Bethlehem Steel Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 29, 1946

70 N.L.R.B. 881 (N.L.R.B. 1946)

In the Matter of BETHLEHEM STEEL COMPANY , EMPLOYER and UNITED
STEEL WORKERS OF AMERICA , C. I. 0., PETITIONER
Cases Nos. 3-R-1145 and 3-R-1146.-Decided August 09, 1946
Mr. James C. Phelps, of Bethlehem, Pa., and Mr. J. E. Jacobs, of
Lackawanna, N. Y., for the Employer.
Mr. Julian R. Bruce, of Lackawanna, N. Y., for the Petitioner.
Mr. Warren H. Leland, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in the case was held at Buffalo,
New York, on May 27, 1946, before Francis X. Helgesen, Trial Ex-
aminer.1 The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are free
from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations
Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
Bethlehem Steel Company, a Pennsylvania corporation, is engaged in
the manufacture of steel products, operating plants in various States
in the United States. We are concerned in this proceeding only with
the Employer's plant located at Lackawanna, New York. During a
normal year the value of the raw materials used by the Employer at its
Lackawanna plant exceeds $6,000,000, of which approximately 80
percent is received from points outside the State of New York. Dur-
ing the same period the value of products manufactured at the Em-
ployer's Lackawanna plant exceeds $100,000,000, of which approxi-
mately 80 percent is shipped outside the State of New York.
The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
1 Although the Petitioner filed two separate petitions , seeking two units of the Em-
ployer ' s clerical employees , one embracing the mechanical department of the Lackawanna
plant, and the other the strip mill department of that plant , the Petitioner now desires a
siugie unit consisting of all clerical employees in both departments.
70 N L. R B, No. 65
881
882 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
The Petitioner is at labor organization affiliated with the Congress
of Industrial Organizations claiming to represent employees of the
Employer. {
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Employer refuses to recognize the Petitioner as the exclusive
bargaining representative of employees of the Employer until the
Petitioner has been certified by the Board in an appropriate unit.
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning
the representation of employees of the Employer, within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Petitioner seeks a unit comprised of all clerical employees em-
ployed in the mechanical strip mill departments of the Employer's
Lackawanna, New York, plant, excluding Jensen, Critchley, Bray,
Spiesz, Godfrey, and all supervisory employees. Although the Em-
ployer agrees generally that the unit sought is appropriate, contrary
to the Petitioner's position it would exclude certain named individuals
who are hereinafter discussed, either as supervisory or confidential
employees.
Disputed clericals in the mechanical department 2
The six named employees mentioned below are located in the central
mechanical division office and perform general clerical duties. They
are supervised by a chief clerk whom the parties agree, to exclude.
The Employer seeks the exclusion of these clericals, contending that
all but Mr. Huber are confidential employees; it seeks the exclusion of
Mr. Huber on the ground that he is a supervisor.
1. Jaromin: This employee, who is located in a separately enclosed
office segregated from the other clericals in the mechanical depart-
ment, acts as a confidential secretary to the superintendent of the
mechanical department. The superintendent has complete charge
of personnel and industrial relation problems in the mechanical de-
partment, and thus exercises managerial functions in the field of labor
relations. We shall, accordingly, exclude the superintendent's con-
fidential secretary, Jaromin, from the unit.
2. Geraci: This employee performs various general office duties.
He substitutes for Jaromin as the superintendent's secretary during
infrequent intervals. We do not believe that these occasional substitu-
tions warrant the exclusion of Geraci from the unit. We shall, accord-
ingly, include him in the unit.
2 Bray, whose inclusion is not in dispute, is also treated under this subheading.
BETHLEHEM STEEL COMPANY 883
3. Kane: This employee performs general office work, and he as-
sumes the duties of the chief clerk at such times as the latter is absent.
In addition to his regular duties he prepares minutes of grievance
meetings pertaining to production and maintenance employees, a
function which the Employer contends warrants his exclusion as a
confidential employee. However, we regard a confidential employee
to be one who assists and acts in a confidential capacity to persons who
exercise managerial functions in the field of labor relations. The
mere typing of minutes of grievance meetings does not place an em-
ployee within the meaning of this definition. The Employer further
requests exclusion of Kane as a supervisor because he assumes the
duties of the chief clerk during the latter's absence. Such occasions,
however, are apparently infrequent, and we therefore deny the Em-
ployer's request. We shall, accordingly, include Kane in the unit.
4. Stettinbenz: This employee maintains absentee records, and he
may be called upon by the' superintendent to furnish information re-
flected in his records for the disposition of grievances of production
and maintenance employees. We are of the opinion Stettinbenz is not
a confidential employee as we define that term. We shall, accordingly,
include him in the unit.
6. Bray: This employee handles orders that are issued to the depart-
ment from other departments, and he carries mail and drawings
between the mechanical department office and the main office. He
takes some shorthand and occasionally types minutes of grievance
meetings relating to production and maintenance workers. We can
perceive no distinction between the nature of his duties and that of
other employees whom we have included in the unit. We shall, ac-
cordingly, include him.
6. Huber: This employee, classified as a foundry clerk, maintains
records of the work assigned to the foundry, and time records of em-
ployees working in the foundry. Once a week he acts as a paymaster,
carrying pay checks to the various departments and issuing them to
the men. The Employer seeks the exclusion of Huber on the grounds
that he supervises one clerk who assists him; and that while the
records lie handles are not in themselves confidential, the relationship
between him and the superintendent is confidential. The Employer
asserts that although Huber does not have the authority to hire or
discharge, he may effectively recommend the discharge of his subordi-
nate. In more than 3 years' time, however, Huber has not exercised
his alleged recommendatory authority. We therefore reject the con-
tention of the Employer that he is a supervisory employee. Nor does
the record substantiate the Employer's contention that a confidential
relationship exists between Huber and the superintendent. We shall
include Huber in the unit.
712344-47-vol. 70-57
884 DECISIONS ,OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Disputed clericals in the strip mill
The strip mill is divided into various sections. The sections we are
concerned with in the following discussion are the general strip mill
office, the cold mill, the hot mill, and the mechanical, electrical, and
labor section.
There are about 10 clerical employees in the general strip mill office.
The Employer and the Union agree to exclude 2 supervisors 3 and the
confidential secretary to the strip mill superintendent.' However,
they disagree as to the remaining 7 clericals,s whom the Employer
would exclude as confidential employees. These employees assemble
production reports, tabulate all production reports, condense the tabu-
lation to figures of tons per hour for each particular unit or machines
in the strip mill, maintain records of all man hours per tons produced,
and perform general office duties. They may be called into grievance
meetings to furnish information or data which is reflected in the
records they maintain so that disposition may be made of individual
grievances. These employees are supervised by a chief clerk and
their duties are of a general routine clerical nature. We are of the
opinion that the information which they nkay be called upon to furnish
the superintendent in the settlement of grievances does not make them
confidential employees as we define that term. We shall, accordingly,
include them in the unit.
Clerical employees in the cold mill: There ark approximately 25
clericals in the cold mill, 5 of whom the Employer would exclude, on
the grounds that 3 are supervisors,° and 2 are confidential employees.?
1. Maher: This employee performs clerical work relative to orders
that the cold mill has received for processing, and he requisitions
raw materials for such orders as he has on hand. He schedules the hot
mill coils for processing on the continuous pickier and on the cold
reducing tandem mills. He has a staff of three assistants concerning
whom lie has the authority effectively to recommend discharge. He
reports directly to the cold mill superintendent. We are convinced
that Maher is a supervisory employee within the meaning of our usual
definition. We shall, accordingly, exclude him from the unit.
?. Mathes: This employee supervises approximately 10 order
tracers who take the production reports from the various producing
units in the cold mill. These reports are posted on a "fly sheet" along-
side the customer's order and they show the progress of the order
through the cold mill. Mathes reports directly to the cold mill super-
intendent and he may effectively recommend the discharge of his
3 Spiesz and Godfrey.
* Jensen.
Taggart, Emerich , Corcoran , Foster , Green, Moore, and Skummer.
° Maher, Mathes, and wiegand.
7 Hojsan and Blair.
BETHLEHEM STEEL COMPANY 885
subordinates. As a supervisory employee, he will be excluded from
the unit.
3. Wiegand: This employee presently supervises one clerical in the
cold mill shipping office. He reports directly to the chief shipper and
he may effectively recommend the discharge of his subordinate. Dur-
ing normal operations it is anticipated that he will supervise three
subordinates, and the increase in personnel within his department
will serve to accentuate his supervisory status. We shall, accordingly,
exclude him from the unit.
4. Hojsan: This employee is a confidential secretary to the cold
mill superintendent. The superintendent is in complete charge of the
departmental personnel and industrial relations problems. He repre-
sents the second step in the established grievance procedure govern-
ing production and maintenance employees. We are convinced,
therefore, that he exercises managerial functions in the field of labor
relations. We shall, accordingly, exclude his confidential secretary,
Hojsan, from the unit.,,
5. Blair: This employee handles all the seniority reports for the
cold mill. He has access to personnel files so that he may extract in-
formation which will enable him to keep the seniority records current.
If employees slake application for a particular position, he gathers
the applications or "bids," checks the records of each employee to
determine seniority rights, and furnishes the information to the super-
intendent. We are of the opinion that these functions, in themselves,
are not sufficient to warrant excluding Blair from the unit. We shall,
accordingly, include him.
Clericals in the hot mill: There are approximately 31 clerical em-
ployees in the hot mill. Of these the Employer would exclude 2 as
confidential employees' and 1 as a supervisor.10
1. Kozaek: This employee is a confidential clerk to the hot mill
superintendent, who is on a managerial level comparable to that of the
cold mill superintendent. Thus, Kozack occupies a position much like
that of Hojsan, whom we have excluded from the unit. We shall, con-
sequently, exclude Kozack from the unit.
2. Swezy: This employee, a typist, makes up sub-allowance tickets
and production reports. Although he substitutes for Kozack when
the latter is absent, we do not believe that his position is basically that
of a confidential employee. We shall, accordingly, include him in
the unit.
3. Schenck: This employee, an assistant shipper, occupies a similar
position to that of Wiegand in the cold mill. He supervises approxi-
8 It is anticipated that Hojsan will be inducted in the Army. The parties agree to exclude
from the unit his proposed successor , Critchley.
9 Kozack and Swezy.
10 Schenk.
886 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
mately 5 subordinates whose discharge he may effectively recommend.
AS -a supervisory employee, he will be excluded from the unit.
Mechanical, Electrical, and Labor Section: The Employer would
exclude Rohr, a typist for the master mechanic, who has charge of the
mechanical, electrical, and labor section. The Employer contends that
Rohr is a confidential employee. The Master Mechanic, as a depart-
ment head, occupies a comparable position to that of the cold and hot
mill superintendents,- and Rohr's functions are similar to those of
Hojsan and Kozack, whom we have excluded from the unit. As a
confidential employee, Rohr will be excluded from the unit.
We find that clerical employees in the mechanical and strip mill
departments of the Employer's Lackawanna, New York, plant, in-
cluding Geraci, Kane, Stettinbenz, Bray, Huber, Taggart, Emerich,
Corcoran, Foster, Green, Moore, Skummer, Blair, and Swezy, but ex-
cluding Jensen, Critchley, Spiez, Godfrey, Jaromin, Maher, Mathes,
Wiegand, Hojsan, Kozack, Schenck, and Rohr, and all other super-
visory employees with authority to hire, promote, discharge, discipline,
or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or effectively
recommend such action, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes
of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the
Net.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the
purposes of collective bargaining with Bethlehem Steel Company,
Lackawanna, New York, an election by secret ballot shall be conducted
as early as possible, but not later than thirty (30) days from the date
of this Direction, under the direction and supervision of the Regional
Director for the Third Region, acting in this matter as agent for the
National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Article III, Sections
10 and 11, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-
Series 3, as amended, among the employees in the unit found alSpro-
priate in Section IV, above, who were employed during the pay-roll
period immediately preceding the date of this Direction, including
employees who did not work during said pay-roll period because they
were ill or on vacation or temporarily laid off, and including em-
ployees in the armed forces of the United States who present them-
selves in person at the polls,'but excluding those employees who have
since quit or been discharged for cause and have not been rehired or
reinstated prior to the date of the election, to determine whether or
not they desire to be represented by United Steel Workers of America.
C. 1. 0., for the purposes of collective bargaining.
MR. JAMES J. REYNOLDS, JR., took 110 part in the consideration of the
above Decision and Direction of Election.