Bingham-Herbrand Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Nov 20, 1951

97 N.L.R.B. 65 (N.L.R.B. 1951)

BINGHAM-HERBRAND CORPORATION 65
Leon Scheirer, Norbert A. Golke, Fred Goodwin, Carl Kane, Philip Wozniczka,
John Maxwell, John Bagan, Theodore Corts, Harold Holmes, Daniel Kapetsky,
Henry Scherr , and Francis Strodel.
[Recommended Order omitted from publication in this volume.]
BINGIIAM-HERBRAND CORPORATION (HERBRAND DIVISION) cnd INTER-
NATIONAL UNION, UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AIRCRAFT A ND AGRICULTURAL
IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA, LOCAL NO. 914, CIO, PETITIONER.
Case No. 8-RC-1346. November 20, 1951
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 Charles A. Fleming,
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 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 certain em-
ployees of the Employer.'
3. The Petitioner seeks to add all timekeepers and factory clericals
to the unit of production and maintenance employees which it cur-
rently represents 2 The Employer contends that its existing contract
with the Petitioner, covering the production and maintenance em-
ployees and specifically excluding "clerical workers," operates as a
bar to such request. We do not agree. It is apparent that the con-
tract does not cover the employees sought to be represented.3 As
the Board has previously held, the express exclusion of certain em
ployees from the coverage of a contract is not equivalent to an agree-
ment by the contracting union not to seek to represent such employees
as part of the more comprehensive unit at some future time.' We
1 The names of the Employer and Petitioner appear in the caption as amended at the
hearing.
2 In 1941, the Petitioner was certified as the bargaining representative of the Employer's
production and maintenance employees and since then has continued to represent them
2 Although the established unit does not expressly exclude timekeepers and factory clerical
employees , it appears that the parties regarded the excluded category of "clerical workers"
as embracing timekeepers and factory clerical employees.
4Philadelphia Company and Associated Companies , 84 NLRB 115; Bard Piston Ring
Company, 75 NLRB 879 Cf Briggs Indiana Corporation, 63 NLRB 1270.
97 NLRB No. 12.
66 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
find, therefore, that the contract does not bar a present election among
the employees requested by the Petitioner.
We find that 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.
4. The appropriate unit :
As previously mentioned, the Petitioner seeks to add all timekeepers
and factory clerical employees to its established unit of production
and maintenance employees at the Employer's Fremont, Ohio, plant.
The Employer contends that the unit sought is inappropriate prin-
cipally because the interests of the employees concerned are more
closely related to those of the main office clerical workers.
The Employer is engaged in the manufacture of drop forgings and
tools. Its operations are conducted in a group of approximately 35
separate buildings. It employs about 75 clerical employees, of whom
about 56 are assigned to the main office building and the remaining
19 employees, sought by the Petitioner, work in 6 or 7 buildings in
the production areas.
As to the duties of the requested employees, the 11 timekeepers main-
tain time and attendance records, job efficiency cards, and inventory
reports, and prepare reports and analyses relating to the various jobs
performed by production employees. The 3 production control cleri-
cals check the timekeepers' cards and determine the hourly rates before
transmitting the cards to the main office. The 2 inventory clerks
record incoming tools and register outgoing shipments. The 2 re-
ceiving clerks check material received against bills of lading-and
shipping memos, and submit information to the main office as to
returned merchandise. The heat treat statistician records and pre-
pares reports on various heats in the heat treating process.
The timekeepers and production control clerks serve under the same
immediate supervision as a number of the main office clericals. How-
ever, unlike the office clericals, all the employees requested by the
Petitioner work in close association with the plant employees ; they
punch time clocks and use the same facilities as the plant employees;
and the timekeepers work on a three-shift basis like the production
workers. Moreover, there is no transfer of personnel between the
plant and main office groups.
We are of the opinion that the timekeepers and other clerical work-
ers sought by the Petitioner are essentially plant clericals with inter-
ests sufficiently akin to those of the plant employees to warrant their
inclusion in the production and maintenance unit if they so desire.5
0 Foster Wheeler Corporation , 94 NLRB 211; W. F. & John Barnes Company, 96 NLRB
1136; Bell Aircraft Corporation , 96 NLRB 1211.
PHILLIPS PETROLEUM COMPANY 67
Accordingly, we shall direct that a self-determination election be
held in a voting group composed of timekeepers and other plant cleri-
cal employees at the Employer's Fremont, Ohio, plant, excluding all
other employees, guards, professional employees,6 and supervisors '
as defined in the Act. If a majority of the employees voting cast
ballots for the Petitioner, they will be taken to have indicated their
desire to be a part of"the production and maintenance unit, and the
Petitioner may bargain for them as part of the existing unit.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this
volume.]
6 In substantial accord with the agreement of the parties , we shall exclude as professional
employees the three registered nurses who only occasionally perform clerical duties.
7 The parties agree, and we find , that the two expediters should be excluded as supervisors.
PHILLIPS PETROLEUM COMPANY and INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPER-
ATING ENGINEERS, AFL, PETITIONER. Case No. 16-RC--811. No-
vember 20, 1951
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 Willis C. Darby, Jr.,
hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are
free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Piursuant 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 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 Act.'
2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain
employees of the Employer.
3 The Employer is a Delaware corporation with offices and plants in more than 25 States
within the United States and, in 1950, delivered more than $ 1,000,000 worth of petroleum
products into interstate commerce and received a like amount of goods through interstate
commerce The Employer's Bartlesville, Oklahoma, operations , here involved, include an
apartment hotel built and owned by the Employer . The Employer does not contest that it is
engaged in interstate commerce but contends that jurisdiction should not be asserted over
the employees of the apartment hotel. The housing accommodations at the latter location,
the record indicates , were supplied by the Employer for the prime purpose of satisfying
housing needs for employees and guests of the company . While the Board, as a matter of
policy, does not exercise jurisdiction over hotels normally , the apartment hotel involved
herein is clearly an integral part of the Employer' s operations at the Bartlesville location
Accordingly, we shall assume jurisdiction over the Employer's operations including the
apartment hotel. Cf. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, Parklabrea Resident Com-
munity, 93 NLRB 381.
97 NISI{B No. 16.