Kansas City Power & Light Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Dec 18, 1947

75 N.L.R.B. 609 (N.L.R.B. 1947)

In the Matter of KANSAS CITY POWER & LIGHT COMPANY, EMPLOYER
and INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, AF-
FILIATED WITH THE AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR, PETITIONER
Case No. 17-R-1810.-Decided December 18, 1947
Messrs. J. W. B. Foringer and Irvin Fane, of Kansas City, Mo., for
the Employer.
Mr. G. A. Baldus, of Kansas City, Mo., for the Petitioner.
Mr. Fred Ruarlc, of Kansas City, Mo., for the Intervenor.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at Kansas
City, Missouri, on June 12, 1947, before Robert S. Fousek, hearing
officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free
from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed., At the hearing, the
hearing officer reserved for ruling by the Board the motion of the
Intervenor to dismiss the petition on the ground that the unit sought
by the Petitioner was inappropriate. For reasons stated in Section IV,
infra, the Intervenor's motion is hereby denied.
Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations
Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
Kansas City Power R Light Company is a Missouri corporation,
having its principal office and place of business in Kansas City, Mis-
souri. It is principally engaged in the production, transmission, and
distribution of electrical energy to domestic, commercial, and indus-
trial consumers in Missouri and Kansas. It is also engaged in the
'On July 16 , 1947, the Boaid received a stipulation , agreed to by all parties to the pro-
ceeding , that the record be corrected in accordance with a list of corrections submitted
theiewith The stipulation is hereby incorporated into the record , and the transcript
ordered corrected accordingly.
75 N. L R. B, No. 69.
609
610 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
production, distribution, and sale of steam heat in Kansas City, Mis-
souri, and the sale of water in several communities in Missouri and
Kansas. It sells at retail electrical appliances in all communities in
which it operates. It also operates generating plants in Missouri
and Kansas. ,
The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the American
Federation of Labor, claiming to represent employees of the Employer.
The Independent Union of Utility Employees, herein called the
Intervenor, is an unaffiliated labor organization, claiming to represent
employees of the Employer.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Employer refuses to recognize the Petitioner as the exclusive
bargaining representative of employees of the Employer until the Peti-
tioner has been certified by the Board in an appropriate unit.
We find that a question affecting commerce exists concerning the
representation of employees of the Employer within the meaning of
Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Employer is engaged in the production and distribution of elec-
tric energy. Employees in the generating stations are classified as
production employees. Other employees are classified generally into
two groups (1) physical employees, who are concerned with the dis-
tribution of electric energy, and (2) office and clerical employees.
Since 1940, the Petitioner has been the certified bargaining representa-
tive of the Employer's production employees. During the sane
period, the Intervenor has represented the remaining employees
through collective bargaining agreements, encompassing office and
clerical employees and physical employees.
The Petitioner now seeks a unit of physical employees of the
Employer, excluding production, office and clerical, and supervisory
employees. The Intervenor contends that the appropriate unit for
physical employees is the present bargaining unit which includes both
physical and office and clerical employees.
Physical employees in general are hourly paid; clerical employees
are salaried. No established line of promotion exists by which
employees are promoted from physical to clerical employment, or vice
versa. The record discloses that contacts in the course of employment
KANSAS CITY POWER & LIGHT COMPANY 611
between the two groups are infrequent and of minor importance. The
Intervenor itself has separated physical employees from clerical
employees in its organizational structure, dividing its IS locals equally
between clerical and physical employees. The physical employee
locals are represented by one grievance committee, and the clerical
employee locals are represented by another.
A disparity arising from the dissimilarity of their duties exists
between the interests of clerical employees and those of manual work-
ers, which makes separate units for these groups of employees prima
facie appropriate.2 The close integration of work among all de-
partinents of public utility operations, tending to minimize these
differences, constitutes the basis of the broader units which we have
sometimes found appropriate.' The record in this particular case
does not persuade us that the integration of work among the physical
or distribution employees and the office and clerical employees of the
Employer, or the history of collective bargaining of physical em-
ployees and office and clerical employees in a combined unit from
which the production employees have been excluded, makes the unit
proposed by the Petitioner inappropriate. We are, therefore, of the
opinion that a unit limited to physical employees of this Employer,
from' which office and clerical employees are excluded, is appropriate
for bargaining purposes.
The parties agree that the batteryman, instrument and relay man,
assistant batteryman, and junior instrument and relay man in the
Employer's system operating department, and apprentice service
man, janitor, and appliance maintenance man in the Employer's meter
service and laboratory department, all salaried employees, should
properly be included in the unit of hourly paid physical employees.
The Intervenor would also include in the, unit, of physical employees,
janitors, elevator operators, maintenance men, and watchmen in the
general office building department; janitors, timekeepers, order fillers,
and junior clerks in the transportation department; janitors in the
miscellaneous department; and elevator operators, janitors, order
filler foreman, and foreman of the warehouse in the stores department.
The Petitioner disagrees on the grounds that employees in these cate-
gories are paid on a salary basis and that their work is dissimilar to
2Matter of Sierra Pacific Power Company, 56 N L R B 458, an cases cited therein;
Matter of Cincinnati Gas and Electrio Company, 57 N. L R B 1298
3 As we stated in our decision in.Matter of PennsyltantarPower and Light Company, we
have, in certain public utility cases , been impressed with the high degree of integration of
work interests among all manual and clerical employees. Where such integration is shown,
and especially where it long history of collective bargaining over a period of years has
served to commingle the employment interests of-such employees ,• we have been reluctant
to break up all-inclusive employee units. Matter of Pennsylvania Power and Light Com-
pany, 64 N. L . R B. 874, and cases cited therein , Matter of Philadelphia Gas Works
Company, 74 'N L. it. B. 638.
766972-48-vol 75-40
612 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
that of physical employees. The Employer agrees with the Petitioner
with respect to the exclusion from the unit of the disputed classifica-
tions, except as to janitors, who, it contends, should be included in
the unit.
We note that the parties are agreed that certain salaried categories
should be included in the unit of hourly paid workers, despite the
difference in their modes of payment. We do not consider mode of
payment controlling on unit placement. We will look to the general
interests, duties, and nature of work and working conditions of em-
ployees to resolve the unit question.4 The general office employees
above noted service the Employer's general office building, a consid-
erable part of which is leased to other tenants. These general office
employees have little or no contact with outside employees. Janitors
and elevator operators in the transportation, miscellaneous, and stores
departments have no regular contacts with and no duties similar to
distribution employees, and other disputed employees in these depart-
ments perform work of a clerical nature. All employees whose place-
ment in the unit of physical employees is disputed have, in past bar-
gaining, been deemed more closely aligned to office and clerical, than
to distribution, employees. For these reasons we shall exclude them
from the unit.
We find that all physical employees of the Employer, including
the batteryman, instrument and relay man, assistant batteryman, and
junior instrument and relay man in the system operating department,
and the apprentice service man, janitor, and appliance maintenance
man in the meter service and laboratory department, but excluding all
production department employees, office and clerical employees, jani-
tors, elevator operators, maintenance men, and watchmen in the gen-
eral office building department, janitors, timekeepers, order fillers and
junior clerks in the transportation department, janitors in the miscel-
laneous department, and elevator operators, janitors, order filler f ore-
man, and foreman of the warehouse in the stores department, and
supervisors, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collec-
tive bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
The Petitioner contends that temporary construction employees
of the Employer should be eligible to vote. The Intervenor disputes
their eligibility on the ground that they are appointed on a temporary
basis with little or no prospect of permanent employment. The
Employer takes no position on the issue.
The Employer's'construction work is divided into three categories;
operational, maintenance, and new construction. The employees in
4 Matter of E. I. du Pont de Nemour8 d Company, 62 N. L. R 'B. 146.
KANSAS CITY POWER & LIGHT COMPANY 613
dispute are from time to time hired to work on new construction
projects, the demand for which is wholly dependent upon the fluctuat-
ing requirements of the Employer's customers. These employees, when
hired, are notified that their employment is temporary and that they
have little prospect of permanent employment. They work as laborers,
digging ditches for underground conduits or setting up poles for
overhead transmission lines; they do not perform any electrical work,
nor are they engaged regularly in duties that bring them into contact
with electrical workers. Most of them are paid off during the winter
months and are not given any priority in reemployment when the slack
period ends. Personnel among these employees constantly changes ;
the Employer's pay roll of June 3, 1947, discloses that 64 percent of
those whose names appear therein had worked for the Employer less
than 6 months. We are of the opinion that temporary construction
workers do not have a substantial interest in conditions of employment
in the Employer's operations,5 and, therefore, shall exclude them from
participation in the election.
We shall direct that the question concerning representation which
has arisen be resolved by an election by secret ballot subject to the
limitations and additions set forth in the Direction.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION 6
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining with-Kansas City Power & Light Com-
pany, Kansas City, Missouri, an election by secret ballot shall be con-
ducted as early as possible, but not later than thirty (30) days from
the date of this Direction, under the direction and supervision of the
Regional Director for the Seventeenth Region, and subject to Sections
203.61 and 203.62 of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regu-
lations-Series 5, among the employees in the unit found appropriate
in Section IV, above, who were employed during the pay-roll period
immediately preceding the date of this Direction, including employees
who did not work during said pay-roll period because they were ill
or on vacation or temporarily laid off, but excluding temporary con-
struction employees and those employees who have since quit or been
discharged for cause and have not been rehired or reinstated prior to
the date of the election, to determine whether they desire to be repre-
sented by International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, A. F. of
L., or by Independent Union of Utility Employees, for the purposes of
collective bargaining, or by neither. -
5 Mattei of Electronic Laboi atories. Inc , 69 N' L R B 413
9 Any participant in the election herein may , upon its prompt ,request to , and approval
thereof by, the Regional Director , have its name removed from the ballot. .