W. Potter, 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 National Labor
Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with
98 NLRB No. 149.
970 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
this case to a three -member 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 National Labor Relations Act.
2. The labor organizations 1 involved claim to represent certain
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 Teamsters asserted at the hearing several alternative posi-
tions as to the appropriate unit. Its first contention is that the ap-
propriate unit consists of truck drivers, warehousemen, laborers, and
the mechanic, excluding assembly workers, office and clerical em-
ployees, and supervisors. In the alternative it asserts that an appro-
priate unit would be one composed of all production and maintenance
employees, excluding office and clerical employees, the warehouse fore-
man-shipping clerk, and the assembly foreman. If an election is con-
ducted in the latter group, it would prefer to be on the ballot jointly
with the Carpenters as a single bargaining representative, but would,
if necessary, be willing to be designated alone. The Carpenters' pri-
mary contention is that an appropriate craft unit consists of the as-
sembly workers, including the three assistant assembly foremen, but
excluding the assembly foreman and all other employees. As an alter-
native, the Carpenters adopts the second position of the Teamsters and
would be willing to appear on the ballot as a joint representative with
the Teamsters in that unit. The Employer agrees in general with
the Teamsters in its second unit contention, that is that an over-all
unitis appropriate, but objects to join representation of such a unit
by the Teamsters and the Carpenters.
The Employer is engaged in the wholesaling of building supplies.
Primarily, the Employer merely buys and sells, without changing or
processing the goods in any way. However, about 25 percent of the
goods it handles come to the Employer in the form of so-called
"knocked-down" parts which are assembled before they are sold. The
knocked-down parts go to make up cabinets, windows, doors, and other
items used in the construction or outfitting of buildings. The job of
assembling the parts is a relatively simple matter as compared with the
usual work of a journeyman carpenter. It was testified that it takes
no more than 30 days to train a person of average skill and intelligence"
to be able to perform any assembly job required in the Employer's
operations. As indicated previously, the Carpenters seeks to repre-
' Petitioner in Case No 39-RC-410K will hereafter be referred to as the Teamsters Peti-
tioner in Case No 39-RC-414 will be called the Carpenters.
WM. CAMERON & CO., INC. 971
sent the assembly workers separately , contending that they compose a
craft group appropriately represented in a separate unit. On the
basis of the record and particularly the facts developed above, we do
not believe that the work of the assembly workers requires the skill,
the duties, or the training of employees the Board customarily finds
to be craftsmen. Accordingly, we deny the request of the Carpenters
that the assembly workers be set up as a separate unit.
In addition to assembly workers, the Employer employs shipping
clerks, warehousemen, laborers, truck drivers, and a mechanic. It
also employs salesmen and clericals with whom we are not concerned
here as they are not sought to be included by any party in any of the
units alleged to be appropriate. The shipping clerks write up the load
tickets used by other employees in filling the orders to be delivered;
they make up delivery tickets, arrange the sequence in which the orders
are to be delivered, and give instructions as to delivery to the truck
drivers; and they do other detail work in the shipping office. The
warehousemen unload railroad cars, pile lumber and other materials
in the warehouse, and load trucks. The laborers assist the warehouse-
men and other employees in performing their duties. The truck
drivers load and drive the trucks. The mechanic repairs the trucks
and also assists generally around the warehouse.
All these employees, including the assembly workers, have the same
vacation and hospitalization benefits. They all have the same work
schedule and the same overtime rates. They use the same time clock,
rest rooms, and entrances. Employees in one category frequently do
the work of employees in another. For example, assembly workers
sometimes assist in unloading railroad cars or in loading trucks.
Warehousemen sometimes have occasion to use the power tools in the
assembly room. All of the employees at times work at glazing win-
dows and doors, which is primarily the work of the assembly work-
ers. On the basis of these facts and on the entire record we conclude
that the principal unit contended for by the Teamsters, comprising all
employees except assembly workers and employees usually excluded,
is inappropriate for purposes of collective bargaining.- On the other
hand, we are persuaded, in accord with the alternative contention of
the Teamsters and Carpenters in which the Employer concurs, that an
over-all unit of the Employer's employees is appropriate.
There is a dispute as to the supervisory status of certain employees
whom we will consider below.
Assistant shipping clerks: These employees perform the duties de-
scribed above under the direction of the shipping clerk, who is con-
ceded by all parties to be a supervisor. In so doing, they give instruc-
2 As the Teamsters does not seek a unit restricted to truck drivers, we find it unnec?s-
sarp to decide whether or not such a unit would be appropriate in this case.
X72 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
tions to warehousemen and truck drivers and sometimes assist manu-
ally in the work of those employees. Though they make recommenda-
tions concerning hiring, discharging, promotions, layoffs, and merit
increases, it does not appear that these recommendations are effective
within the meaning of the Act. The operations manager testified as
to such recommendations that he would "get both sides of the story
and be sure that the man had a fair deal." It appears that the rela-
tionship of the assistant shipping clerks to other employees is pri-
marily one of transmitting information as to the details of the orders
to be filled and their method and sequence of delivery. They give
instructions rather than commands. We find that the assistant ship-
ping clerks are not supervisors as defined by the Act and they will be
included in the unit found appropriate.
Assistant warehouse foremen: There are two of these employees.
,One is primarily in charge of the unloading and stacking of mer-
chandise, the other directs the loading of the merchandise on the
trucks. After receiving load tickets from the assistant shipping
clerks, they instruct the other warehousemen in gathering the mate-
rials called for by the orders. They make recommendations con-
cerning hiring, discharging, promotions, layoffs, and merit increases,
but on the same basis as the assistant shipping clerks. They sometimes
assist with the handling of material, the unloading of railroad cars,
and the loading of trucks. We believe that these employees are es-
sentially order fillers rather than supervisors. They primarily only
transmit instructions of the warehouse foreman who has the real
authority as to discipline and other personnel matters. We find that
the assistant warehouse foremen are not supervisors as defined in the
Act and they will be included in the unit found appropriate.
Assistant assembly foremen: There are 3 employees in this category
functioning under the assembly foreman, who is conceded by all par-
ties to be a supervisor as defined by the Act. There are about 13 as-
sembly workers. Like the other assistant foremen, the personnel rec-
ommendations of the assistant assembly foremen are subject to the
limitations indicated above. They regularly do manual work right
along with the other assembly workers. They are more experienced
employees and, as such, instruct the others in the method of perform-
ing the various operations. The operations manager testified that
-they are, in effect, "lead horses." We find that the- assistant assembly
foremen are not supervisors as defined in the Act and they will be in-
cluded in the unit found appropriate.
We find that the following employees constitute a unit appropriate
for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Sec-
tion 9 (b) of the Act :
All employees of the Employer at its Houston, Texas, branch, in-
cluding the assistant shipping clerks, assistant warehouse foremen,
STANOLIND OIL AND GAS COMPANY 973
and the assistant assembly foremen, but excluding salesmen, office and
clerical employees, the manager, the assistant manager, the warehouse
foreman-shipping clerk ,3 assembly foreman, assembly clerk,4 and
supervisors as defined in the Act.
5. The Teamsters and the Carpenters desire to go on the ballot as a
single, joint representative. The Employer opposes this on the
grounds that it is a subterfuge to defeat a finding of a unit on an
over-all basis. No showing has been made that, if selected, the Team-
sters and the Carpenters will not bargain on a joint basis for the whole
unit. Board precedent has fully established the propriety of two
or more labor organizations acting jointly as bargaining representa-
tive for a single group of employees. We see no reason to depart from
such precedent in the present instance, and accordingly find that the
Teamsters and the Carpenters may appear jointly on the ballot in the
election directed hereinafter. If they should win, they will be certi-
fied jointly as the bargaining representative of the employees in the
entire appropriate unit. The Employer may then insist that the
Teamsters and the Carpenters do in fact bargain jointly for such em-
ployees as a single unit.,
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this
volume.]
3 The duties of the shipping clerk and the warehouse foreman are presently combined
in one person.
4 All parties agreed to the exclusion of this clerical employee.
S International Harvester Company, West Pullman Works, 89 NLRB 413.
STANOLIND OIL AND GAS COMPANY and OIL WORKERS INTERNATIONAL.
UNION, CIO, PETITIONER. Case No. 30-Rri-676. Marcl 31, 1952
Decision and Direction of Election
Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before Clyde F..
Waers, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hear-
ing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor
Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with
this case to a three-member 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 National Labor Relations Act.
2. The Petitioner is a labor organization claiming to represent
employees of the Employer.
98 NLRB No. 143.