Hillman Manufacturing Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 13, 1956

116 N.L.R.B. 585 (N.L.R.B. 1956)

HILLMAN MANUFACTURING COMPANY 585
history herein, the branchwide unit would be the only appropriate
unit. However, we shall not dismiss the petition as there is an alterna-
tive basis for an appropriate unit finding in the fact, as previously
noted, that the Maine area salesmen appear to be the only salesmen
in the Boston branch not represented by any labor organization. In
these circumstances, we shall find appropriate for purposes of collec-
tive bargaining, under our residual unit doctrine, all unrepresented
salesmen and merchandisers in the Employer's Boston branch.6
We find that all unrepresented salesmen and merchandisers in the
Employer's Boston, Massachusetts, branch, excluding those currently
represented by the Petitioner and Local 646, International Brother-
hood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of Amer-
ica, AFL-CIO, and excluding office and clerical employees, delivery
employees, guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act, constitute a
unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the
meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
CHAIRMAN LEEDOM and MEMBER MURDOCK took no part in the con-
sideration of the above Decision and Direction of Election.
6Egastable Gas Company, 111 NLRB 453; The Kroger Company, 93 NLRB 274.
Paul Hillman and Michael Sakuta d /b/a Hillman Manufacturing
Company and Harvey C. Babbitt , Petitioner and International
Union, United Automobile, Aircraft and Agricultural Imple-
ment Workers of America , and its Local 155 , AFL-CIO. Case
No. 7-l?D-207. August 13,1956
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND ORDER DIRECTING
REGIONAL DIRECTOR TO OPEN AND COUNT CHAL-
LENGED BALLOT
On October 20, 1955, the Board issued its Decision and Direction of
Election in this proceeding' pursuant to which an election by secret
ballot was conducted on November 8, 1955. Out of 22 votes cast, 11 were
for the Union, 8 were against it, and 3 were challenged by the Union.
The Employer filed, but later withdrew, objections to the conduct
of the election, and the Union withdrew its challenge to two of the
ballots. The Regional Director duly conducted an investigation upon
.the remaining ballot which was challenged on the ground that Arthur
Strittmatter, the employee in question, was a supervisor and not
entitled to vote. On March 19,1956, the Regional Director's report on
1 Not reported in printed volumes of Board Decisions and Orders.
116 NLRB No. 83.
586 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
challenged ballots issued, recommending that Strittmatter be found a
supervisor and his ballot not counted. To this the Employer has filed
exceptions.
In connection with its consideration of the exceptions, the Board
ordered that the ballots as to which challenges were withdrawn be
counted, and as a result thereof the Regional Director reported that the
tally of ballots shows 11 votes for the Union and 10 against.
On the basis of the detailed material concerning Strittmatter's
alleged supervisory status contained in the report on challenged bal-
lots, the Board finds that Strittmatter is not a supervisor for the fol-
lowing reasons.
Two diemakers and a trainee are the sole employees on the night
shift. Strittmatter is the most skilled and the highest paid of the
three, and senior in point of service. He comes in 15 minutes early to
get the work "line up," as prepared by one of the partners, which in-
volves drilling and tapping to finish work started by"the day shift.
He has no authority to start a job or to make changes, and checks
the work of the other two night employees only when something spe-
-cial is being done. Serious problems which arise are laid aside for
the day shift.
There is no contention that Strittmatter has authority to hire, dis-
charge, or discipline or effectively to recommend such action, and the
investigation indicates that he was refused a leader's classification
by the Employer such as Molitor, the head diemaker on the day
shift, has. Because more than enough work is normally lined up for
the night shift by partner Sakuta, Strittmatter is called upon to
-assign work to the other two employees only in rare instances.
Whatever responsibility to direct the work of the others he may
have, we believe, arises from his being a skilled diemaker, is based
upon working skill and experience, and does not constitute the type
.of direction emanating from management which is contemplated
in the definition of supervisors in Section 2 (11) of the Act 2
As we have found merit in the Employer's exceptions, we shall over-
rule the challenge to the ballot of Arthur Strittmatter and direct that
it be opened and counted.
[The Board ordered that the Regional Director for the Seventh
Region shall, within ten (10) days from the date of this Order,
open and count the ballot of Arthur Strittmatter, and serve upon
the parties a revised tally of ballots.]
MEMBERS MuRDOOK and PETERSON took no part in the consideration
,of the above Supplemental Decision and Order Directing Regional
Director to Open and Count Challenged Ballot.
2 See Southern Bleachery and Print Works, Inc., 115 NLRB 787.