Aerospace Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 30, 2000

331 N.L.R.B. 561 (N.L.R.B. 2000)

AEROSPACE CORP. 561
The Aerospace Corporation and International Union,
United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural
Implement Workers of America, UAW, Peti-
tioner. Case 31–RC–7654
June 30, 2000
DECISION ON REVIEW AND ORDER
BY MEMBERS FOX, LIEBMAN, AND HURTGEN
On September 1, 1998, the Regional Director for Re-
gion 31 issued a Decision and Direction of Election
(relevant portions of which are attached as an appendix)
finding appropriate the petitioned-for unit of mainte-
nance employees in the facilities services section of the
employer’s facility department in El Segundo, California.
Thereafter, in accordance with Section 102.67 of the
Board’sRules and Regulations, the Employer filed a
timely request for review of the Regional Director’s de-
cision. The Employer contended, inter alia, that Board
precedent mandates facility wide units in the research
and development industry. By Order dated September
30, 1998, the Board granted the request for review.1
The Board has delegated its authority in this proceed-
ing to a three-member panel.
Having considered the entire record in this proceeding,
including the Petitioner’s brief on review, we affirm the
Regional Director’s unit determination.
The facts are set forth in detail in the appendix.
Briefly, the Employer operates a research and develop-
ment (R&D) facility in El Segundo, California, in sup-
port of national space programs. The Employer’s two
main customers are the United States Air Force and the
National Reconnaissance Office. The Employer employs
a total of 2500 employees at its El Segundo facility. The
Petitioner seeks to represent a unit of 41 maintenance
employees in the facilities services section (FSS) of the
Employer’s facility department. The Employer contends
that the only appropriate unit is a facility wide unit con-
sisting of 165 shop and service, technical support, and
office support (plant clerical) employees. In support of
its contention the Employer argues that the Board has
created a per se rule that only facility wide units are ap-
propriate in the R&D industry.2 We find no merit in this
contention.
In the research and development industry, the Board
has considered the nature of the business—i.e., testing—
to be a significant but not determinative factor in analyz-
ing unit appropriateness. For example, in Dynalectron
Corp., 231 NLRB 1147 (1977), the most recent case in
which the Board considered an issue of unit composition
in the R&D industry, the employer tested railroad and
mass transit rail vehicles. The petitioner sought a plant-
wide unit of production and maintenance employees.
The employer did not engage in any production in the
traditional sense. Rather, as the Board observed, the
“test activities which are among the major duties of all
employees . . . constitute the production process itself.”
231 NLRB at 1147 (footnote omitted). The only ques-
tion before the Board was whether technical employees
must be included in the plantwide production and main-
tenance unit. In assessing this question, the Board con-
sidered the nature of the Employer’s business, but also
relied on other factors as set forth in Sheffield Corp., 134
NLRB 1101 (1961). The Board found that the technical
employees not only worked alongside production and
maintenance employees, but also performed closely in-
terrelated tasks, and in some cases the same tasks, often
under common supervision. Thus, “on the facts of (that)
case,”3 the Board, applying a community-of-interest test
and not a per se rule, included the technical employees in
the production and maintenance unit.

1 In its Order Granting Review, the Board directed that the Regional
Director’s order be amended to permit the two clericals in the facilities
services section to vote under challenge. Their eligibility is not before
us in this proceeding.
2 Although there are 2500 employees at the facility, there are various
exclusions which the Employer does not contest. Thus, a facility wide
unit covers 165 employees.
The Board used a similar analysis in Airesearch Mfg.
Co. of Arizona, 137 NLRB 632 (1962). There, the em-
ployer developed and manufactured units and systems
for use in the aircraft and space industries. The Board
held that technical employees were properly included in
the production and maintenance unit sought by the union.
The Board reasoned that where development is a key
feature of the employer’s business, the employees en-
gaged in testing are not by reason of their duties and
functions such a distinct and homogeneous group as
would justify constituting a separate appropriate unit.
Further, the Board, citing Sheffield, supra, found that
testing was an integral part of the employer’s production;
that many of the laboratory employees had the same ba-
sic skills as those possessed by production and mainte-
nance employees, and some performed fabrication, main-
tenance, and assembly work; that there was regular con-
tact and job transfers between laboratory employees and
the production and maintenance employees; and that
there were similar terms and conditions of employment.
For all these reasons the Board directed the inclusion of
technical employees in the production and maintenance
unit. Thus, the Board, while giving weight to the nature
of the employer’s business, again used a community-of-
interest, rather than a per se test. Also supporting the use
of the traditional community-of-interest test is Monsanto
Research Corp., 185 NLRB 137 (1970), in which the
Board applied the community-of-interest test in finding
appropriate the petitioned-for unit of machine shop em-
ployees employed at the employer’s laboratory, which
primarily performed R&D work.
Neither Tracerlab, 158 NLRB 667 (1966), nor Boeing
Co., 144 NLRB 1110 (1963), also relied on by the Em-
3 231 NLRB at 1148.
331 NLRB No. 74
DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 562
ployer, involved the issue of whether only a wall-to-wall
unit was appropriate in the R&D industry. In Tracerlab,
the employer was engaged in the development and manu-
facture of instrumentation and in providing services re-
lated to nuclear radiation monitoring. The union sought
to represent a unit of production, maintenance, and tech-
nical employees. The issue was whether certain other
technical employees found in other departments should
be included in the petitioned-for unit, inasmuch as it al-
ready included some of the employer’s technical em-
ployees. The Board found, on the facts of that case, that
they should be included. The Board did not hold that
production and maintenance units must always include
technical employees. Boeing Co., supra, involved the
issue of craft severance of electronic technicians at an
employer that was engaged in both production and test-
ing of missiles and rockets. The petition for severance
was denied.
In sum, we do not agree with the Employer that the
Board has formulated a special, per se rule that governs
unit determinations in the R&D industry. In each of the
relevant cases, the union sought a broad production and
maintenance (and sometimes technical) unit, and the
question before the Board was whether other employees,
including some technicals, did similar work under similar
terms and conditions of employment, and thus also
should be included.
Here, the Petitioner seeks a narrow maintenance unit.
It is Board policy to find separate maintenance depart-
ment units appropriate when petitioned for in the absence
of a more comprehensive bargaining history, where the
factors of the case demonstrate that the maintenance em-
ployees have the requisite separate community of inter-
est. American Cyanamid Co., 131 NLRB 909 (1961).
We find that the record supports the Regional Director’s
finding that, under a traditional community-of-interest
analysis, the petitioned-for maintenance employees con-
stitute a clearly identifiable, functionally distinct group
and therefore constitute an appropriate unit. Ore-Ida
Foods, 313 NLRB 1016 (1994), enfd. 66 F.3d 328 (7th
Cir. 1995).
ORDER
The Regional Director’s Decision and Direction of
Election is affirmed. This proceeding is remanded to the
Regional Director for further appropriate action.
APPENDIX
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION
. . . .

5. The following employees of the Employer constitute a
unit appropriate for the purpose of collective bargaining within
the meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act:

INCLUDED: Full-time and regular part-time electricians,
maintenance mechanics, auto mechanics, painters, plumbers,
carpenters, dispatchers, drivers, driver/movers, heating, venti-
lation and air-conditioning technicians, maintenance
coordinators, maintenance coordinators-landscape and
maintenance craft specialists employed by the Employer in its
Facilities Services Section at its location at 2350 East El
Segundo Boulevard, El Segundo, California.

EXCLUDED: All other employees, including office clerical,
professional employees, security console operators, classified
destruction coordinators, guards and supervisors as defined in
the Act.

The Employer is a California nonprofit corporation with a
principal place of business located in El Segundo, California,
where it is chartered by the Federal Government to operate a
federally funded research and development center where it
performs general systems engineering and integration services
for military space-related programs and other programs essen-
tial to national security. The Employer annually purchases and
receives in California goods and services valued in excess of
$50,000 directly from businesses located outside the State of
California. Accordingly, the Employer meets both the statutory
and the Board’s discretionary standards for asserting jurisdic-
tion over nonretail enterprises as well as over enterprises exert-
ing a substantial impact on national defense. Woods Hole
Oceanographic Institution, 143 NLRB 568 (1963); Siemons
Mailing Service, 122 NLRB 81 (1959).
II. PROPOSED EMPLOYER UNITS
The Employer contends a facility wide unit comprised of all
nonexempt, salaried employees employed under the employer
groupings of office support, technical support, and shop and
service constitute an appropriate unit. The Employer contends
these employees comprise a functionally integrated group of
employees which are all part of the process of providing the
Employer’s product, in this case, research, systems engineering,
and testing. Within the designations of office support, technical
support, and shop and service are employees from various de-
partments and divisions within The Aerospace Corporation
including general services and technology operations. The
Employer contends that the following classifications of em-
ployees constitute an appropriate unit: laboratory technicians,
research assistants-senior, research assistants, mechanical shops
specialists, experimental machinists, input/output user service
coordinators, library technicians I, II, and III, library coordina-
tors, buyer/planner assistants, property disposal coordinators,
metrology coordinators, metrology specialists, ship-
ping/receiving coordinators, office assistants, clerks-senior,
security clerks-senior, network cabling technicians, quality
assurance inspectors, alarm system specialists, telecommunica-
tion specialists, engineering assistants, engineering assistants-
senior, industrial illustrators-senior, photo laboratory techni-
cians, photographers, production control coordinators-senior,
database coordinators, database coordinators-senior, technical
research assistants, audio-visual service technicians, audio-
visual specialists, technical coordinators, computer operators,
computer operators-senior, computer operators-in-charge, com-
puter operator specialists, data communications technicians,
data technicians-senior, data technicians, data technicians spe-
cialists, data technicians specialists-senior, computer interactive
systems coordinators-senior, locksmiths, master locksmiths,
stockkeepers, stockkeepers-senior, shipping-receiving clerks,
and shipping-receiving clerks-senior, in addition to the classifi-
cations proposed by the Petitioner. The facility wide unit pro-
AEROSPACE CORP. 563
posed by the Employer is approximately 165 employees. Al-
ternatively, the Employer proposes a unit that is less than facil-
ity wide, but beyond the facility services section, and would
include the classifications listed above who are in the ware-
house, stores, shipping and receiving, machine shop, technical
support services, engineering and technology, lock and key,
measurement and quality assurances, electronic support ser-
vices, audio/visual, photography, records retention, and prop-
erty administration. It contends the petitioned-for unit is an
inappropriate unit.
III. BACKGROUND
The Aerospace Corporation is engaged in the business of
providing objective engineering and scientific services in sup-
port of national space programs. Its employees perform, inter
alia, programming work in support of launches, readiness re-
views, and field experiments. They conduct tests on space
components and provide advice to Aerospace customers on the
test results. Its two main customers are the United States Air
Force and the National Reconnaissance Office. There are ap-
proximately 2500 employees at the El Segundo facility which is
made up of a number of rented and leased buildings and adja-
cent Air Force buildings.
The Aerospace Corporation has both nonexempt and exempt
employees (exempt from California Federal wage and overtime
laws). The exempt employees are not at issue in this matter.
Both the Petitioner and Employer want only nonexempt, sala-
ried employees in the unit (with the Employer seeking a larger
number included than the Petitioner). The nonexempt employ-
ees are salaried but are nonetheless eligible for overtime.
Though the nonexempt employees are not paid hourly, a base
hourly rate is calculated for each employee for overtime pur-
poses. All nonexempt employees are subject to the same salary
scale which includes a range of salaries and grades for each
classification. All nonexempt employees have the same bene-
fits and are subject to the same personnel policies and proce-
dures (as to a great extent are the exempt employees). Labor
relations for exempt and nonexempt employees is centralized in
the human resources department. Nonexempt employees are all
subject to the same progressive discipline system. Grievances
are processed in the same fashion for all nonexempt employees.
All employees have access to the same cafeteria and dining
facilities, libraries, restrooms, and stores.
The Aerospace Corporation is made up of a number of op-
erations. Speaking generally, under each operation is a divi-
sion, under the divisions are directorates, under the directorates
are departments, and under the departments are sections. Each
operation, division, directorate, department, and section has
someone at the upper echelon akin to a director or supervisor.
The five main departments or divisions involved in the present
matter are the facilities department, general services depart-
ment, publications department, and technology operations and
as noted, the Petitioner seeks a unit composed only of employ-
ees in the facility services section of the facilities department.
The facilities department is part of the administrative opera-
tions division which reports to the chief financial officer, treas-
urer, and senior vice president of administration. Other de-
partments under the administrative operations division are gen-
eral services, and the publication department. Other divisions
which report to the chief financial officer are the finance divi-
sion, contract management division, security and safety, and
corporate information resources division. Each of the divisions
has a department or directorate below it. Other sections under
the facilities department are electronic support services, meas-
urement and quality assurance, and facilities engineering and
planning. The manager of facilities services reports to the head
of the facilities department.
The facilities services section is organized differently than
other departments or services at The Aerospace Corporation in
that there are five “zones” within the section. Zones are usually
comprised of several buildings at the El Segundo facility, in-
cluding both The Aerospace Corporation and Air Force build-
ings. Within each of these zones, there are tradespersons as-
signed. For example (personnel numbers permitting), a me-
chanic, plumber, electrician, carpenter, and painter will be as-
signed to zone 1, a similar group to zone 2, and so on. There
are situations, however, where a zone may be without one of
these tradespersons or an employee of an outside contractor in
the classification may be brought in. There are differences
among the zones. For example, zone 1 has no labs; zone 5 has
much of the vehicle maintenance. For each zone there is a zone
supervisor. Under the zone supervisor is a maintenance coor-
dinator. The coordinators report to the supervisors and the
supervisors report to the facilities services section manager.
IV. POSITIONS IN PETITIONED FOR-UNIT
The Petitioner contends that a unit composed of facility ser-
vice section employees (essentially a maintenance unit) consti-
tutes an appropriate unit for bargaining. This section is one of
four within the facilities department. The Petitioner contends
that the positions described below should be included in the
unit:
The electricians maintain all facets of electrical distribution,
application, and repair. They ensure safe use, installation and
operation of all electrical systems, machinery and emergency
generators. They install, test, troubleshoot, and maintain light-
ing systems, electrical systems, and equipment. They modify
and upgrade existing electrical circuits and perform some elec-
trical work on heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning sys-
tems. The electricians also supply outlets including outlets
hanging from the ceiling or wall (drops) to the laboratories.
Drops are sometimes not changed for years. Electricians will
change or move outlets upon request. They do not hook up the
experiments to the electrical supply but they supply the power
source to the laboratories. They may also repair wiring on
machines and equipment. Their skills are acquired through
specialized training or formal apprenticeship. Testimony at the
hearing indicated that electricians have been advised to “keep
their hands off” the scientific equipment. Electricians may also
be called on to repair machine shop equipment, often with as-
sistance of a facility services section mechanic. Electricians
have little contact with the machine shop employees other than
to ask what needs to be repaired.
The maintenance mechanics maintain and repair mechani-
cal equipment. They perform preventive maintenance on
equipment including machine shop equipment and air compres-
sors. They respond to safety and/or hazardous situations need-
ing repair. They assist other skilled trades people with electri-
cal, mechanical, air-conditioning, plumbing, and carpentry
repairs and/or installations. They perform preventive mainte-
nance to building equipment and machinery. At the hearing a
maintenance mechanic testified he has never aided the labora-
tory mechanics in performance of their job.
DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 564
The auto mechanics maintain and repair The Aerospace
Corporation vehicles, including trucks, vans, and cars. They
perform state-mandated biannual smog checks. They perform
complete engine jobs. They ensure vehicle safety, fuel and
clean vehicles, and schedule vehicle servicing.
The painters maintain a professional looking work environ-
ment for the Employer. They perform routine and preventative
maintenance on equipment to prevent rust and decay. They
paint and refinish walls, woodwork, fixtures, and equipment
within The Aerospace Corporation facilities. They also paint
stripes in parking lots and color code parking spaces.
The plumbers install, repair and maintain plumbing systems
for heating, cooling, water, and drainage systems. They install
and modify process piping for buildings and equipment. They
install, connect, and disconnect plumbing. They ensure that the
building plumbing systems operate properly and in sanitary
condition. In addition, they perform preventive maintenance on
air, water, steam, gas, and drainage systems. Much like the
electricians supply the electrical power to the laboratories, the
plumber will “stub” out pipes for the laboratory. Their work
generally ends at the point in the laboratory where the labora-
tory technician or research assistant attaches the equipment
necessary for the experiments. Their skills are acquired
through specialized training or a formal apprenticeship.
Plumbers do not work on lasers, vacuum chambers, or vacuum
pumps. They will supply gas and water lines to the laboratories
on request. Plumbers do not work on the laboratory equipment.
The carpenters provide a variety of carpentry services in-
volving repair, modification, installation and maintenance of
structural woodwork, fixtures, and equipment in an assigned
maintenance zone. They perform installations in carpentry
fields such as fencing, doors, floor coverings, ceilings, and
windows. They make crates to transport bulky equipment.
They require specialized training or a formal apprenticeship.
The dispatchers receive and input into computers data for
repair and modification requests and dispatch personnel as
required. They issue company vehicles and maintain related
records. They receive and process work orders for maintenance
service, move requests, deliveries, and installations. They act
as central communicator for various maintenance personnel.
The dispatchers receive work requests from any or all Aero-
space Corporation employees. Those requests are relayed to
the supervisors in the facility services section zones who then
assign the task or give the tasks to the maintenance coordinator
to assign. One dispatcher works more with fleet vehicles; the
other works more with the maintenance employees.
The driver drives the Employer’s interfacility and airport
shuttle vehicles. He transports employees and visitors through-
out The Aerospace Corporation complex and transports person-
nel to and from Los Angeles Airport. He acts as backup to the
intercompany outside contractor shuttle driver. He also fuels
the fleet vehicles.
The driver/movers provide support services for The Aero-
space Corporation and its customers. They drive trucks and
other vehicles necessary in moving personnel, equipment, and
furniture throughout the facilities. They also pick up and de-
liver various items and equipment to on-site/off-site locations
and chauffeur civilian and military VIPs as directed. The
driver/movers in facility services section are generally respon-
sible for intraoffice moves. They also deliver excess furniture
to the warehouse for disposal. They use, among other things,
pallets, forklifts, and trucks to accomplish their tasks. Formerly
the warehouse driver/movers were part of facility services sec-
tion but they were severed from facility services about 2 years
ago and are now part of materials and mail services which is
part of general services. As a rule, the warehouse
driver/movers and facility services section driver/movers work
separately. The primary responsibility of the warehouse
driver/movers is to deliver items received at the warehouse to
the proper recipient. There are occasions (e.g., when there are
large moves) where the facility services and warehouse
driver/movers lend a hand to one another. The facility services
manager testified that the occasions could vary from 5 times a
week up to 10 times a year.
The maintenance coordinators coordinate facilities re-
quirements with maintenance personnel, external vendors, and
tradespersons to ensure that buildings meet The Aerospace
Corporation standards. They coordinate and monitor assign-
ments of facility services section employees and outside con-
tractor janitorial personnel. They oversee the facilities and pass
out work assignments. They also will engage in manual labor
if necessary. There is a maintenance coordinator for each zone.
They do not have the authority to discipline employees.
The heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning technicians
(HVAC) install, repair, service and maintain air-conditioning,
heating, and refrigeration equipment systems. They coordinate
air-conditioning, heating and refrigeration repairs, and installa-
tions with outside contractors. They determine, by regular
inspections, the need for repairs and maintenance work for
heating, ventilation, refrigeration, and air-conditioning. They
perform scheduled preventive maintenance, emergency service,
repair, installation, and overhaul of all refrigeration equipment.
In addition to working on the equipment that supplies “comfort
cooling” to all of The Aerospace Corporation facilities, the
HVAC technicians also are called upon to adjust and work on
water chillers, closed loop cooling towers, and low temperature
refrigeration units that are used in the laboratories. Some of
these pieces of equipment are inside the laboratory, some are
outside. According to the HVAC technician, there may be
equipment installed in the laboratory that she is unaware of
until it breaks down and needs repair. HVAC technicians do
not work on the experimental process, they supply properly
functioning equipment to enable the experiments to proceed.
At the hearing, an HVAC technician testified she had been
advised by management not to connect her air-conditioning
drops to any scientific laboratory equipment. They often work
with mechanics, plumbers, and carpenters. The air-
conditioning control computer system is not supported by The
Aerospace Corporation computer department. The HVAC
technician said she had not worked with laboratory mechanics
at all in 1998. In addition, an HVAC technician has provided
relief for the dispatchers for lengthy periods of time.
The maintenance coordinators-landscape maintain The
Aerospace Corporation grounds and leased property. They
coordinate activities related to grounds landscaping conducted
by outside contractors. They are in charge of the contract gar-
deners and oversee all external ground work.
The maintenance craft specialists perform highly skilled
duties in one or more crafts, such as machining, plumbing, air-
conditioning, carpentry, electrical maintenance, and installa-
tion. They are versatile, higher-level craftspersons. The two
present maintenance craft specialists were formerly a lead elec-
trician and a carpenter.
AEROSPACE CORP. 565
V. POSITIONS IN EMPLOYER’S PROPOSED UNITS
The Employer contends that the unit proposed by the Peti-
tioner is not an appropriate unit and that the appropriate unit
should include the classifications proposed by the Petitioner
and the following classifications (or alternatively, some lesser
number of classifications as specified above in sec. II, proposed
employer unit). The following gives a generalized overview of
the classifications the Employer contends should be included.
A. Laboratory Employees
The laboratory employees set up and conduct experiments.
These categories of employees fall under the technology opera-
tions division of the engineering and technology group. They
report to the manager of technology operations. There was no
record testimony regarding any laboratory employees, nor any
other employees, ever transferring into facility services.
The laboratory technicians support members of the techni-
cal staff (MTS) and associated technical staff (ATS) by provid-
ing technical laboratory support for various space flight, launch
vehicle, and ground based projects. They maintain and operate
computers and test equipment for space qualification of various
instruments. In addition, among other things, they validate that
equipment and instrumentation are in proper working order to
acquire expected data. They design, build, set up and conduct,
under direct supervision, tests on mechanical components pro-
viding documentation of tests and results.
The research assistants-senior provide technical support to
MTS in a laboratory environment. Among other things, they
assist in laboratory research, chemical analyses, testing, or
waste disposal. They prepare schedules to meet timelines estab-
lished with MTS and customers. They design and construct
experimental hardware and test fixtures. They maintain and
order laboratory equipment and supplies. They utilize com-
puters to record, compile, and analyze data for presentation to
MTS.
The research assistants assist MTS in development and ap-
plication of laboratory and field measurements using broad
practical knowledge in support of space missile systems center
activities. Among other things, they support advanced re-
search/development programs in materials, physics, chemistry,
and technology.
B. Laboratory Mechanics
There are two laboratory mechanics. They are part of
technology operations which is part of the engineering and
technology group and they report to the manager of technology
operations. One of the main job duties of the laboratory me-
chanics is to assemble and disassemble equipment for experi-
ments. They generally work in the laboratory, alongside the
laboratory technicians or research assistants. They connect the
experimental equipment from the drops installed by facility
services section employees or from the “stubbed out” pipes or
outlets. They hook up lasers and vacuum chambers. The Em-
ployer determined that it wanted mechanics dedicated to pro-
viding service to the laboratories because facility services sec-
tion mechanics were often too busy. The laboratory mechanics
position was created to accommodate the laboratory personnel.
C. Machine Shop Employees
The mechanical shop specialists and experimental machinists
work in the machine shop and are part of technical operations
which is part of the engineering and technology group. They
report to the manager of technology operations. According to
hearing testimony they interact with the laboratory personnel
constantly, sometimes hourly. The machine shop employees
work in close cooperation with the MTS or laboratory techni-
cians to fabricate equipment and materials used by the research
assistants, laboratory technicians, and MTS in their tests and
experiments. Based upon a design or blueprint submitted, the
machine shop employees fashion the necessary laboratory ap-
paratus. The machine shop employees have their own machine
shop, separate from the facility services section shop. Facility
Services employees do on occasion use the machinists’ ma-
chine shop, particularly the machinists’ shear. Additionally, the
facility services section mechanics maintain the equipment in
the facility services and machinist’s machines shop.
Generally speaking, the mechanical shops specialists ma-
chine and fabricate laboratory apparatus and flight hardware in
accordance with blueprints, rough sketches, drawings, and oral
instructions. They ensure dimensional accuracy and comple-
tion of job in a timely manner.
The experimental machinists provide complex and close
tolerance fabrication of machine parts, models, assemblies, and
laboratory apparatus used in research programs. They work
directly from blueprints, sketches and/or verbal instructions to
identify necessary materials and decide appropriate machining
techniques to complete finished parts.
Three employees have transferred from the machine shop to
other technology operations sections. One had been a plumber
in facility services who transferred to being a machinist in
technology operations. He has again transferred to another
position in technology operations but the facility services man-
ager did not know what his new position was. His hobby was
being a machinist and he had machinist skills he had acquired
outside the Aerospace Corporation. Another employee was a
facility services mechanic who became a machinist and within
the past year has become a laboratory mechanic. The other was
always a machine shop machinist before transferring; he had
not worked in the facilities services section.
D. Alarm System Specialists
The alarm system specialists are part of the electronic sup-
port services section of the facilities department. They design,
install, service, and maintain electronic/electrical security, and
life-safety equipment throughout the Employer’s facilities.
They test, troubleshoot, and repair equipment. The Aerospace
Corporation has numerous alarms on everything from doors to
laboratory experiments. The alarm specialists communicate on
a different walkie-talkie frequency than the facility services
section employees. There are limited occasions when a facility
services section electrician may need to work in cooperation
with the alarm specialist.
E. Telecommunications Specialists
The telecommunications specialists are part of the elec-
tronic support services section of the facilities department.
They oversee and perform installation of telephone and data
systems for the Employer. They ensure compliance with indus-
try standards and building codes. They coordinate work efforts
of outside vendors and in-house services to meet time frames of
installation of data cabling and telephone systems. They main-
tain installation records, main point of entry (MPOE), docu-
mentation, inventory of telephone equipment, and network
infrastructure documentation.
DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 566
F. Metrology Employees
The metrology employees and quality assurance inspector
are part of the measurement and quality assurance section of
the facilities department. The metrology specialists test vari-
ous specialized electronic equipment, systems, and
instrumentation. They calibrate, modify, adjust, align, repair,
and certify the accuracy of a wide variety of highly accurate
precision measuring and test equipment. They also
troubleshoot, repair, and maintain this equipment.
The metrology coordinators coordinate processing of all
calibration/maintenance work in and out of the metrology labo-
ratory. They maintain the accuracy and completeness of the
metrology database.
G. Quality Assurance Inspectors
The quality assurance inspectors monitor the Employer’s
calibration and maintenance systems to assure that the quality
and reliability of those systems are maintained at levels consis-
tent with contractual requirements and customer expectations.
H. Stockkeepers
Stockkeepers are part of the material and mail services sec-
tion which is part of general services. The Employer has three
stores; one general and two electronic. The general store car-
ries items generally needed for maintaining the facility such as
screws, nuts, bolts, paint, and nails. The electronic stores stock
electronic equipment and related tools such as soldering
equipment, gloves, videotape, batteries, and assorted tools.
Any Aerospace employee may utilize the stores, which are
stocked by the stockkeeper. The stockkeepers and stock-
keepers-senior provide service to internal/external customers,
including laboratory and maintenance service staff, by main-
taining supplies, equipment, and furniture necessary in per-
formance of projects. They coordinate efforts to obtain materi-
als to satisfy backorders and expedite delivery process when
possible. They perform routine duties involving receipt, issu-
ance, storage, and movement of items contained in stores or
warehouses.
I. Shipping and Receiving Employees
The shipping and receiving employees are also part of ma-
terial and mail services section which is part of general ser-
vices. (Under general services are four organizations: mail
services which is contracted out; Stores and warehousing; ma-
terial control; and shipping and receiving.) The shipping and
receiving clerks-senior and shipping and receiving clerks
receive and process incoming goods, supplies, and equipment
from various suppliers. Among other things, they process in-
coming shipments delivered by freight carriers, verify counts,
and check for damages. They also package items such as com-
puters, monitors, lasers, and office equipment for shipping.
After receipt of the material and supplies, the material is sent to
the stockkeeper for placement in the stores. Employees can
either have the stockkeeper retrieve the item or, in some cases,
retrieve it themselves. The stockkeepers, shipping and receiv-
ing clerks, and shipping and receiving coordinators conduct all
their work in the warehouse, where the warehouse driver/mov-
ers are located.
The shipping and receiving coordinators assist in all ac-
tivities associated with shipping and receiving. They process
shipping orders, government bills, receiving documents, and
hazardous incoming and outgoing packages. They work in an
office area and provide direction to the shipping and receiving
clerks. They also resolve discrepancies on equipment/supplies.
J. Clerks-Senior
The clerks-senior work out of the material and mail services
section of general services. One clerk-senior keeps track of gas
cylinders delivered to the Employer. He uses a complex data-
base to track the cylinders.
K. Locksmiths
The locksmiths are part of the security and safety director-
ate. They have a machine shop where they can repair locks and
make keys. They communicate on a different walkie-talkie
frequency than facility services section employees. The lock-
smiths work all over The Aerospace Corporation facilities and
any employee can request their services. The locksmiths-
master provide control and accountability for various key and
locking systems to meet Government and The Aerospace Cor-
poration’s security standards. They plan, coordinate and im-
plement work projects, schedules and shop functions assigned
to lock and key. They repair, install, and maintain locking
hardware including panic hardware, office equipment locks,
and vaults.
The locksmiths install, repair, and maintain locks and lock-
ing devices and, cut keys by code for desks, storage file cabi-
nets, doors, and padlocks. They rekey cylinders as needed,
issue and install locksets, combination locks, padlocks, desk
locks, and file cabinet locks. They set combinations for locking
devices for vaults, closed/restricted areas, strong rooms, safes,
and files.
L. Audio/Visual Employees
The audio/visual employees are part of the general services
department. The audio/visual specialists oversee activities and
operation of the video department. They plan and coordinate
video productions. They provide technical direction and train-
ing to associate personnel. They produce, direct, write and edit
video and multimedia programs, and plan and coordinate over-
all operation of video department.
The audio/visual services technicians provide technical
support in audiovisual, multimedia, video teleconferencing
(VTC), and computer-based presentation services for in-house
and off-site Employer, Air Force, and contract vendor request-
ers. They act as projectionist, technician, scheduler and advisor
for The Aerospace Corporation conference centers. There is
also an audio visual clerk that the Employer contends should be
included in the unit as a plant clerical.
M. Buyer/Planner Assistants
The Employer contends this is a plant clerical position. The
buyer/planner assistant works in the warehouse and is part of
general services. The person filling this position assists in
maintaining appropriate levels of materials and supplies. They
interface with technical/administrative staff to determine acqui-
sition needs for assigned areas of responsibility. They analyze
requests and procure defined products and services. They fore-
cast and maintain inventory levels and initiate replenishment
releases. The buyer/planner and buyer/planner-senior, with
whom the assistant works, are exempt positions.
N. Office Assistants
The office assistant, part of the Measurement and quality as-
surance section of the facilities department, creates and main-
AEROSPACE CORP. 567
tains an internal web page with metrology information. She
also maintains a data base to account for handling invoices.
The record evidence was unclear whether she ever has any
contact with facility services section employees. There is also
an office assistant in records retention (which is in a storage
area for company records) who catalogs, boxes, and archives
records. An office assistant also works in the warehouse. The
record does not disclose the duties of the warehouse office
assistant.
O. Photography Employees
The photography employees are part of the publication ser-
vices department of general services. The photographers-
senior design and produce photographs for displays, publica-
tions, and briefings using a variety of sources, subjects, and
specialized equipment. They coordinate photographic services
including processing, printing, quality control, and finishing of
images both in-plant and outside via contracted services.
The photo lab technicians-senior complete requests for
photographic processing, printing, and copying. They send to
outside services requests that cannot be completed in-house.
They perform digital photo retouching and manipulation.
P. Illustrators Industrial-Senior
The illustrators industrial-senior provide computer-
generated graphics for publications and briefings. This in-
cludes graphs, block diagrams, illustrations, milestones, and
tables. They design, modify, and produce technical art for re-
ports and presentations from rough draft through final produc-
tion. They are in a secure complex at The Aerospace Corpora-
tion and generally support technology operations, mainly the
engineers.
Q. Engineering Assistants
Engineering assistants are in data reduction, part of the
computer services division which is part of the engineering
group. The engineering assistants-senior and the engineering
assistants both perform complex telemetry processing tasks in
support of launch vehicle and satellite programs. Among other
things, they set up, calibrate, and monitor highly specialized
electronic equipment. They maintain corporate telemetry his-
torical database and monitor the quality of the database prod-
ucts.
R. Technical Research Assistants
The technical research assistants are part of the engineer-
ing group and provide assistance to MTS in researching and
compiling technical intelligence related to international space
and missile programs. They utilize various mainframe data-
bases to obtain highly technical information.
S. Computer service Employees
The computer service employees are generally part of the
network systems and services subdivision and the central com-
puting subdivision which are part of computer information
resources division (CIRD). The computer interactive systems
coordinators-senior provide customer support via telephone,
electronic mail, and house calls to computer users. They de-
termine appropriate solutions to problems or malfunctions en-
countered in use of software/hardware systems in scientific and
business environment. They help administrative and/or techni-
cal personnel in network and computer needs.
The data technicians-senior provide data managing services
to The Aerospace Corporation user community in capturing
information, transforming data, and producing useful computer
readable files. They enter diverse information and transform
data into useful, computer ready files using personal computers,
software, and programs.
The data technician specialists-senior provide data manag-
ing services to The Aerospace Corporation user community in
capturing information, transforming data, and producing useful
computer readable files. They assist users with complex data
management requests. They schedule routine workflow. They
assist supervision in direction of day-to-day efforts in ensuring
operation of the data management function.
The data technician specialists provide data managing ser-
vices to The Aerospace Corporation user community in captur-
ing information, transforming data, and producing useful com-
puter readable files. They perform difficult and complex tasks
in creating formats and designing layouts using databases, ta-
bles, spreadsheets, work processing surveys, and text files.
The data technicians provide data managing services to The
Aerospace Corporation user community in capturing informa-
tion, transforming data, and producing useful computer read-
able files. They enter diverse information and transform data
into useful, computer ready files using personal computers,
software, and programs.
The data communication technicians maintain, install, and
troubleshoot problems for local and wide area networks. They
coordinate and install various networking and data communica-
tions equipment. They solve operational problems within net-
works using diagnostic test equipment and appropriate tools.
The computer operator specialists provide technical sup-
port to various computer systems. They operate and monitor
multiple computer systems, networks, and peripherals. They
provide technical support that integrates networks to mainframe
and client/server platforms. They provide assistance to system
programmers and client/server administrators to ensure con-
tinuous processing.
The computer operators provide, under general supervi-
sion, technical support for computer services. They operate and
monitor mainframe systems and related peripherals. They pro-
vide assistance to system users and client/server administrators.
They troubleshoot hardware and software failures, take correc-
tive actions and/or recommend possible solutions.
The computer operators-in-charge operate a secure com-
puting facility. They provide support for users in operating and
maintaining classified computer systems. They monitor main-
frame computer and peripheral equipment and make sure file
servers are maintained in an operational status. They trouble-
shoot and resolve problems that occur in systems.
The computer operators-senior provide technical support
for various computer systems and peripherals. They operate
and monitor mainframe systems and related peripherals. They
provide assistance to system programmers and client/server
administrators. They troubleshoot hardware and software fail-
ures, take corrective actions and/or recommend possible solu-
tions.
The production control coordinators-senior prepare and
complete production computer runs for the Employer’s admin-
istrative and financial reporting. They provide computer output
reports to administrative departments. They ensure quality for
information systems.
DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 568
The technical coordinators-CIRD provide administrative
and technical support to CIRD. They coordinate preparation of
documentation for all business and technical projects within the
division. They support large scale applications.
The input/output user service coordinators operate and
maintain the corporate tape library system. They log and file
tapes and ensure availability of scratch tapes for operators.
The data base coordinators perform project-oriented tasks
using software to generate charts, documents, and databases for
special reviews and data analyses. They provide support relat-
ing to databases. They maintain and upgrade databases, com-
puter equipment, application software, and hardware. They
design databases to link various databases and graphical ob-
jects.
The data base coordinators-senior administer computer
systems. They maintain databases and software. They inter-
face multiple computer systems to process data. They respond
to technical and nontechnical user needs. They ensure security
procedures are followed. They monitor workstations and per-
form routine maintenance.
T. Library Employees
The Employer contends the library technicians I, II, III, and
library coordinators are plant clerical positions and should be
included in the unit. The coordinator acts as the leadperson.
The library coordinators, among other things, schedule work-
flow to ensure job assignments are performed efficiently and
accurately. They perform administrative tasks to assist in nor-
mal operation of library functions. They act as liaison to other
departments both inside and outside of library. They assist
users with complicated library requests. They are in overall
charge to see that the library runs smoothly.
The library technicians I perform routine library duties in-
volving ordering, receiving, processing, distributing, and circu-
lating materials. They use databases, under direction of more
experienced staff, to obtain information and perform data
searches. They interact with employees, contractors, military
and government personnel to obtain requested information and
maintain quality of on-line library databases and records.
The library technicians II and III perform complex library
duties involving ordering, receiving, processing, distributing,
and circulating materials. They use databases independently to
obtain information and perform data searches. They interact
with employees, management, contractors, military and gov-
ernment personnel to obtain requested information. All Aero-
space Corporation employees have access to the library and can
avail themselves of its services.
U. Property Disposal Coordinators
The Employer contends the property disposal coordinators
and security clerk-senior are plant clerical positions and should
be included in the unit. The property dis-posal coordinators
are part of the Security and Safety Directorate. They receive
government and The Aerospace Corporation surplus property,
catalog and store it until ready for disposal. They also assist in
an annual inventory of equipment at the Employer. The
driver/movers from facility services section deliver equipment
to the property disposal area.
V. Security Clerks-Senior
The security clerks-senior provide assistance to the prop-
erty disposal coordinator. This position is also part of security
and safety directorate.
W. Network Cable Technician
The network cable technicians are part of the Employer’s
electronic support services section of the facilities department.
The network cable technician job entails general troubleshoot-
ing on computer hardware or software. The person in this posi-
tion is “versatile.”
X. Warehouse Driver/Movers
The warehouse driver/movers are part of the materials and
mail service section. They are supervised by the head of that
section who also supervises a clerk-senior and the shipping and
receiving clerks. The warehouse driver/movers deliver equip-
ment such as compressors, pumps, and filters received in the
warehouse to the proper recipients at the Employer. They are
principally charged with receipt and delivery of items of all
sizes to and from the warehouse. Their “normal” job is to
deliver packages that come to the warehouse. They are a sepa-
rate division from the facility services section, are separately
supervised and are located in the warehouse. Two years earlier
the warehouse driver/movers were part of facilities services but
the Employer decided to sever them and make them part of
materials and mail service. Both the facilities services
driver/movers and warehouse driver/movers use similar equip-
ment such as dolleys, pallets, and forklifts. Also both use large
identical 20-ton Ford trucks. Both move large objects. The
skills required for both jobs are similar. the facilities services
section essentially moves furniture or equipment from office to
office. As a rule the two sets of driver/movers operate inde-
pendently although they do work together on larger projects or
to move large equipment. The manager of the material and
mail services section said the warehouse driver/movers only
“occasionally” work with the facility services driver/movers.
The facility services section manager said her driver/movers
could work with the warehouse driver/movers from up to 5
times a week to 10 times a year. Also warehouse driver/movers
may be called upon up to four times a year to help chauffeur
trustees at The Aerospace Corporation.
Y. Clericals
The Employer contends that, in addition to the clerical posi-
tions previously discussed, two additional clerical positions in
the facilities services section should be included in the unit as
plant clericals. Both positions are under the facility services
section zone 5 supervisor and thus do share the same supervi-
sion as some facility services section employees. The em-
ployee in one of these positions works at a desk outside the
auto shop. She hands computer-generated work orders to the
mechanics, handles petty cash for them, pays bills, and per-
forms clerical duties in support of the facility service section
supervisors.
The other clerical works in the general office for the facility
services section adjacent to the office of the facilities services
manager and facilities department director. She prepares re-
leases to pay bills and monthly billings. She also does filing,
correspondence, and more traditional clerical duties. The per-
son regularly holding this position is on maternity leave and a
maintenance coordinator is filling in for her, as she has on
many occasions because the clerical is part time. Both the
clerical and the maintenance coordinator are familiar with
processing the paperwork so that the contract janitorial em-
ployees are paid.
AEROSPACE CORP. 569
VI. ANALYSIS
In deciding the appropriate unit, the Board first considers the
Union’s petition and whether the unit sought is appropriate.
P. J. Dick Contracting, 290 NLRB 150 (1988). The Board,
however, does not compel a petitioner to seek any particular
appropriate unit. The Board’s declared policy is to consider
only whether the unit requested is an appropriate one, even
though it may not be the most appropriate unit for collective
bargaining. Black & Decker Mfg. Co., 147 NLRB 825, 828
(1964). There is nothing in the statute which requires that the
unit for bargaining be the “only” appropriate unit, or the “ulti-
mate” unit, or the “most” appropriate unit, the Act only requires
that the unit be “appropriate.” Morand Bros. Beverage Co., 91
NLRB 409, 418 (1950), enfd. on other grounds 190 F.2d 576
(7th Cir. 1951); see Staten Island University Hospital v. NLRB,
24 F.3d 450, 455 (2d Cir. 1994); see also American Hospital
Assn. v. NLRB, 499 U.S. 606, 610 (1991), interpreting the lan-
guage of Section 9(a) as suggesting that “employees may seek
to organize ‘a unit’ that is ‘appropriate’ not necessarily the
single most appropriate unit.” A union is, therefore, not re-
quired to request representation in the most comprehensive or
largest unit of employees of an employer unless “an appropriate
unit compatible with that requested unit does not exist.”
P. Ballantine & Sons, 141 NLRB 1103, 1107 (1963); accord:
Ballentine Packing Co., 132 NLRB 923, 925 (1961).
Additionally, the Board has set forth a policy in American
Cynamid Co., 131 NLRB 909 (1961), finding that a separate
maintenance department unit may be appropriate in the absence
of a more comprehensive bargaining history. Thus, if a main-
tenance unit is composed of a distinct and homogenous group
of employees with interests separate from those of the other
employees, they may constitute an appropriate unit. Ore-Ida
Foods, 313 NLRB 1016 (1994).
Based on the record and exhibits as a whole, and the relevant
case law, I conclude that the facilities services section employ-
ees in the unit proposed by the Petitioner share a sufficiently
distinct and separate community of interest to warrant their
determination as an appropriate bargaining unit and to justify
exclusion from that unit the other classifications sought by the
Employer. Harron Communications, 308 NLRB 62 (1992);
Armco, 271 NLRB 350 (1984); Atlanta Hilton & Towers, 273
NLRB 87 (1984). In reaching that conclusion, I have factored
in the traditional community-of-interest criteria used in deter-
mining whether a unit is appropriate. I thus have considered,
inter alia, the degree of functional integration, common super-
vision, employee skills, interchangeability, contact among em-
ployees, fringe benefits, similarities in wages, hours, benefits,
and other terms and conditions of employment, and bargaining
history. Kalamazoo Paper Box Co., 136 NLRB 134 (1962);
Franklin Mint Corp., 254 NLRB 714 (1981).
A. Functional Integration
The facilities services section unit proposed by the petitioner
includes an arguably functionally integrated group of employ-
ees whose overall responsibility is to maintain the actual physi-
cal “facilities” at The Aerospace Corporation, including tasks
related to the preventative maintenance and upkeep of build-
ings, grounds, vehicles, and offices. The petitioned-for group
of employees can be categorized as those employees who are
charged with the responsibility to “keep up” what could be
called the physical “infrastructure” at The Aerospace Corpora-
tion. By their trade skills and physical efforts the facilities
services section employees provide the necessary framework
within which The Aerospace Corporation is able to perform its
work. The facilities service section employees are mostly
tradespersons, craftspersons. The services they provide are not
involved in the actual engineering, scientific analysis, testing,
and experimentation that goes on at The Aerospace Corpora-
tion. Other than supplying water, power, or refrigeration to the
laboratories (as they do to all The Aerospace Corporation facili-
ties), facilities services employees play no part in performing
the Employer’s main functions. Thus the electricians, plumb-
ers, painters, carpenters, maintenance mechanics, HVAC tech-
nicians, landscape maintenance coordinator, and maintenance
coordinators keep the facility’s machinery operating and its
buildings and grounds in top visual and mechanical order.
They provide the upkeep for the buildings and offices so that
the bulk of the other Aerospace Corporation employees can
carry out their numerous, generally more scientifically oriented,
tasks.
The electricians provide power to the labs, as they do to all
The Aerospace Corporation facilities. The plumbers supply the
water line hookups. Both the electrician and plumber run their
wiring or pipes to the walls of the labs and then “stub out” the
pipes, leaving them for the laboratory mechanics, laboratory
technicians, or research assistants to connect to the experimen-
tal apparatus, tubing, or electrical components. Carpenters
build crates or workbenches, repair furniture and doors. Paint-
ers repair and paint surfaces and reline the parking lot. The
maintenance mechanics repair machinery, including maintain-
ing the machine shop machinery. They do not do complex
fabrication on experimental apparatus as do the machinists.
HVAC technicians work on the “comfort cooling” of the entire
facility plus work on water chillers, low temperature refrigera-
tion units, and small refrigeration units. Like the work done by
the electricians and plumbers, the HVAC technician provides a
general hookup to which those persons who conduct the ex-
periment actually hookup the experimental equipment.
The auto mechanics, drivers and dispatchers, keep the Em-
ployer’s fleet of vehicles including trucks, vans, and cars, prop-
erly maintained and operational. The facilities services
driver/movers utilize the vehicles maintained by the auto me-
chanics and physically move office equipment and furniture
from office to office. Within the various trades people in facili-
ties services, the dispatchers are part of the fully integrated
process of keeping the facilities running. Work requests are
channeled through the dispatchers who prepare work orders for
assignment to the trades. The dispatchers also requisition vehi-
cles and wash them. A driver drives The Aerospace Corpora-
tion intercompany van and airport shuttle van. Working in
conjunction with both the dispatchers and the facilities services
section employees is the maintenance coordinator who gener-
ally oversees the tradespeople, passes on work orders to the
employees and offers his or her physical assistance when a task
requires it. Acting as a “jack of all trades” within the facility
services section is the maintenance craft specialist. Facility
services section employees are not part of the process of or
involved in engineering, scientific analysis, testing, and ex-
perimentation as are numerous other categories of employees
sought by the Employer for inclusion in the unit. The facility
services section is a functionally integrated, separate, and dis-
tinct section of The Aerospace Corporation.
In contrast, the vast majority of the classifications in the
units proposed by the Employer share no discernible commu-
DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 570
nity of interest with facilities services (other than centralized
labor relations and shared personnel policies). As will be dis-
cussed infra, most of the classifications’ only contact with any-
one in the facility services section is if they make a request for
service or repair. Even in those circumstances, the requester
and the facility services section employee may never come into
contact.
B. Common Supervision
The facilities service section employees are separately su-
pervised from all other Aerospace Corporation employees at
both the first supervisor level and at the manager level.
C. Employee Skills
The majority of the employees in the units proposed by the
Employer do not possess skills akin to those of employees in
the facility services section. There are however, certain groups
of employees, particularly the driver/movers in warehouse, the
laboratory mechanics, the machinists, the alarm system special-
ists, the telecommunications specialist, and the network cabling
technicians who arguably have similar skills to employees in
the petitioned-for unit.
As noted, the warehouse driver/movers move things as do
the facilities services driver/movers. However, to a great extent
what facilities services moves (offices versus dispensing goods
from the warehouse) and where they are located (facility ser-
vices versus warehouse) argues against finding a community of
interest. The warehouse employees and facilities services em-
ployees are parts of different sections of the Employer and
under different supervision. The groups were severed from
each other by the Employer. While this classification is the
arguably closest one sought by the Employer to be included in
the petitioned for unit, I conclude that their community of inter-
est is not sufficient to include them. The contact and sporadic
assistance between the warehouse driver/movers and facility
services section driver/ movers arguably reflects more a “spirit
of cooperation or civility” than any overlap of job functions.
Ore-Ida Foods, supra; Omni International Hotel, 283 NLRB
475 (1987). To some extent the warehouse driver/movers in-
terests would seem to be more aligned with those of the ship-
ping/receiving department and not facilities services section.
Additionally, I do not include the warehouse driver/movers
with facility services section as it would act to fragment a well-
defined and cohesive unit and, according to the record, the
warehouse driver/movers’ interests are more aligned with the
other warehouse employees.
The record evidence indicates that the laboratory mechanics
do the actual hookup of the equipment used in the experiments
from the point in the wall where the facilities services section
tradesperson had stubbed out the equipment. They are much
more integrated into the laboratory and experimental process
than the facility services section mechanics. The laboratory
mechanics work essentially shoulder to shoulder with the labo-
ratory technicians and research assistants and work almost ex-
clusively in the laboratories. Such cannot be said about the
maintenance mechanics. Most of the maintenance mechanics’
work is performed outside the laboratory and they are not in-
volved in the process of the experiment. Testimony from an
HVAC technician and maintenance mechanic indicated that the
facilities services section employees have been advised not to
touch any experiments in the laboratories. The maintenance
mechanics work anywhere at the facility where work needs to
be performed. In addition, the laboratory mechanics are part of
technology operations (a/k/a laboratory operations). They are
in a separate section from the maintenance mechanics, and are
in a different division. They are separately supervised. Thus
while the laboratory mechanics and maintenance mechanics
often use similar tools, the nature of the work they are perform-
ing differs substantially. As noted, the facilities services sec-
tion essentially provides generalized maintenance of the entire
facility. The laboratory technicians provide a much more spe-
cialized service to the persons conducting the experiments. I
conclude that the laboratory mechanics do not share a sufficient
community of interest to be included in the petitioned-for unit.
The Employer also contends that the machinists share a suf-
ficient community of interest to be included in the petitioned-
for unit. As an initial matter, machinists are in a different divi-
sion than the facility services section. They are separately su-
pervised. The hearing testimony established that the machinists
support the laboratory by fashioning and fabricating the often
sophisticated apparatus used for experiments. Thus they work
from a drawing or blueprint that an MTS or laboratory techni-
cian draws up for a piece of equipment or apparatus that they
would like fashioned for their experiment. The machinist
works directly with the laboratory technician or MTS in making
the specialized item. There are a facilities services section
machine shop and another machine shop, the one used by the
machinists. The facilities services machine shop has almost the
same machines as the nonfacilities services shop, although the
nonfacilities services machine shop has a larger shear. Record
testimony indicates that the maintenance mechanics may occa-
sionally do machine shop work but of a much less sophisticated
type than that done by the machinists. Thus, while the machin-
ists work from a drawing or blueprint to make a prototype or
some sort of component, the maintenance mechanic may find it
necessary to fashion a castor or bracket. The level of skills
required differs substantially. The machinists are far more
involved with the laboratory technicians, MTS or research as-
sistants, than are the facilities services section employees. On
occasion the facilities services section may ask the machinists
to make them a piece of equipment or fix something. I con-
clude that the machinists do not share a sufficient community
of interest such that they should be included in the unit.
The alarm systems specialist is mainly responsible for keep-
ing the Employer’s alarm systems, including gas, fire, and labo-
ratory, operating. There was some limited testimony that the
alarm systems specialist may need to work with an electrician
“weekly.” The alarm systems specialist receives the bulk of his
work orders from the security console operators (an excluded
category of employees). The security console operators sit at a
console and observe screens to detect if the Employer’s security
is being breached. The security console operators are part of
the security control center which is part of the safety director-
ate. In order to work on the security alarms, the alarm systems
specialist needs a special clearance. He spends the vast major-
ity of his time working alone. Thus, while the alarm systems
specialist does work on wiring and may on occasion work with
an electrician, the nature of his work is substantially different
than the facilities service section electricians. He works exclu-
sively on alarm systems. His job requires a special clearance.
There was no record evidence that the electricians or other
facility services employees need similar clearances. He is sepa-
rately supervised and is in a separate section of the Employer
from Facility Services. He receives the majority of his work
assignments from the security console operators and not facility
AEROSPACE CORP. 571
services section dispatchers. Based on the above, and the dif-
ference in the nature of the jobs and the limited interchange
between facility service section employees and the alarm sys-
tems specialist, I conclude the position should not be included
in the petitioned-for unit.
The telecommunications specialist is generally charged with
responsibility for maintaining the Employer’s telephone sys-
tem. To accomplish that goal he coordinates the work of a
large staff of outside contractors. He may be called upon to
personally repair or change telephone wiring. Often the tele-
phone switch rooms and switch boxes are next to or in the vi-
cinity of the electrical equipment cabinets and thus the tele-
communications specialist may find it necessary to coordinate a
job with a zone supervisor to ensure that what he is doing does
not interfere with the work of someone else. The telecommuni-
cations specialist position requires specialized knowledge and
training in telecommunications technology. The telecommuni-
cations specialist is often sent to specialized courses to supple-
ment his knowledge and experience. I conclude that the tele-
communications specialist, while he does work with wiring, as
do the electricians, nevertheless should not be included in the
unit found appropriate. The position requires specialized
knowledge and training in telecommunications. He is sepa-
rately supervised and in a separate section of the company. He
generally works with outside contractors and only occasionally
with Facility Services employees. I find that this position does
not possess a substantial enough community of interest to be
included in the petitioned-for unit.
The network cabling technician is mainly involved in work-
ing on computers. He was described on the record as a “trou-
bleshooter.” He diagnoses, and if possible repairs, problems
with employee personal computers. In the course of his job he
may be called upon to, among other things, replace a circuit
board or repair a computer/printer cable connection. He has
access to the entire facility. He is listed as a “research assis-
tant” in the Aerospace Corporation computer database but it
was determined he was more properly defined as the network
cabling technician. He, like the alarm systems specialist and
the telecommunications specialist, are under the supervision of
the electronic support services section manager. I conclude that
the network cabling technician shares virtually no community
of interest with the facility services section employees and thus
I find he should not be included in the unit found appropriate.
D. Interchangeability of Employees
There is virtually no interchangeability among the employees
in the petitioned-for unit and the units proposed by the Em-
ployer. The classifications proposed for unit inclusion by the
Employer have never transferred, permanently or temporarily,
into the facility services section. There is record evidence of
two permanent transfers of former facility services section em-
ployees to laboratory operations positions over an unspecified
period of time. One of the employees went from plumber to
machinist and then to laboratory operations. Another became a
laboratory mechanic. Such a nominal number of transfers does
not indicate a substantial community of interest. In addition, it
is well established that permanent transfers weigh less heavily
than temporary interchange in assessing the community of in-
terest shared by maintenance and production employees.
Franklin Mint Corp., supra. Here there has been no temporary
interchange of employees other than an HVAC technician and
maintenance coordinator who replace a dispatcher now and
then, and a maintenance coordinator who fills in for an office
clerical on occasion (discussed infra).
E. Contact Among Employees
The contact between the facility services section employees
and most of the employees in the Employer’s proposed units is
either nonexistent or merely involves a request for a repair. It
is the same sort of contact the facility services employees
would have with management at The Aerospace Corporation.
Otherwise, as discussed above, there is “minimal” contact be-
tween most employees at The Aerospace Corporation and facil-
ity services employees. Montgomery Ward & Co., 230 NLRB
366 (1977); Mobay Chemical Corp., 225 NLRB 1159 (1976).
F. Wages, Hours, Fringe Benefits, and Working Conditions
As noted, labor relations is centralized at The Aerospace
Corporation and the nonexempt employees share the same inte-
grated wage scale and fringe benefits. The nonexempt employ-
ees are subject to the same rules and regulations and progres-
sive discipline system. Facility services section employees
have a 30-minute lunchbreak as opposed to the 45 minutes
provided to most other employees (there are some nonexempt
employees outside Facility Services, for example the machin-
ists and some computer operators, who also have 30 minutes).
Generally, facility services section employees also end their
shifts 15 minutes before the majority of other nonexempt em-
ployees.
G. Bargaining History
There is no bargaining history regarding the petitioned-for
unit or the units the Employer seeks. There is a union at The
Aerospace Corporation, Aerospace Professional Staff Associa-
tion, which represents a number of the professional employees.
In support of its position, the Employer relies principally on
Dynalectron Corp., 231 NLRB 1147 (1977). Dynalectron is
not controlling in the present situation in my view. As noted by
the Board, Dynalectron was a “unique” situation. Additionally,
I do not read it to mandate a facility wide unit in all testing
facilities. As an initial matter, while the facts in Dynalectron
were not extensively developed on the record, the instant matter
does distinguish itself from Dynalectron. Thus, there was a
much higher degree of functional integration in Dynalectron
than is present at The Aerospace Corporation. In Dynalectron,
the facilities people worked in a much closer, more direct fash-
ion with the technical employees. For example, in Dynalec-
tron, the photographer was an integral part of the testing proc-
ess in determining why trains puncture. Additionally, the
Board concluded in Dynalectron that the technical and the other
employees shared, among other things, similarity of skills and
jobs, and in many instances, common supervision. The same
cannot be said in the present case. The facilities services sec-
tion has separate supervision, both at the zone level and man-
ager level from any other sections or departments at The Aero-
space Corporation. Additionally, and more importantly, there
are as noted, substantial numbers of employees in the units
proposed by the Employer who share virtually no job skills or
interaction of any kind with the employees in the petitioned-for
unit. For example, the metrology employees, audio/visual em-
ployees, engineering assistants, and numerous other categories
of employees, have no discernible community of interest with
the facilities services employees (other than the above-
discussed shared labor relations and personnel policies). They
may conceivably never cross each others paths unless there is
DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 572
some sort of equipment failure or remodel or they need furni-
ture moved or to use a corporate vehicle. This contact would
constitute the same level of contact facility services employees
might well have with the vice president of the company should
his air-conditioning stop working. Indeed, much of the contact
the Employer is trying to establish as some sort of interrelation-
ship of operations is no more than maintenance repairing some
faulty piece of equipment and the sort of personal interchange
that accompanies those sort of dealings. So too, the facilities
services section employees fail to share any discernible com-
munity of interest with the employees performing computer
services or data entry. Again, aside from the fact the employ-
ees may use computers, there is no community of interest. The
only contact either group of employees may ever have is if one
of the computer employees repair a facility services computer
or facility services does some sort of building or machine repair
for computer services. Such tangential contact does not suffice
as establishing a community of interest. As to the warehouse
employees, all Aerospace Corporation employees utilize the
stores. Indeed, the units as proposed by the Employer pluck
here and there from various divisions, departments, and sec-
tions of the Employer based on seemingly arbitrary criteria. I
thus conclude that the employees in the unit requested by Peti-
tioner possess a sufficiently separate common of interest to
entitle them to separate representation, notwithstanding their
centralized labor relations and resultant common conditions of
employment.
As previously noted, the Employer seeks to have a certain
number of employees included in its proposed units as plant
clericals. In examining whether an employee should be in-
cluded in a maintenance unit such as this one versus an office
clerical unit, the Board considers community of interest. F. &
M. Schaefer Brewing Co., 198 NLRB 323 (1972). The em-
ployees that the Employer seeks to include as plant clericals
including, among others, the library technicians I, II and III,
library coordinator, buyer/planner assistant, office assistants,
clerks-senior, property disposal coordinator and security clerk-
senior, as has been generally discussed, lack a community of
interest with the facilities services section employees. They fail
to share nearly all the criteria looked at to determine commu-
nity of interest including similar skills, common supervision,
functional integration, interchangeability and contact. I thus
conclude that the employees noted above lack a sufficient
community of interest to be included in the unit found appro-
priate.
With particularity as to the two clerical employees in the fa-
cility services section, the Employer contends their clerical
duties are in the nature of production work performed in con-
junction with other employees and that they share a substantial
community of interest with the other petitioned-for employees.
The Petitioner contends the two employees are not plant
clericals. Petitioner contends the clerical located near the auto
shop (Burns) merely prints out work orders initiated by some-
one else. The orders are then given to a supervisor for distribu-
tion or put in the auto mechanics’ boxes or on occasion handed
to the mechanics. Thus this clerical has little interaction with
the employees and does not need to seek information from
them as a rule. According to the Petitioner, the fact she distrib-
utes petty cash is insufficient to make her a plant clerical. Fun
Connection & Juice Time, 302 NLRB 740, 758 (1991). As to
the clerical located by the manager’s office, Kaneshiro, the
Petitioner contends she has virtually no contact with facility
services employees other than the occasions when she performs
part of the job of another. According to the Petitioner, the bulk
of her time is spent on office clerical work.
Based on the evidence at the hearing I cannot conclude that
either Burns or Kaneshiro share a substantial enough commu-
nity of interest with the facility services section employees to
be included in the petitioned-for unit. The minimal interface
that Burns may have with the auto mechanics as she performs
her other clerical duties does not provide the requisite commu-
nity of interest. So too in Kaneshiro’s case, though there is
some “filling in” to process janitorial paperwork (concerning an
outside contractor) done by Wade for Kaneshiro and vice versa,
that is insufficient to establish a substantial enough community
of interest to include Kaneshiro in the petitioned-for unit. Both
Burns and Kaneshiro’s interests appear to be more closely
aligned with the office clericals, an excluded category of em-
ployees. Dunham’s Athleisure Corp., 311 NLRB 175 (1993);
J. Ray McDermott & Co., 240 NLRB 864 (1979); cf. Hamilton
Halter Co., 270 NLRB 331 (1984). Thus, I conclude that
Burns and Kaneshiro are not included in the unit found appro-
priate.
At the hearing the parties initially stipulated that the appro-
priate unit here would include, at a minimum, the classifica-
tions sought by the Petitioner including “mechanics.” As the
hearing progressed, and it became clearer that “mechanics”
could include both facility services section (maintenance) me-
chanics and laboratory mechanics, the Petitioner sought to and
was permitted by the hearing officer to alter the stipulation and
amend the petition to exclude laboratory mechanics. The Em-
ployer objected at the hearing and has objected in its post-
hearing brief. I conclude that it was permissible for the Peti-
tioner to amend its petition, even if there had been a stipulation.
The Employer was not foreclosed from presenting its position
and evidence on the laboratory mechanics so I do not see that it
has been prejudiced.
At the hearing a job posting for a maintenance craft assistant
position was submitted into evidence. From the job description
on the posting it would appear that the maintenance craft assis-
tant should be part of the petitioned-for unit. However, in the
absence of anything but the posting, and because the position
has never been filled, I conclude that there is insufficient evi-
dence to make a determination on whether that position should
be included or excluded in the petitioned-for unit. Accordingly,
should this position be filled, the person holding this position
shall vote subject to challenge.
VII. CONCLUSION
I conclude that the unit proposed by the Petitioner is an ap-
propriate unit for collective bargaining.
There are about 41 employees in the unit found appropriate.