Vickers Inc.Download PDFNational Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsMay 24, 1957117 N.L.R.B. 1767 (N.L.R.B. 1957) Copy Citation VICKERS, INCORPORATED 1767 Vickers, Incorporated and International Union of Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers, AFL-CIO, Petitioner. Case No. 15-RC-1516. May 24,1957 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 Sewall S. Fine, hearing 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 National Labor Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member panel [Chairman Leedom and Members Murdock and Rodgers]. 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 Petitioner is a labor organization within the meaning of the Act and claims to represent certain 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. We find, in accord with the stipulation of the parties at the hearing, that the following employees of the Employer constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act: All hourly paid production and maintenance employees employed at the Employer's Jackson, Mississippi, plant, including probationary employees, but excluding all salaried 2 office, office clerical and plant clerical employees,3 cafeteria employees, technical employees, the 1 The hearing officer denied a motion made by the Employer at the hearing to postpone the hearing in this proceeding until October 1, 1957, or thereafter. The ruling is hereby affirmed. The hearing officer referred to the Board a motion by the Employer made at the hearing that the petition be dismissed on the ground that it is premature, and an alternative motion that the direction of an election be postponed until on or after Octo- ber 31, 1957 , on the ground that the unit petitioned for is in the process of expansion. For reasons stated in paragraph numbered 5 of the text , these motions are hereby denied. The Employer contends further that , if an election is directed , the Petitioner be re- quired to submit a sufficient showing of interest in the larger group that will be employed at the time of the election . However, we are administratively satisfied that the showing of interest already submitted is sufficient in relation to the plant complement that will be employed at the time of the election hereinafter directed. 2 There is no evidence that any of the clerical employees or office employees are non- salaried. 8 Petitioner would include , and the Employer would exclude , a plant clerical employee named Tillson , who is classified as a general clerk #2. Tillson , like other plant clericals, is salaried , performs clerical duties solely , and works the same hours, receives the same benefits, and shares the same working conditions as the rest of the salaried plant clerical 117 NLRB No. 236. 1768 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL -LABOR RELATIONS BOARD nurse, professional employees, guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act. 5. The Employer, a Michigan corporation, is engaged in the manu- facture of hydraulic pumps and equipment at various plants. The only plant involved herein, located at Jackson, Mississippi, is a new plant and is currently increasing both its production and its work force on a scheduled, gradual buildup basis. The Employer contends that an election should not be held at this time because of the expan- sion occurring at this plant and moves, therefore, that the instant petition be dismissed on the ground that it is premature. In the alter- native, the Employer requests that an election be delayed until October 31, 1957, at the earliest, at which time it alleges that 50 percent of the employees in its ultimate employee complement will be employed and will have finished their 90-day probationary periods. The instant plant commenced production in January 1957, when 156 pumps were assembled. The plant is scheduled to manufacture 250 pumps during February 1957 and 350 pumps during March 1957. Thereafter, production will be increased gradually to a rate of 1,500 during March 1958, with the maximum rate of 3,000 pumps per month scheduled for March 1959.4 There were 255 hourly paid production and maintenance employees employed by the Employer at the date of the hearing. Of these, 63 were permanently assigned to specific job classifications, 21 were tentatively assigned to such classifications and the remainder were assigned to various departments for general training. Employees were permanently or tentatively assigned to 24 of the Employer's 78 job classifications. The Employer expects that the plant complement will expand at a uniform rate to an ultimate complement of approxi- mately 807 hourly paid production and maintenance employees by March 1958. New employees are designated as probationary em- ployees for the first 90 days of their employment, after which their status becomes that of permanent employees. The record shows that the Employer is presently producing a full range of pumps and parts which the instant plant is designed to manu- facture and that, at the date of the hearing, all but 11 of the 311 machines scheduled to be installed in the plant had already been in- stalled. Of these, approximately 240 were in use, albeit on a part- time basis. The record further shows that the present work force is employees, including other general clerks #2, whom the Petitioner has stipulated to ex- clude from the unit. We find, therefore, that Tillson's interests are allied with those of the other plant clerical employees and, as Petitioner has agreed to exclude this category from the unit, we shall exclude Tillson as a salaried plant clerical employee. • ' The hydraulic pumps manufactured by the Employer are highly complex mechanisms to be used in aircraft and are extremely small , weighing between 2 and 3 pounds. The simplest pump manufactured by the Employer contains 96 parts, while'the most complex contains over 500 parts, and the employees must observe tolerances of up to 34000o of an inch in their work. M. E. MOSES CO., INC. 1769 performing almost every function that will ultimately be performed. In view of these circumstances, and as it is clear from the record that it was expected that at least 40 percent of the maximum complement would be employed by May 1, 1957,5 we find that the Employer pres- ently has in its employ a substantial and representative segment of its ultimate plant complement, and we shall direct an immediate election in the unit found appropriate in paragraph numbered 4, above .6 [Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.] s It is immaterial for the purpose of the case at bar that many of these employees may still be considered to be "trainees" by the Employer or that many of them may-not have completed their 90 -day probationary period Walton -Young Corp ., 117 NLRB 51; Extral Corporation, 111 NLRB 878 9 Bell Aircraft Corporation, 96 NLRB 1211. M. E. Moses Co ., Inc.' and Dallas General Drivers , Warehousemen & Helpers, Local 745, AFL-CIO, Petitioner . Case No. 16-RC- 2032. May 24,1957 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 John Y. Funke, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds : 1. There are two corporations, one a Texas corporation and one an Oklahoma corporation, operating under the name M. E. Moses Co., Inc. The Texas corporation owns and operates 24 retail 5- and 10- cent stores in various cities or towns throughout Texas and a ware= house at Dallas, Texas. The Oklahoma corporation operates one retail store in Oklahoma. The stock ownership of both corporations is. substantially identical, and the directors and officers are the same. There is centralized buying and accounting as well as centralized con- trol of management and labor relations policies for both corporations. The Oklahoma store is included in an administrative group with, and subject to the control of the same store superintendent as, a number of Texas stores. We find, in agreement with the Employer, that the Oklahoma and Texas corporations constitute a single employer for jurisdictional purposes.2 During the fiscal year ending January 31, 1956, out-of-State purchases for all stores were in excess of $1,950,000. Gross sales of all stores were under $4,000,000 of which those made to The Employer 's name appears as amended at the hearing. 2 Orkin Extermtinatsng Company, Inc ., 115 NLRB 622. 117 NLRB No. 234. Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation