Boeing Airplane Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 17, 1955

113 N.L.R.B. 794 (N.L.R.B. 1955)

7 94 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
the Rocky Mount and Wilson plants 6 who make watch rounds on
nights and weekends, watching for fire, damage, or "anything that
may come up." In the course of their rounds, they punch clocks, and
between rounds, they may perform material-handling or cleanup
work. The Employer also has gatemen at the Rocky Mount plant
who check on strangers appearing at the plant gate. Although the
watchmen and gatemen are not deputized, armed, or uniformed, it
is evident that their function is, at least in part, to protect the Em-
ployer's property from ingress , by unauthorized persons. As the
Employer's watchmen and gatemen come within the Board's definition
of guards , we shall exclude them from the unit 7
We find 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 production and main-
tenance employees engaged in the manufacturing processes at the
Employer's Rocky Mount and Wilson, North Carolina, -plants,' in-
cluding local and over-the-road truckdrivers, leadmen and working
foremen and foreladies, and plant clerical employees, but excluding
office clerical employees, professional employees, confidential -em-
ployees, the time-study man, gatemen and watchmen, and all super-
visors as defined in the Act.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
CHAIRMAN FARMER took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Direction of Election.
6 At the Wilson plant, the Employer occasionally selects at random one of the material
handlers to supplement his watchman group. No contention was made that any of these
supplemental employees performing sporadic watchman duties is a guard.
7 See Walterboro Manufacturing Corporation , 106 NLRB 1383. -
8 The Petitioner expressed a willingness to include in the unit similar employees who
may be employed in the future at the Employer ' s Scotland Neck, North Carolina , plant,
which has not been developed and may not be until such employees are in fact employed.
As Board unit findings are based upon present operations, we do not consider this alter-
native unit proposal . Westinghouse Electric Corporation, 110 NLRB 475.
Boeing Airplane Company,: Wichita Division and International
Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local No. 271, AFL, Peti-
tioner. Case No. 17-RC-1997. August 17,1955
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 Charles A. Fleming, hearing
officer. The hearing officer 's rulings made at the hearing are free from
prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
113, NLRB No. 84.
BOEING AIRPLANE COMPANY 795
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the Act.
2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent certain em-
ployees 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. The Petitioner seeks to represent as a craft unit all maintenance
electricians A, B, and C,, portable tool repairmen A, B, and C, and
maintenance helpers regularly assigned to the electrical department, at
the Employer's Wichita, Kansas, plant, excluding all production em-
ployees, and supervisors as defined in the Act. The Employer and the
Intervenor, International Association of Machinists, District Lodge
No. 70, AFL, contend that such a unit is inappropriate, and that the
present production and maintenance unit represented by the Inter-
venor is the only appropriate unit. The Employer further contends
that if any craft unit of electricians is found to be appropriate, main-
tenance electricians special should be included therein, and the portable
tool repairmen and maintenance helpers should be excluded.
In 1943, pursuant to a consent election, International Association of
Machinists, AFL, was certified as the representative of all the Em-
ployer's production and maintenance employees at the Wichita plant.'
The current collective-bargaining contract, between the Employer and
the Intervenor, expired July 22,1955.
There are approximately 17,000 production and maintenance em-
ployees at the Wichita plant, of whom approximately 200 are in the
unit petitioned for. There is no electrical department in the plant.
The electrical maintenance operations are organized into eight sections
under the superintendent of the electrical group and the superintend-
ent of the maintenance group, plant 1, on the first shift; and under the
superintendents of administration on the, second and third shifts.
These various superintendents are responsible to the assistant plant
engineer for maintenance and salvage, who is responsible to the plant
engineer.
Maintenance electricians A, B, and C are assigned to various elec-
trical sections throughout the plant, including the floor service section,
composed of troubleshooters who make immediate electrical repairs on
cranes, elevators, and motors; the rebuild section, which rebuilds large
movable electrical machines which are brought to the shop ; the con-
struction section, which installs lighting and motors, and also rewires
machines; and system maintenance, which is chiefly responsible for
the transmission and distribution of electricity throughout the plant.
I Case No. 17-R-406 (not reported in printed volumes of Board Decisions and Orders).
796 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
These employees are also assigned to the electronics section, which
maintains the telephone and call-system equipment; the small motors
section, which rewinds motors, coils, armatures, and transformers;
and the flight line section, which maintains generators furnishing
power for testing aircraft. Transfers of employees among the electri-
cal maintenance sections are common, but transfers between electrical
maintenance and other operations are not.
Maintenance electricians A, who are in the second highest labor
grade in the plant, are required to construct, install, repair, and re-
build radio, communication, and sound equipment and systems, in-
dustrial electronic equipment and electronic control equipment and
systems, electrical machinery, and electrical power distribution equip-
ment and systems for plant facilities. In performing these duties,
they diagnose and correct malfunctions, and devise, construct, and
use test panels and other testing devices, working in conformance with
applicable codes, ordinances, and specifications`, and using blueprints
and schematic wiring diagrams. -Maintenance electricians B and C
are in the same occupational classification as maintenance electricians
A, with whom they work in the electrical sections of the plant, per-
forming electrical duties similar in nature but requiring proportion-
ately less experience and ability. There is no apprentice program in
the plant, but the current contract provides that employees in the
next lower grade within the same occupational classification must be
given first consideration in filling vacancies.
In view of the foregoing, it appears that the higher grade main-
tenance electricians are experienced craftsmen, and that employees
in the lower grades are in the direct line of progression. We therefore
find' that maintenance electricians-A, B, and C constitute a distinct
and homogeneous craft group 2 working as such.' As the Petitioner is
a union which has traditionally represented separate units of mainte-
nance electricians, we find that these employees may, if they so desire,
bargain as a separate appropriate unit despite a history of bargaining
on a broader basis.4
Maintenance electricians special, who the Employer contends should
be included, are rated as labor grade 1, the highest in the plant, and
are in the same occupational classification as maintenance electricians
2 Contrary to the contention of the Employer, the Board has held that the perform-
ance of some electrical work by other maintenance employees, and by production em-
ployees as an integral pact of the production process, does not prevent the severance of a
maintenance electricians ' craft unit North American Aviation, Inc, 108 NLRB 863,
at 869.
3 As these employees are engaged primarily in the duties described above, the fact that
they are also required to perform work usually assigned to other classifications of main_
tenance employees, when incidental or necessary to their electrical duties, does not, con-
trary to the contention of the Employer, affect their craft status. See American Potash e
Chemical Corporation, 107 NLRB 1418, at 1423
?North American Aviation, Inc., 108 NLRB 863; American Potash & Chemical Corpora-
tion, 107 NLRB 1418. '
BOEING AIRPLANE COMPANY 797
Al B, and C. They lead,'work with, and plan sequence of work for
employees engaged in the development, layout, installation, construc-
tion, and maintenance of electrical and electronic equipment and sys-
tems. It therefore appears that maintenance electricians special are
experienced electricians exercising, to an even more advanced degree,
the same skills as maintenance electricians A, B, and C, who are in
the direct line of progression, and that they should therefore be in-
cluded in the voting group. However, the record does not reveal
whether or not maintenance electricians special, who apparently are
leadmen, are supervisors within the meaning of the Act. Accordingly,
we shall make no determination at this time as to their status, but
shall permit them to vote subject to challenge. If they are vested
with supervisory authority, they will be excluded from the voting
group; otherwise, they will be included.'
The Employer also contends, as indicated above, that portable tool
repairmen and maintenance helpers should not be included in the
craft group, as requested by the Petitioner.
Portable tool repairmen A, B, and C are in labor grades 4, 7, and 9,
respectively. They are assigned to the small tool section. They are
engaged, at their progressive levels of experience and ability, in main-
taining and repairing portable electric, pneumatic, and hydraulic
tools. However, there is no evidence as to what proportion of their
work is electrical. They are in a different occupational classification
from the maintenance electricians, and therefore apparently receive
no special consideration for vacancies therein. Accordingly, as the
evidence does not establish that portable tool repairmen are engaged
primarily in electrical work and that they are in the direct line of
progression in the electrical craft, we find that they may not be
included in the voting groups
Maintenance helpers, who are in labor grade 10, are engaged in un-
skilled duties, and are assigned as helpers to various categories of
maintenance employees. As some of the maintenance helpers appar-
ently are regularly assigned to maintenance electricians, we shall in-
clude in the voting group helpers so assigned, even though the evidence
does not establish that they are in the direct line of progression in
the electricians' craft.'
Accordingly, we shall direct that an election be conducted in the
following voting group of employees at the Employer's Wichita,
Kansas, plant : all maintenance electricians A, B, and C, maintenance
electricians special, and maintenance helpers who are regularly as-
signed to maintenance electricians, but excluding portable tool repair-
men A, B, and C, production employees, and supervisors as defined
in the Act.
5 Master-Craf t Corporation, 92 NLRB 524 , footnote 9.
6 American Potash & Chemical Corporation, supra
7 American Potash & Chemical Corporation , 107 NLRB 1418 , at 1423.
I
798 DECISIONS OF, NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
If a majority vote for the Petitioner, they will be taken to have
indicated their desire to constitute ,a separate appropriate unit, and
the Regional Director conducting the election directed herein is in-
structed to issue a certification of representatives to the Petitioner for
that unit, which the Board under such circumstances finds to be appro-
priate for purposes of collective bargaining. In the event a majority
vote for the Intervenor, the Board finds the existing plantwide unit to
be appropriate, and the Regional Director will issue a certification of
results of election to such effect.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
CHAIRMAN FARMER and MEMBER MURDOCK took no part in the con-
sideration of the above Decision and Direction of Election.
Montgomery Ward & Co. and Department and Specialty Store
Employees Union Local 1265, Retail Clerks International As-
sociation , AFL, Petitioner . Case No. 20-RC-2770. August 17,
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 Shirley N. Bingham, 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 labor organizations involved claim to represent certain em-
ployees 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. The Petitioner requests a unit of all employees of the Employer's
retail store operation located at 29th Avenue and East 14th Street,
Oakland, California. The Employer contends that a unit of its retail
store employees should include the employees of its two retail store
warehouses Nos. 4 and 5. The Intervenor,' which represents the Com-
pany's mail order operation workers, claims that it also represents
1 The Intervenor in this proceeding, warehousemen 's Union Local 853, International
Brotherhood of Teamster s, Chauffeurs , Warehousemen , and Helpers of America , AFL, on
April 6 , 1955, filed a petition for the Employer 's retail store warehouse employees in Case
No. 20-RC-2779. On May 9, 1955, the Regional Director for the Twentieth Region ap-
proved the Teamsters ' request for withdrawal of the petition in Case No. 20-RC-2779.
113 NLRB No. 86.
1