Howard A, Friedman & Assoc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 23, 1971

192 N.L.R.B. 919 (N.L.R.B. 1971)

HOWARD A. FRIEDMAN & ASSOC.
Howard A. Friedman & Associates and Organization of
Architectural Employees, Petitioner. Case
20-RC-9830
August 23, 1971
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF
ELECTION
BY MEMBERS FANNING, 7ENKINS, AND
KENNEDY
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9(c) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, a
hearing was held before Hearing Officer Paula Paley.
Thereafter, pursuant to Section 102.67 of the Nation-
al Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations and
Statements of Procedure, Series 8, as amended, and
by direction of the Regional Director for Region 20,
this case was transferred to the National Labor
Relations, Board for decision. Briefs have been timely
filed by the Employer and Petitioner.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the
National Labor' Relations Board has delegated its
powers in connection with this case to a three-
member panel.-
The Board has reviewed" the Hearing Officer's
-rulings made at" the hearing and finds that they are
free from prejudicial error. They are hereby affirmed.
Upon the' entire record in this case' the Board
finds:
.1. The Employer, an architectural firm, during
fiscal year 1970 purchased in excess of $50,000 of
goods and services from firms located outside the
State of California, and during this same period
furnished services to clients outside the State of
California in excess of $50,000. We find that the
Employer is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the Act and that it will effectuate the
purposes of the Act to assert -jurisdiction herein.2
1 The Employer's request for oral argument is hereby denied as in our
opinion the record, including the briefs, adequately presents the issues
herein and the positions of the parties.
2 Wurster, Bernardi & Emmons, Inc, 192 NLRB No. 121.
8 The parties stipulated that the architects are professional employees
regardless of their lack of academic degrees or state licenses, and we agree.
4 In order to assure that all eligible voters may have,the opportunity to
be informed of the issues in the exercise of their statutory right to vote, all
parties to the election should have access to a list of voters and their
addresses which may be used to communicate with them . Excelsior
919
2. The parties stipulated, and we find, that the
Petitioner is a labor organization within-the meaning
of the Act.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concern-
ing the representation of certain employees of the
Employer within the meaning of Sections 9(c)(1) and
2(6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The Petitioner seeks -an election in a unit
of air architectural - employees including associate
architects.3 The Employer would exclude the associ-
ate architects as supervisors.
The Employer is a small architectural firm consist-
ing of four architects, two of whom are associates,
one structural engineer, one secretary, and the
principal, Howard Friedman. The parties stipulated
that Howard Friedman, the secretary, and the
structural engineer should be excluded from the unit,
and we agree.
The Employer contends that the associate archi-
tects are in fact supervisors and should be excluded
from the unit. We do not agree. Associates William
Sagar and Benjamin Irvin do not have the authority
to hire or fire, and their recommendations regarding
employees are independently investigated by How-
ard Friedman, who also reserves for himself the final
determination on all architectural decisions. All
architects including the associates are paid an hourly
rate and all receive annual bonuses. We therefore
find that associate architects are not supervisors and
shall include them in the unit.
Accordingly, we find that the following employees
constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of
collective bargaining within the meaning of Section
9(b) of the Act: All architectural employees includ-
ing associates, but excluding the structural engineer,
office clerical employee, guards and supervisors, as
defined in the Act.
[Direction of Election4 omitted from publication.]
Underwear Inc., 156 NLRB 1236; NLRB: v. Wyman-Gordon Co., 394 U.S.
759. Accordingly, it is hereby directed that an election eligibility list,
containing the names and addresses of all ' the eligible voters, must be filed
by the Employer with the Regional Director for Region 20 within 7 days of
the date of this Decision and Direction of Election. The Regional Director
shall make the list available to all parties to the election . No extension of
time to file this list shall be granted by the Regional Director except in
extraordinary circumstances. Failure to comply with this requirement shall
be grounds for 'setting aside the election whenever proper objections are
filed.
192 NLRB No. 124