Tulsa Hudson Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 17, 1951

94 N.L.R.B. 646 (N.L.R.B. 1951)

646 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
TULSA HUDSON COMPANY and LODGE 790, INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION
OF MACHINISTS, PETITIONER
TULSA HUDSON COMPANY and TULSA GENERAL DRIvERS, WAREHOUSE-
MEN AND HELPERS, LOCAL UNION 523, PETITIONER. Cases Nos.
16-RC-686 and 16-RC-688. May 17, 1951
Decision and Direction of Elections
Upon separate petitions duly filed,' a consolidated hearing was held
before Charles Y. Latimer, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rul-
ings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby
affirmed.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor
Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with
these cases to a thiree-member, panel [Chairman Herzog and Members
Murdock and Styles].
Upon the entire record in these cases, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the
National Labor Relations Act.
2. The labor organizations named below claim to represent certain
employees of the Employer.
3. Questions affecting commerce exist concerning the representation
of certain employees of the'Employer within the meaning of Section 9
(c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The following employees of the Employer constitute separate
units 2 appropriate for the purpose of collective bargaining within the
meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
Case No. 16-RC-686
The Petitioner alid Employer are in substantial agreement-as to the
composition of the unit. Disagreement exists only as to the inclusion
or exclusion of the service salesman. The Petitioner would exclude
and the Employer include the service salesman. The Petitioner urges
exclusion on the basis that the service salesman is a supervisor. The
service salesman receives customers who drive their automobiles to
the Employer's shop for repairs, diagnoses mechanical troubles, writes
up customers' repair orders, and advises the mechanics as to the work
required on the basis of the customers' orders. He attempts to sell
1 These cases were consolidated by order of the Acting Regional Director on March
9, 1951.
2 The parties to these proceedings agreed to set up two separate units, described here-
inafter. While ordinarily we would Include In one unit all the employees sought to be
represented In the two separate units herein ( see Massachusetts Motor Car Company, Inc.,
90 NLRB No . 186), we find no reason here to overrule the agreement of the parties, and
will permit It to stand.
94 NLRB No. 102.
SACO-LOWELL SHOPS 647
automotive accessories and makes minor. mechanical ,adjustments and
installation of appliances. He frequently runs road tests to determine
whether or not the defects reported by the customers were corrected by
the mechanics and reports the results of his investigation directly to the
service manager. As a rule automobiles brought in for repairs are
assigned to mechanics in rotation. On various occasions the service
salesman has taken mechanics off the repair of one automobile and
assigned them to emergency repair work at the instance of the service
manager or on his own accord.
The service salesman, however, has no authority to hire, discharge,
reward, or discipline any of the mechanics or other employees, nor
the authority effectively to recommend such action. Further the evi-
dence does not indicate that he in any way responsibly directs the
work of any mechanic. Upon these facts and the record as a whole, we
find that the service salesman is not a supervisor within the meaning of
the Act; in view of the interrelation and integration of his work with
that performed by mechanics, we shall include him in the unit.'
We find, 'therefore, that the appropriate unit consists of all me-
chanics, body-men, painters and their. helpers, including the service
salesman, employed at the Employer's Tulsa, Oklahoma, automotive
agency, but excluding office clerical employees, salesmen, watchmen,
professional employees, guards, and supervisors as defined by the Act.
Case No. 16-RC-688
We find all porters , greasers , washers, parts-men, polishers, and
chauffeurs , employed at the Employer 's Tulsa, Oklahoma, automotive
agency but excluding mechanics , guards , clerical employees , profes-
sional employees and supervisors as defined by the Act, constitute a.
unit appropriate for the purpose of collective bargaining within the
meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act .4
[Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication in this
volume.]
6 See The Fuller Automobile Company d/b/a The Fuller Automobile Company and
Fuller Manufacturing & Supply Company , 88 NLRB 1452, 1457, 1458; Massachusetts
Motor Car Company, Inc ., supra ; Public Motors Co., 90 NLRB No. 273.
* This unit was agreed to by the parties.
SAGO-LOWELL SHOPS and INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHIN-
ISTS, PETITIONER . Case No. 1-RC-2O05. May 17, 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 Sidney A. Coven,
94 NLRB No. 94.