Flight Safety, Inc.Download PDFNational Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsMay 1, 1968171 N.L.R.B. 146 (N.L.R.B. 1968) Copy Citation 146 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Flight Safety , Inc. and Teamsters Automotive Em- ployees ' Union, Local 78 , International Brother- hood of Teamsters , Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers of America , Petitioner. Case 20-RC-7870 May 1, 1968 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION BY MEMBERS FANNING, JENKINS, AND ZAGORIA Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, a hearing was held before Burton I. Meyer, Hearing Officer. The Hearing Officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the Na- tional Labor Relations Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three- member panel. Upon the entire record, including the brief filed by the Employer, the Board finds: 1. The Employer, Flight Safety, Inc., is a New York corporation with its principal office in New York, New York. It has 10 locations throughout the United States, including 1 at Hayward, California, at which the Petitioner seeks to represent all em- ployees engaged in fueling operations. The Em- ployer trains pilots and flight engineers, maintains and services aircraft, fuels aircraft, and operates an air taxi service whereby it carries passengers and freight between States under charter flight arrange- ments . Its training school, repair stations, and air taxi service are operated pursuant to FAA cer- tificates and regulations. At the time of the hearing, however, the Employer had rendered no air taxi services out of the Hayward location. The Em- ployer also concedes that its revenue from such air taxi services throughout its system is "minimal." The parties stipulated that the Employer does in excess of $500,000 gross business annually and that it derives more than $50,000 of its annual gross business from services performed for a number of major airlines. The Employer urges dismissal of the petition on the ground that it is a common carrier by air en- gaged in interstate commerce within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act,' that its operations and em- ployees are covered by the provisions of that Act, and that this Board is therefore without jurisdiction. Specifically, the Employer points to its air taxi operation, and its contracts with agencies of the Federal Government, including National Aeronau- tics and Space Administration, and with a number of major airlines to train pilots. We find no merit in the Employer's contention. Its air taxi operation, as noted above, is concededly de minimis. Its contracts with Federal agencies do not require the transpor- tation of mail for the U.S. Government. Finally, the business of training pilots for airlines, without more, is too far removed from interstate air trans- port to make the Employer a "common carrier by air." Because of the nature of the question presented here, we have in this case, as in other cases in the past,2 requested the National Mediation Board as the agency primarily vested with jurisdiction, under the Railway Labor Act, over air carriers and having primary authority to determine its own jurisdiction, to study the record in this case and determine the applicability of the Railway Labor Act to the Em- ployer. We are administratively advised by the Na- tional Mediation Board, under date of March 15, 1968, that: "Based on the entire record, the Na- tional Mediation Board is of the opinion that Flight Safety, Inc. does not meet the definition of com- mon carrier by air as set forth in Section 201, Title II of the Railway Labor Act; consequently there is no basis for this Board to exercise jurisdiction over the employer or its employees." Accordingly, we find that the Employer is en- gaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act and that it will effectuate the policies of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein. We, therefore, assert ju- risdiction herein. 2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain employees of the Employer. 3. A question affecting commerce exists con- cerning the representation of certain employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9(c)(1) and Section 2(6)and (7) of the Act. 4. The parties stipulated, and we find, that the following employees of the Employer constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bar- gaining within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act: Title 11 of the Railway Labor Act extends the coverage of that Act to every common carrier by air engaged in interstate or foreign com- merce, and every carrier by air transporting mail for or under contract with the United States Government , and every air pilot or other person who performs any work as an employee or subordinate official of such carrier or carriers. . " (45 USC Sec. 151, et seq., Sec. 181.) ' Lynch Flying Service, Inc , 166 NLRB 961; Wings & Wheels, Inc , 139 NLRB 578, Bradley Flying Service, Inc., 131 NLRB 437. 171 NLRB No. 30 FLIGHT SAFETY, INC. 147 All employees engaged in the fueling opera- tions at the Employer's place of business at the Hayward Airport, Hayward, California; but ex- cluding all other employees, guards , and super- visiors , as defined in the Act. [Direction of Election3 omitted from publication.] I In order to assure that all eligible voters may have the opportunity to be informed of the issues in the exercise of their statutory right to vote, all parties to the election should have access to a list of voters and their ad- dresses which may be used to communicate with them. Excelsior Un- dernwear Inc, 156 NLRB 1236; N.L.R.B. v. Wyman-Gordon Co, 394 U.S 759. Accordingly, it is hereby directed that an election eligibility list, con- taining the names and addresses of all the eligible voters, must be filed by the Employer with the Regional Director for Region 20 within 7 days of the date of this Decision and Direction of Election The Regional Director shall make the list available to all parties to the election . No extension of time to file this list shall be granted by the Regional Director except in extraordi- nary circumstances Failure to comply with this requirement shall be grounds for setting aside the election whenever proper objections are filed. 353-177 0 - 72 - 11 Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation