Mack Manufacturing Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Sep 2, 1952

100 N.L.R.B. 978 (N.L.R.B. 1952)

978 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
MACK MANUFACTURING CORPORATION and INTERNATIONAL UNION,
UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AIRCRAFT AND AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT
WORKERS OF AMERICA, LOCAL 677, CIO, PETITIONER. Case No.
44--RC`=1613. September 2, 1952
Decision and Order
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a hearing was held before Julius Topol, hearing officer.
The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prej u-
dicial 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-member
panel [ChaiJrman Herzog and Members Murdock and Peterson].
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. No 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, for the following reasons:
The Petitioner seeks to include a group of 11 clerical leaders in the
over-all clerical unit which it represents at the Employer's Allentown,
Pennsylvania, plant. The Employer contends that these clerical
leaders, are supervisors and that the petition. should therefore be
dismissed.
Following a consent election, the Petitioner was certified in the
clerical unit on March 24, 1952. In the consent-election agreement the
Employer and the Petitioner agreed that certain clerical leaders were
not supervisors and should be included in the unit,. and that another
group of clerical leaders were supervisors and should be excluded from
the unit. Not being able to agree as to the alleged supervisory status
of a third group of 11 clerical leaders, the parties provisionally ex-
citided them from the unit in the consent election and agreed 'to' submit
the issue to the Board. The Petitioner thereupon instituted the
present proceeding.
The Employer is engaged at its Allentown plant in the manufacture
of busses and trucks. Of the 11 clerical leaders here involved, 10
work in the production control department? The function of the
` Although the other clerical loader, R. R Roberts, works in the accounting department,
the parties stipulated that his duties and authority are substantially the same as those
of the 10 clerical leaders in the production control department and that the determination
as to supervisory status should be the same in all 11 cases.
100 NLRB No. 121.
MACS MANUFACTURING CORPORATION 979
employees in this department is to control inventory by checking parts
on hand against production requirements and then determining what
parts will have to be acquired to meet the production schedule. Each
of the 12 groups of clerks in the production control department con-
trols certain of the component parts that go into the finished product.
The production controller, with the help of 2 supervisory assistants,
supervises all the work done in the production control department.
Reporting directly to the production controller are 12 clerical leaders,
each in charge of a group of clerks varying in number from 1 to 6.
There is a total of 43 clerks in the department, all of whom are in the
clerical unit represented by the Petitioner. At the time of the consent
election, the parties stipulated that 2 of the clerical leaders,2 each in
charge of a group of 4 clerks, were supervisors. Involved in the
present case, therefore, are the clerical leaders in charge of 10 groups,
totaling 35 clerical employees.
The 10 clerical leaders perform approximately the same functions.
When furnished with a production schedule, the clerical leader assigns
to the clerks in his group, including himself, certain component parts
of the group assignment. In most cases, this assignment of work is
routine, as the various clerks usually handle the same parts. Once the
work is assigned, the clerks complete their tasks without special help
from the clerical leader. Occasionally a problem will arise in which
the clerical leader, because of his greater experience, will assist the
clerk. The clerical leader is responsible for the completion of the
entire job of his group by a date which will permit production to
proceed on schedule. Accordingly, if the clerical leader decides
overtime work is necessary, he receives authority therefor from the
production controller, and then allots the overtime work to the mem-
bers of his group.
The clerical leaders have no authority to hire, discharge, or initiate
recommendations with respect to disciplining or rewarding the clerks.
However, from time to time the production controller will ask the
clerical leader about the efficiency of a clerk in his group.
For a large part of their working time, the clerical leaders do the
same kind of work as the rank-and-file clerical employees. To the
extent,that the clerical leaders assign work to and direct the work of
the other clerksthe record shows that such duties are largely routine
in nature. These factors indicate that the clerical leaders are not
supervisors. On the other hand, and suggesting a contrary conclusion,
2 S. Mentzel, whose group controls cabs and cowls , and H. Hartenstein, whose group
controls IBM parts requirements.
227260-53-vol . 104 -63
980 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
the clerical leaders decide, with the approval of the production con-
troller, when overtime is necessary, exercise some judgment in assign-
ing overtime, and are occasionally consulted by the production con-
troller with respect to the efficiency of the clerks.
An important factor in this case is the abnormally high ratio of
supervisors to rank-and-file employees which would result from- a
decision holding the clerical leaders to be supervisors. There are 43
nonsupervisory clerical workers in the production control department.
A finding that the clerical leaders are supervisors would increase the
number of supervisors in the department to 15, an unlikely average of
less than 3 employees to every supervisor. The Board has frequently
held that the relative number of employees and supervisors is a factor
to be considered in determining whether certain persons have super-
visory status.3
Under all the circumstances, we find that the clerical leaders in this
case are not supervisors within the meaning of the Act, and that they
may properly be included in the existing clerical unit. However, as
there is no bargaining history excluding these clerical leaders from the
clerical unit ,4 and as the vote of the 11 clerical leaders could not have
affected the results of the consent election,5 we shall not direct an elec-
tion herein. We find therefore that the clerical leader in the account-
ing department (R. R. Roberts), and all clerical leaders in the produc-
tion control department except S. Mentzel (cabs and cowls) and H.
Hartenstein (IBM parts requirements), are a part of the existing
clerical unit for which the Petitioner has been certified, and that the
Petitioner may bargain for them as part of such unit.
Accordingly, we shall dismiss the petition herein, and the Regional
Director is instructed to amend the certification in Case No. 4-RC-
1383 in accordance with this decision.
Order
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition herein be, and it hereby is,
dismissed.
8 See United States Gypsum Company, 85 NLRB 162.
4 Compare Great Lakes Pipe Line Co., 88 NLRB 1370.
5 The tally of ballots in the consent election , Case No. 4-RC-1383 , showed 178 votes
for the Petitioner , 41 votes against the Petitioner , and 10 challenged ballots.