Great Trails Broadcasting Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 14, 1947

73 N.L.R.B. 396 (N.L.R.B. 1947)

In the Matter of GREAT TRAILS BROADCASTING COMPANY, EMPLOYER
and INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, LOCAL
UNION 1224, AFL, PETITIONER
Case No. 9-R- 23.p^.-Decided April 14, 1947
Messrs. Estabrook , Finn dl McKee , by Mr. H. A. Estabrook , of Day-
ton, Ohio, for the Employer.
Mr. Freeman L. Hurd, of Washington, D. C., and Mr. James B.
Mattox, of Cincinnati , Ohio, for the Petitioner.
Mr. Abraham?, Frank, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at Dayton,
Ohio, on December 10 and 11, 1946, before Max Rotenberg , 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 the case, the National Labor Relations .
Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
Great Trails Broadcasting Company, an Ohio corporation, is en-
gaged in the operation of a radio station at Dayton, Ohio, with the
call letters WING, under license from the Federal Communications
Commission. It is affiliated with the American Broadcasting Com-
pany, and approximately 35 percent of the Employer's broadcasting
time is devoted to programs broadcast on this national network. Its
revenues from broadcasting exceed $100,000 annually, and its broad-
casting programs have a reception range extending to parts of Ohio,
Indiana and Kentucky.
The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the American
Federation of Labor, claiming to represent employees of the Em-
ployer.
73 N L R. B, No. 76.
396
GREAT TRAILS BROADCASTING COMPANY
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
397
The Employer refuses to recognize the Petitioner as the exclusive
bargaining representative of employees of the Employer until the
Petitioner has been certified by the Board in an appropriate unit.
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning
the representation of employees of the Employer, within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Petitioner seeks a single unit comprising all transmitter techni-
cians, control room operators and remote control operators, including
the transmitter supervisor, the engineering supervisor and the control
room supervisor., The Employer contests the. appropriateness of a
single unit, contending that the three groups should constitute three
separate units, and would also exclude the three supervisors.
The Employer's broadcasting facilities include a studio, a control
room and a recording room at its main offices in Dayton, Ohio, and a
transmitter station, which is located approximately 5 miles from the
studio. The transmitter technicians work at the transmitter station,
where their duties consist primarily of operating and maintaining the
technical radio equipment. They are required to be licensed by the
Federal Communications Commission. The control room operators
handle all manual controls and switches in the control and recording
rooms, acting on signals from the program producer. Remote control
operators perform in the field substantially the same duties and receive
the same rate of pay as the control room operators. Both groups
are under the supervision of the engineering supervisor. Although
the Federal Communications Commission does not require that these
employees be licensed, two control room operators possessed Com-
mission licenses at the time of their employment and, of these, one
has been promoted to transmitter technician and the other remains as
a control room operator. Further integration between the control
room operators and transmitter technicians is indicated by the Em-
ployer's policy of rotating the position of control room supervisor
every 3 months among the four full-time transmitter technicians.
While the duties of the transmitter technicians appear to be of a
more technical nature and their hourly rate of pay correspondingly
higher than that of the control operators, we are of the opinion that
the close inter-relation of the functions of all groups, the similar condi-
tions of employment, in the integration of personnel, and the general
IOf the 14 employees involved , 5 are transmitter technicians , 4 are control room opera-
tors , 2 are remote control operators , 3 are referred to as supervisors.
398 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
pattern of organization in the broadcasting industry 2 indicate a
sufficient community of interest to warrant their inclusion in a single
appropriate unit."
Transmitter supervisor-L. House: This employee is the senior
transmitter technician and constitutes the only continuous super-
visory authority at the transmitter station. He does not work on a
rotating shift, as do the other technicians, and is not required to sign
an attendance record. His pay is 10 percent higher than that of the
highest paid technician, and lie has the authority to discipline and
recommend the discharge of employees within his departnient. We
are of the opinion that lie is a supervisory employee; we shall exclude
him.
Engineering supervisor-W. Evenden: This employee's primary
duties consist of checking and supervising the activities of the control
room operators and the remote control operators. In the exercise of
his authority, he has discharged one employee and effectively recom-
mended a pay raise for another. He is paid at a rate substantially
higher than that of the employees working under his supervision. We
find that he comes within the Board's customary definition of super-
visory employees; we shall exclude him.
Control room supervisor-H. Ryan: This employee is the current
rotating transmitter technician, who repairs radio equipment in the
control room and directs routine activities of the control room opera-
tors. He receives no additional remuneration during his 3-month
shift at the control room, and the record reveals that he possesses no
supervisory authority within the Board's accepted definition thereof.
We shall include him.
We find that all radio technician employees of the Employer, in-
cluding transmitter technicians, control room operators, remote con-
trol operators, and the control room supervisor, but excluding the
consulting engineer, the engineering supervisor, the transmitter sup-
ervisor, and all or any other supervisory employees with authority to
hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in
the status of employees, or effectively recommend such action, con-
stitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining
within the meaning of Section .9 (b) of the Act.
2 The Employer has no history of collective bai gaining However, the Petitioner's inter-
national representative testified that Petitioner at the time of the hearing had between 350
to 400 contracts with radio broadcasting companies, including 5 to 6 in the State of Ohio,
and that in approximately 80 percent of these contracts employees performing duties sub-
stantially the same as those performed by the employees herein involved are included in a
single unit
3 See Matter of Louis C Baltimoi e, 57 N L R B 1611 ; and Matter of Atlanta Journal
Company, 70 N L R B 1168.
GREAT TRAILS BROADCASTING COMPANY
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
399
We shall direct that the question concerning representation which
has arisen be resolved by an election by secret ballot, subject to the
limitations and additions set forth in the Direction.
The parties disagree as to the eligibility of three part-time employ-
ees to vote in the election. The Employer is opposed to their partici-
pation, whereas the Petitioner would permit them to vote.
Transmitter technicians-Bright and 1TTymer: These employees
work from 6 to 8 hours per week during the current installation of a
new transmitting plant. Normally however, they are called upon
only as substitute technicians when the regular employees are ill, on
leave, or otherwise temporarily absent. We find that they do not have
sufficient interest in the selection of a bargaining representative to
entitle them to vote in the election.
Control room operator-Hurley: This employee works 36 hours per
week on a regular part-time basis. Inasmuch as his interests are sub-
stantially the same as those of the regular employees, we find that he
is eligible to participate in the election.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the
purposes of collective bargaining with Great Trails Broadcasting
Company, Dayton, Ohio, an election by secret ballot shall be conducted
as early as possible, but not later than thirty (30) clays from the date
of this Direction, under the direction and supervision of the Regional
Director for the Ninth Region, acting in this matter as agent for the
National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Sections 203.55 and
203.56, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-
Series 4, among the employees in the unit found appropriate in Sec-
tion IV, above, who were employed during the pay-roll period immedi-
ately preceding the date of this Direction, including employees who
did not work during said pay-roll period because they were ill or on
vacation or temporarily laid off, and including employees in the armed
forces of the United States who present themselves in person at the
polls, but excluding those employees who have since quit or been dis-
charged for cause and have not been rehired or reinstated prior to the
date of the election, to determine whether or not they desire to be
represented by International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers,,
Local Union 1224, AFL, for the purposes of collective bargaining.
MR. JOHN M. HOUSTON took no part in the consideration of the
above Decision and Direction of Election.
739926-47-vol. 73-27