The Sheffield Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 29, 1951

94 N.L.R.B. 1781 (N.L.R.B. 1951)

THE SHEFFIELD CORPORATION 1781
procured from out of State. During the same period its revenue from
the sale of its products, all of which were sold to firms within the
State, exceeded $200,000. ,
During' 1950 the product of the Employer was purchased in its
entirety by the following firms for use in the manufacture of their
own products in the amounts indicated : The Great States Corporation
purchased products from the Employer in excess of $100,000; The
American Lawn Mower Company purchased products in excess of
$25,000; and The Ray Glow, Inc., products in excess of $25,000.4
Each of the afore-mentioned companies annually ships products
valued in excess of $25,000 out of State.
Upon these facts we find that the operations of the Employer affect
-commerce within the meaning of the Act and further that it will
effectuate the purposes of the Act for the Board to assert jurisdiction
over this Employer.'
2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain
employees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning representation
of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9 (c)
(1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. We find that the following employees of the Employer consti-
tute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining
within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act :
All production and maintenance employees employed at the Em-
ployer's Rochester, Indiana, plant, excluding office clerical employees,
professional employees, confidential employees, guards, superintend-
ents, foremen, and all other supervisors as defined by the Act.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this
volume.]
4 Whether or not the sales of the Employer 's product to the three named companies
were consummated and title passed within the State does not determine the effect that
the Employer ' s operations have on interstate commerce.
5 See Hollow Tree Lumber Company, 91 NLRB 635.
THE SHEFFIELD CORPORATION and UNITED STEELWORKERS OF AMERICA,
CIO,' PETITIONER . Case No. 9-RC-827. June 29, 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 William A. Mc-
' The Petitioner herein was originally designated as United Steelworkers of America,
District 25, CIO. On June 22, 1951 , the Petitioner moved to delete the reference to
District 25 in its designation. As United Steelworkers of Anrerica , CIO, appears to be
94 NLRB No. 240.
1782 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Gowan, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the
hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Pusuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, the Board
has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-mem-
ber 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 em-
ployees 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 appropriate unit :
The parties agree generally that all production and maintenance
employees of the Employer at its Dayton, Ohio, operation, including
machine operators and janitors, but with the usual exclusions, consti-
tute an appropriate unit. However, they are in disagreement as to
the placement of certain categories of employees discussed below :
Designers, detailers, and draftsmen: The Employer employs ap-
proximately 75 designers and detailers, and 2 electrical draftsmen,
whom it would include .in, and the Petitioner would exclude from, the
unit. The Employer is engaged at the operation here involved prin-
cipally in the manufacture of machine tools and gauges, precision
measuring instruments, and accessories such as dies, jigs, fixtures, and
cutting tools.' It handles both standard items and custom orders,
the latter representing about 20 percent of its gross income.3 The de-
signers prepare designs for standard and custom products, make the
necessary calculations, and indicate the specifications to be used in
their manufacture. They consult with the customers, and_ with repre-
sentatives of the Employer's sales, engineering, and manufacturing
departments, concerning the preparation of particular designs. The
detailers take individual portions of the designs and draw them in
proper dimensions for use by tool makers and other production em-
the real party in interest, the motion is granted. The Employer's objections to the
motion, on the grounds that, under the Board's Rules and Regulations, amendments to,
representation petitions are not permitted and the motion is belated, are without merit
and are overruled. Aluminum Foils, _Inc., 94 NLRB 806 ; P. R. Mallory & Co., Inc.,
89 NLRB 962.
2 There has been no past history of bargaining with respect to the Dayton operation.
Although a consent election was previously held in the instant case and the Petitioner
certified, the election and certification were later set aside by the Regional Director, and
approval of the consent election agreement was withdrawn, mainly because of a misunder-
standing with respect to the scope of the unit.
3In connection with its custom work, the Employer sells the manufactured items alone
or with the designs, or in some instances the designs alone.
THE SHEFFIELD CORPORATION 1783
ployees in the manufacture of the products. They also calculate di-
mensions, indicate specifications, and show materials to be used. The
electrical draftsr en apparently perform comparable work.
Substantially all the employees in question are assigned to divisions
of the engineering department, work in areas apart from those of the
production and maintenance employees,4 and serve under separate im-
mediate supervision. While the designers, detailers, and draftsmen
located at the plant regularly contact production employees, they re-
port to work at different hours and are not interchanged with the pro-
duction employees .5 Moreover, although the training of the disputed
employees is related to that of tool makers, they perform no manual
production duties, but work exclusively at designing, detailing, and
drafting. Under all the circumstances, we find that the detailers,
designers, and electrical draftsmen are skilled technical employees
whose work and interests differ from those of the production and
maintenance employees. We shall, therefore, exclude them from the
unit .6
Electrical technicians: There are five or six "electrical technicians"
in the plant whom the Employer would include in, and the Petitioner
would exclude from, the unit. These employees are assigned to the
research department, where they work along with research shop em-
ployees 7 fabricating electronic tubes and transformers for one of the
Employer's products, an X-ray instrument that measures the thick-
ness of metals. It appears that their training is generally acquired
at the Employer's plant. We are of the opinion that the electrical
technicians are essentially production workers with interests akin to
4 About 30 designers and detailers in the contract engineering department of whom
approximately 20 are employed on a part -time basis , work in an office building approxi-
mately 2' miles from the plant ; about 12 to 15 in the research department with the 2
electrical draftsmen , work on the first floor of the plant in a glass -enclosed section
adjoining the research shop ; about 30 in the product engineering department are located
on the second floor of the plant adjoining the sales department ; employees engaged in
Murchey designing are in a room adjacent to the products engineering department; and
designers and detailers in the industrial engineering department are located in the same
room with the accounting department in a separate building on the plant parking lot.
5 Transfers between the production enrployees and the designers , detailers, and draftsmen
are infrequent.
6 See S. B . Whistler and Sons, Inc., 92 NLRB No . 197; Southern Desk Company,
92 NLRB No. 137; General Electric Company, 89 NLRB 726 ; Kelsey Hayes Wheel
Company, 85 NLRB 666. Cf. Quality Hardware & Machine Division , Continental Copper
and Steel Industries , Inc., 91 NLRB No. 159.
Although the Regional Director , in connection with the prior consent election, ruled
that the designers and detailers should be included in the unit, this determination is
clearly not dispositive . Cf. R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, 88 NLRB 600 . See also
National Oats Company, 93 NLRB 939.
T The approximately 25 shop employees assigned to the research department consist of
classifications such as tool makers , machinists , and the like. Their work is similar to
that performed by production personnel . It is clear that their interests are closely related
to those of the other plant employees and we shall include them as production and
maintenance employees. J. I. Case Company , 80 NLRB 223.
1784 DECISIONS OF "NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
those of the other production employees, and accordingly, we shall
include them in the unit."
We find, therefore, that the following employees gt the Employer's
Dayton, Ohio, operation, constitute a unit appropriate for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b)
of the Act :
All production and maintenance employees, including machine
operators, electrical technicians, and janitors, but excluding designers,
detailers, electrical draftsmen, office, clerical, and professional em-
ployees, guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act.'
5. The determination of representatives :
All new employees of the Employer are required and agree to serve
the equivalent of a 3-month probationary period, during which time
their future employment status is determined. These employees,
whom the Petitioner would include among those eligible to vote and
the Employer would exclude, are not generally accorded certain bene-
fits, such as paid holidays, vacations and leaves of absence, or par-
ticipation in the group insurance, profit sharing, and pension plans.
However, they are paid on an hourly basis, like the regular employees,
are carried on the same payroll, are subject to the same shop rules,
and serve with the regular employees. Moreover, the record shows
that they have a reasonable expectancy of becoming permanent
employees.1o We believe that these employees have a substantial
interest in the terms and conditions of employment and are entitled
to vote 11
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this
volume.]
8 See F. W. Lynch Company, 92 NLRB 867; J . I. Case Company, supra; Domestic
Engine cE Pump Company, 70 NLRB 1263. Cf. Engineering and Research Corporation,
90 NLRB 16.
9 The parties are in disagreement as to whether certain employees , referred to as
probationary employees , should be included in the unit . However , our unit finding is based
upon functionally related occupational categories , and all employees working at jobs
within the unit are necessarily included and entitled to representation , irrespective of
the tenure of their employment . The separate issue of the voting eligibility of such
employees will be discussed in paragraph numbered 5, infra. Gerber Products Company,
93 NLRB 1668.
18 The Employer 's personnel counsel indicated that about 85 percent of the probationary
employees became permanent employees.
11 Gerber Products Company, supra.
Substantially in accord with the agreement of the parties, we find that employees hired
for a specific job, upon completion of which their services are terminated , are temporary
employees and not entitled to vote.