Southern Electric Service Co., Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jan 4, 1945

59 N.L.R.B. 1447 (N.L.R.B. 1945)

In the Matter of SOUTHERN ELECTRIC SERVICE Co., INC.' and LOCAL
UNION #342, INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORK-
ERS, A. F. OF L.
In the Matter of SOUTHERN ELEarRIC SERvrcE Co., INC. and LOCAL
UNION #379, INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORK-
ERS, A. F. OF L.
Cases Nos. 5-R-1677 and 5-R-168 respectively .Decided January
4, 1945
Mr. W. S. Blakeney, of Charlotte, N. C., for the Company.
Mr. H. F. Adair, of Charlotte, N. C., for the Locals #342 and
#379.
Messrs. James A. Martin and C. 0. Robinson, of Charlotte, N. C.,
for Local #379. -
Miss Ruth Rusch, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon petitions separately and duly filed by Local Union #342,
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, A. F. of L., herein
called Local #342, and Local Union #379, International Brother-
hood of Electrical Workers, A. F. of L., herein called Local #379,
each alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concern-
ing the representation-of employees of Southern Electric Service Co.,
Inc., Charlotte, North Carolina, herein called the Company, the Na,
tional Labor Relations Board provided for an appropriate consoli-
dated hearing upon due notice before Sidney J. Barban, Trial Exam-
iner. Said hearing was held at Charlotte, North Carolina, on No-
vember 24, 1944. The Company, Local #342, and Local #379
appeared and participated.2 All parties were afforded full oppor-
1 All formal papers were corrected to show the name of the Company as set forth above
2 By endorsement of a letter from the Trial Examiner dated November 30, 1944, the
parties have stipulated that a certain typographical error in the transcript of the hearing
be corrected. The stipulation is hereby approved and it is ordered that the record be
corrected accordingly.
59 N. L. R. B., No. 264.
1447
1448 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
I tunity to be heard; to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to
introduce evidence bearing on the issues. The Trial Examiner's
rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are
hereby affirmed. All parties were afforded an opportunity to file
briefs with the Board.
Upon the entire record in the case; the Board makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
The Company is a North Carolina corporation with its main plant
located in Charlotte, North Carolina, and its other plants located in
Greensboro, North Carolina, Greenville, South Carolina, and Spartan-
burg, South Carolina. The Company is engaged in the general repair
of electrical equipment, sale of new and rebuilt equipment, and in-
stallation of industrial wiring. For the first 10 months of 1944, the
Company purchased materials and equipment amounting to more than
$100,000 in value, of 'which approximately 75 percent was shipped
from sources outside of the'-States of-'North and South Carolina. Dur-
ing the same period, the Company's volume of business amounted to
approximately $500,000.
We find that the. Company is engaged in commerce within the mean-
ing of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
Local Union #342 and Local Union #379, International Brother-
hood of Electrical Workers are labor organizations affiliated with the
American Federation of Labor, admitting to membership employees
of the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Company has refused to grant recognition to Local #342 and
Local #379 as the, exclusive bargaining representatives of certain of
its employees until Local #342 and Local #379 have been certified
by the Board in appropriate units.
A statement of a Field Examiner, introduced into evidence at the
hearing, indicates that Local #342 and Local #379 each represents
substantial number of employees in the unit proposed in its petition,
and hereinafter found appropriate.3
' The Field Examiner reported that Local #342 submitted application -for-membership
cards, 13 of which bore the names of persons listed on the Company's pay roll, which con-
tained the names of 15 employees in the appropriate unit at the Greensboro plant. The
cards were dated - 5 in June 1944 , 5 in July 1944, 2 in August 1944, and 1 undated.
Local #379 submitted application -for-membership cards, 30 of which bore the names of
persons listed on the pay roll which contained the names of 41 employees in the appropriate
unit ,at the Charlotte plant. The cards were dated. 4 in July 1944 , 4 in August 1944, 3
in October 1944, and 19 undated.
SOUTHERN ELECTRIC SERVICE CO., INC. 1449
We find that questions affecting commerce have arisen concerning
the representation of employees of the Company, within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
Local #342 seeks to represent a-unit composed of 'production and
service employees, excluding 'office and all supervisory employees at
the Company's Greensboro, North Carolina, plant. Local #379 asks
for a similar unit at the Company's main plant in Charlotte, North
Carolina. While the Company is in substantial accord with the classi-
fications included in the proposed units, it contends that all four of
its plants should comprise a single unit.
The Company's two other plants are located in Spartanburg, South
Carolina, and Greenville, South Carolina. Each of the three branch
plants is approximately 100 miles from the Charlotte plant where the
executive offices are located. All the Company policies are determined
in Charlotte. Purchases are made by this office and the materials are
then; distf il5Lited to the other plants. If either a delivery or a sale is
made by one of the branch plants, an invoice is sent to the main office.
The time sheets are sent to the Charlotte office by the branch plants and
a weekly check is sent to each plant to cover the pay roll. All the books
and records are kept at the central office, but they are kept in such a
way so that the overhead and profit of each plant can be ascertained.
The Company has maintained uniform working conditions throughout
all of the plants. The War Labor Board has set a uniform wage scale
for employees of all four plants and the War Production Board has
allotted priority materials to the Company as a whole rather than to
each plant separately.
At the Charlotte plant, there is a foreman who supervises the work
of the employees. There are plants managers who oversee the work
at the other plants. Prior to the war, there was an interchange of
employees. among the plants. Since the manpower shortage has
become acute, ' the Company has transferred work rather than
employees, from one plant to another to distribute it more evenly.
It is evident from the -foregoing that a 4-plant unit might be
appropriate, but also that the employees at each plant are a clearly
identifiable group. Although the International Brotherhood of Elec-
trical Workers has tried to organize the Company's plants in South
Carolina, it has been unsuccessful. Since the employees at the
Spartanburg and Greenville plants have expressed no desire to desig-
nate a bargaining representative, we find that separate units for the
Company's employees at Charlotte and Greensboro, respectively, are
appropriate. However, our present determination does not preclude
11
1450 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
a finding at a future date that a larger, more inclusive unit will then be
appropriate.
We find that the following groups of employees constitute units
appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the
meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act:
1. All production and service employees at the Company's Greens-
boro, North Carolina, plant, excluding office employees, foremen, and
all supervisory employees with authority to hire, promote, discharge,
discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or
effectively recommend such action.
2. All production and service employees at the Company's Char-
lotte, North Carolina, plant, excluding office employees, foremen, and
all supervisory employees with authority to hire, promote, discharge,
discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or
effectively recommend such action.
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
We shall direct that the questions concerning representation which
have arisen be resolved by elections by secret ballot among the
employees *in the appropriate units who were employed during the
pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of the Direction of
Elections herein, subject to the limitations and additions set forth in
the Direction.
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National Labor
Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act,
and pursuant to Article III, Sectidn 9, of National Labor Relations
Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3, as amended,,it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Southern Electric
Service Co., Inc., Charlotte, North Carolina,--elections-by secret ballot
shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than thirty (30)
days from the date of this Direction, under the direction and super-
vision of the Regional Director for the Fifth Region, acting in this
matter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject
to Article III, Sections 10 and 11, of said Rules and Regulations, among
the employees in the units 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 dur-
ing said pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation or tem-
porarily laid off, and including employees in the armed forces of the
United States who present themselves in person at the polls, but
SOUTHERN ELECTRIC SERVICE CO., INC. 1451
excluding those employees who have since quit or been discharged
for cause and have not been rehired or reinstated prior to the date of
the elections, (1) to determine with respect to the employees in the
unit described in paragraph 1 of Section IV, whether or not they
desire to be represented by Local Union #342, International Brother-
hood of Electrical Workers, A. F. of L., for the purposes of collective
bargaining, and, (2) to determine with respect to the employees in the
unit described in paragraph 2 of Section IV, whether or not they desire
to be represented by Local Union #379, International Brotherhood
of Electrical Workers, A. F. of L., for the purposes of collective
bargaining.
CHAIRMAN MILLIS took no part in the consideration of the above De-
cision and Direction of Elections.
D