Truscon Steel Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 7, 1951

95 N.L.R.B. 1005 (N.L.R.B. 1951)

TRUSCON STEEL COMPANY 1005
Gary branch plant operates under a plant superintendent. Clerical
employees of Gary make up the Employer's payroll, and do some of
its accounting work. Each plant involved herein has a hiring office.
At the time of the hearing, held on May 25, 1951, the Employer,
Illinois, and Gary were erecting a new building, otherwise and here-
inafter called the Blue Island plant, to which they expect to transfer
their operations about August 1, 1951 .1 After the transfer, approxi-
mately 85 production and maintenance employees of the three con-
cerns will punch the same time clock and have the same general work-
ing conditions. The two plant superintendents will be retained. The
Employer's president will determine policy with respect to hours and
conditions of employment, wages, and similar matters for all em-
ployees, and conduct all labor negotiations. There will be common
hiring and purchasing offices, and common office clerical and main-
tenance employees. The Employer, Illinois, and Gary will contrib-
ute their proportionate shares to the payment of common overhead
expenses, including those for maintenance, taxes, water, heating,
lighting, fuel, and wages of office clerical employees. Employees at
the Gary main plant will prepare and file income tax returns cover-
ing the corporations, and withholding and social security tax re-
turns covering employees at the Blue Island plant, and will make up
its payroll.
Under these circumstances, we are of the opinion that no useful
purpose will be served if we proceeded with a determination of rep-
resentatives at this time.2 We shall therefore dismiss the petition
herein, without prejudice to the filing of a new petition after opera-
tions have begun at the Blue Island plant.
Order
Upon the entire record in this case, the National Labor Relations
Board hereby orders that the petition be, and it hereby is, dismissed
without prejudice.
1 The operations of the Gary main plant will not be transferred to the Blue Island plant.
z International Harvester Company, Chattanooga Works, 73 NLRB 436 and cases cited
therein.
TRUSCON STEEL COMPANY and UNITED STEELWORKERS Or AlrERICA,
CIO, PETITIONER . Case No. 8-RCi-1,212. August 7, 1951
Decision and Direction of Election
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National La-
bor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Bernard Ness, hearing
95 NLRB No. 116.
1006 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
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-mem- -
ber 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 employees
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 Petitioner seeks to represent a separate unit of those office
and clerical employees employed in the shop offices and warehouse
of the Employer's Youngstown, Ohio, plant, which is engaged in the
manufacture of steel reinforcing and building products and bar mat.
In the alternative, the Petitioner would add these employees to the
production and maintenance unit which it currently represents. The
Employer contends that these employees are confidential employees.
The Employer's office and clerical employees are divided into two
main groups : The operating department employees and the general
office employees. The latter group of employees work in the general
office building in the sales, executive, and administrative divisions,
under the ultimate direction of the executive vice president. The
operating department employees are under the over-all supervision of
the works manager, and are further divided into two groups, those
who work in what is known as the plant operating building; and those
who work in offices located. in the plant proper and in the warehouse.
It is this latter group-the clericals in the plant office:; and in the
warehouse-that the Petitioner seeks to represent.
The employees working in the plant operating building include
primarily (1) those employees assigned to the works accounting
department, which accumulates the cost of the manufactured product
including labor costs and makes up the payroll for all hourly rated
production' and maintenance employees, and (2) the production
department planners and their typists, who plan the sequence.of the
operations of the work to be done in the plant. In addition to typists,
the clericals employed in the plant operating building include
employees classified as clerks, comptometer operators, duplicator
operators , and messengers.
TRUSCON STEEL COMPANY 1007
Included in the group of clericals assigned to the plant proper and
to the warehouse whom the Petitioner now seeks to represent, are the
following categories :
(1) Timekeepers.-Although these employees are assigned to the
works accounting department, they work exclusively in the plant,
accumulating time records of the production and maintenance
employees in the machine shop, shipping department, and electrical
department.
(2) Dispatchers.-These employees work throughout the plant and
in offices located in production departments. They routinely assign
all work performed in the plant and apply base and incentive rates
established by the industrial -engineering department, noting such
rates on production tickets given to the employees. The dispatchers
report all time data to the accounting department and production data
to the production department, and make such reports as may be
required by their supervisor, the superintendent of the production
department. The clerical work necessary for these reports is per-
formed by the 10 clerks assigned to the dispatchers.
(3) Receiving and general stores department clerks.-They are
under the supervision of the superintendent of stores and raw stock,
and perform clerical duties related to keeping track of materials
received, on order, and on hand, disbursements, and stock balances.
(4) Clerks in the shipping department.-Two of these clerks pre-
pare bills of lading, make daily reports of shipments, and order trucks
for shipping purposes. One clerk orders and classifies all freight
cars for outbound shipping, maintains service cards records, deter-
mines debit and credit balances, checks demurrage reports and
expense reports, and keeps storage records. Another clerk cuts sten-
cils and runs tags for LCL shipments,' receives and distributes mail,
and operates the ditto machine. The remaining, three clerks in this
department plan and assemble truck and car shipments and make
reports on partial shipments.
(5) The machine shop clerks.-One of these clerks is primarily a
planner for the machine shop department. ' The other clerk makes up
requisitions, does typing. and general clerical work as directed.
(6) Warehouse clerks.-These employees work in the office of the
warehouse located about 3 blocks from the plant, operated by the
Employer's parent corporation, Republic Steel Corporation," and
' Although this warehouse is operated nominally by Republic Steel , employees located
there are hired and paid by the Employer , and are frequently interchanged with the
Employer 's plant employees when layoffs occur. The Petitioner has represented the
nonclerical employees of this warehouse as part of the production and maintenance unit
of the Employer ' s employees.
1008' DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
perform the clerical duties usually 'associated with warehouse
activities.
No issue has been raised as to the appropriateness of a unit con-
fined to the above six categories of employees, and excluding the cler-
ical employees assigned to the plant operating building. In an earlier
proceeding involving the same plant,'. the Board directed an. election
in a. "plant clerical" unit which. embraced both groups of employees 3
We note, however, that in that case no party raised the issue of the
appropriateness of including both groups, and the particular job
duties of the clericals in the plant operating building were apparently
not fully litigated. On the more complete evidence before us in the
instant proceeding we are satisfied that the employees in the plant
operating building are essentially office clericals as distinguished from
those in the group sought to be represented by the Petitioner, whose
duties clearly stamp them as plant clericals. The record before us
further establishes that the two groups have little contact with each
other, are paid on a different basis, are never interchanged except for
an occasional permanent transfer, and are separately supervised.
Under all the circumstances we conclude that the unit sought by the
Petitioner is not rendered inappropriate by the exclusion of the cler-
icals in the plant operating building.
Nor do we find any basis for the Employer's contention that the
clericals in question are confidential employees. There is no evidence
that they have access to confidential data concerning labor relations
or otherwise act in a confidential capacity to management officials
charged with responsibility in the field of labor relations. Absent
such functions they are not confidential employees as the Board has
construed that term.4
Under well-established principles plant clericals may appropriately
be included in the production and maintenance unit. Accordingly,
we shall direct an election in the following voting group : All plant
clerks at the Employer's Youngstown plant and warehouse including
timekeepers, dispatchers, clerks assigned to dispatchers, receiving and
general stores department clerks, shipping department clerks, ma-
chine shop clerks, and warehouse clerks, excluding all general office
employees, clerical employees of the plant operating building, the
salaried raw materials clerk, guards, professional employees, and
supervisors as defined in the Act.
2 Truscon Steel Company, 88 NLRB 331.
2 No union won that election.
' Foster Wheeler Corporation, 94 NLRB 211 . Truscon Steel Company, supra.
However , the parties stipulated , and we find , that the salaried raw materials clerk acts
in a confidential capacity to persons exercising managerial responsibility in the field of
labor relations . As such we shall exclude this employee from the voting group.
DEALERS ENGINE REBUILDERS, INC. 1009,
. If a majority of these employees vote,for the Petitioner, they will
be taken to have indicated their desire to be included in the production
and maintenance unit currently represented by the Petitioner, and the
Petitioner, may bargain for such employees as part of the existing
unit.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this
volume.]
DEALERS ENGINE REBUILDERS , INC. and LODGE No. 325, INTERNATIONAL
ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS . Case No. 32-CA-148. August 8,
1951
Decision and Order
On April 12, 1951, Trial Examiner John H. Eadie issued his In-
termediate Report in the above-entitled' proceeding, finding that the
Respondent had engaged in and was engaging in certain unfair labor
practices and recommending that it be ordered to cease and desist
therefrom and take certain affirmative action, as set forth in the copy
of the Intermediate Report attached hereto. Thereafter the Re-
spondent and the charging union filed exceptions to the Intermediate
Report and supporting briefs.
The Board 1 has reviewed the rulings made by the Trial Examiner
at the hearing and finds that no prejudicial error was committed.
The rulings are hereby affirmed. The, Board has considered the
Intermediate Report, the exceptions and briefs, and the entire record
in the case and hereby adopts the findings, conclusions, and recom-
mendations of the Trial Examiner, with the following additions and
modifications :
1. We agree with the Trial Examiner's conclusion that the Re-
spondent refused to bargain with the Union in violation of Section
8 (a) (5) and .(1) of the Act on and after February 14, 1949.
The Union was certified as the collective bargaining representative
on November 29, 1949. By letter of December 1, 1949, the Union
requested aprompt bargaining conference and enclosed-a copy of
their proposed contract. No reply was received. After a number
of phone calls and personal visits to the Respondent, a bargaining
conference was finally held almost 2 months after the initial request,
on January 20, 1950,. at the office of Wayne Owen, the Respondent's
attorney. When the Union requested discussion of their proposed
i Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, the Board has delegated its _
powers in respect to this case to a three -member panel [ Members Houston , Reynolds, anc]
Styles].
95 NLRB No. 125.