Bendix Aviation Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Feb 1, 1955

111 N.L.R.B. 456 (N.L.R.B. 1955)

456 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
BENDIx AVIATION CORPORATION, HAMILTON DIVISION and INTERNA-
TIONAL UNION OF ELECTRICAL RADIO & MACHINE WORKERS, CIO,
PETITIONER . Case No. 9-RC-2243. February 1,1955
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 Clifford L. Hardy, 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. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the
Act.
2. The Petitioner (IUE-CIO) and the Intervenor, Local Lodge
856, International Association of Machinists, AFL (IAM) are labor
organizations claiming 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.
The Intervenor contends that its current 5-year contract, covering
the employees sought herein, is a bar. The Petitioner asserts that a
schism has occurred preventing the contract from barring this pro-
ceeding,) and furthermore, that a 5-year contract is of unreasonable
duration under the facts of this case. The Employer agrees with the,
Intervenor.
The Employer is engaged in the manufacture of aircraft engine and'
automotive parts, operating some 30 plants throughout the country.
The evidence shows that, although more automotive pieces are shipped
than aviation parts, approximately 75 percent of the dollar value of
the products of the instant plant and 90 percent of the labor are con-
cerned with the aviation engine parts industry. We, therefore, find
that the instant plant is primarily devoted to the manufacture of avi-
ation engine parts rather than automotive parts,' and that collective-
bargaining contracts in the aviation engine parts industry rather than
the automobile industry are applicable in the determination of the.
contract-bar issue.'
Of the 7 named major manufacturers in the aviation engine parts
industry, it appears that 3 (General Motors Buick, General Motors
" In view of our finding that the contract is not a bar, we do not deem it necessary to
consider the schism issue.
2 Cf. Bendix Products Division, Bendix Aviation Corporation, 102 NLRB 1137, where
the Board held the plant under consideration was engaged in the manufacture of automo-
tive component parts.
8 As we find that the instant plant is concerned primarily with the aviation parts indus-
try, we find no merit in the Intervenor 's contention that because the Employer 's chief
customers are manufacturers of automobiles , that therefore the collective -bargaining prac-
tices in the latter industry are applicable herein.
111 NLRB No. 58.
THE BUDD COMPANY 457
Allison, and Ford) may have 5-year contracts.' As to the four re-
maining companies it was admitted that General Electric did not have
5-year contracts. No information was furnished as to Pratt-Whitney,
Continental, and Curtiss-Wright.
We find merit in the Petitioner's position that the current contract
is not a bar. The instant plant is engaged essentially in the manufac-
ture of aviation engine parts. The Board has found that contracts as
long as 3 years may be a bar in the aviation industry,' but as yet has
not extended the concept of reasonableness beyond 3 years in this in-
dustry. As the Intervenor has failed to show that a substantial por-
tion of the aircraft engine parts industry has negotiated contracts
of similar duration, we find that the instant 5-year contract, of which
more than 3 years have already elapsed, is not a bar to an election of
representatives.6
4. The appropriate unit:
We find that all production and maintenance employees including
steam power employees' at the Employer's Hamilton, Ohio, plant, but
excluding all clerical employees, engineers, and all supervisors as
defined in the Act, constitute a unit appropriate for purposes of col-
lective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.']
• No contracts of these companies were in evidence and no representative thereof testi-
fied at the hearing . The evidence in the record is insufficient to support a finding that
these companies have 5-year contracts in the aviation engine parts industry.
See Republic Aviation Corp., 109 NLRB 569.
See Duncan Foundry and Machine Works , Inc., 107 NLRB 298. Coil Wi,nders, Inc.,
d/b/a New Cassell Electronics, 109 NLRB 827.
1 The unit as indicated herein was amended at the hearing to include the steam power
employees and is the same unit as that described in the current contract
8 See Chairman Farmer's concurring decision in Allis-Chalmers Manufacturing Com•
pany, 111 NLRB 389.
THE BUDD COMPANY and INTERNATIONAL UNION, UNITED AII 'rOMOBILE,
AIRCRAFT, AND AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA,
UAW-CIO, PETITIONER. Case No. 4-RC-2339. February 1, 1955
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 Bernard Samoff,
hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are
free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.'
1 The bearing officer referred to the Board for disposition a motion by the Employer to
strike certain testimony relating to the duration of the negotiations which resulted in the
execution of the contract urged as a bar herein and a motion by Budd Field Employees'
Independent Union, the Intervenor, to dismiss the petition on the ground of contract bar.
In view of our disposition of the contract-bar issue , it is unnecessary to consider the motion
to strike and the motion to dismiss is hereby denied.
111 NLRB No. 74.