Lockheed Aircraft Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Oct 27, 1958

121 N.L.R.B. 1541 (N.L.R.B. 1958)

LOCKHEED AIRCRAFT CORPORATION 1541
Lockheed Aircraft Corporation and National Union, United
Welders of America, Independent , Petitioner. Case No. 21-RC-
5154. October 27, 1958
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 Kenneth M. Schwarz
and George H. O'Brien, hearing officers. The hearing officers' rulings
made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby
affirmed.
'
''
Pursuant to Section 3 '(b) of 'the National Labor Relations Act, the
Board has delegated its powers herein to a'three-member panel [Mem-
bers Rodgers, Jenkins, and Fanning].
Upon the entire record' in this case, the Board funds'
1. The Employers are engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the Act.
"
2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent employees
of the Employer.2
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 Employer at its 'California Division is engaged in the de-
sign, manufacture, and sale of aircraft and aircraft parts. The Peti-
tioner seeks to sever a craft unit of welders from the existing produc-
tion and maintenance unit currently represented by the Intervenor,
District Lodge 727. The employees sought by-the Petitioner include
welders in the following categories:' aircraft aluminum, aircraft are,
aircraft combination, aircraft gas, aircraft inert gas arc, maintenance,
maintenance B, tooling, and tooling setup man.' The Petitioner would
include in the unit several other classifications if the Board finds they
devote 50 percent of their time to craft welding,4 but would -exclude
flash welders and spot welders. The Employer and the Intervenor
contend that severance should be denied because (1) the Employer's
welders are unlike the skilled welders the Board found to be crafts-
men in Hughes Aircraft Company, supra; (2) the decision in Hughes
Aircraft was based on an incomplete record, and should be overruled;
1 The requests of the Employer and the Intervenor for oral argument are denied, as the
record, including the briefs, adequately presents the issues and the positions of the parties.
It was stipulated at the hearing that the exhibits in Hughes Aircraft Co., 117 NLRB 98,
and C. F. Braun & Co., 120 NLRB 282, be made a part of this record.
9 The Aeronautical and Industrial District Lodge 727, International Association of
Machinists , AFL-CIO, and the International Association of Machinists , AFL-CIO, were
permitted, to intervene on the basis of a current contractual interest in the employees
Petitioner seeks to represent.
3 The Intervenor did not raise its contract as a bar to this proceeding.
4 These classifications include profile cutting torch operators , model builders wind
tunnel A, flight test shop mechanics, flight ' instrument mechanics A, and research
mechanics A. '
121 NLRB No. 199.
1542 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
and (3) the unit sought by the Petitioner is only a small fragment of
a larger number of employees performing welding operations.
The aircraft aluminum, aircraft are, aircraft combination, ail-craft
gas, and aircraft inert gas are welders work with the light-weight
metals currently in use in high-speed aircraft. Although they utilize,
all three traditional welding processes of gas, are, and heliarc, pro-
gressively greater use is being made of the more difficult heliarc proc-
ess. Newer metals, such as titanium, magnesium thorium, and In-
conel X have been introduced, as well as new techniques for welding
thin gauge aluminum and stainless steel. More complex instruments,.
.such as AC-DC reverse polarity welding machines and water-cooled
torches, require the welders to have relatively higher degrees of
knowledge and skill.
Welders in the above categories must hold Army-Navy certificates,
obtained through tests which must be repeated every 6 months. There
is a different test and certificate for each metal and welding process
used, and a certification in one metal does not permit a welder to per-
form in any other certification class. Combination welders are re-
quired to hold certificates for 4 kinds of welding, but a few of the
welders employed hold as many as 9 certificates.
While the Employer requires no formal training or apprenticeship,
of its welders, it ,appears that all welders in the categories sought by
the Petitioner had extensive welding experience before being certified
to do aircraft welding for the Employer. Even after obtaining certifi-
cation, employees are often placed on simple welding jobs when first
starting to work, and are permitted to progress to more difficult jobs
only on demonstration of proficiency and skill. It may take 2 to 3
years before a welder is performing quality work.
The maintenance welders are not required to possess military certifi-
cates, and do little heliarc welding. Otherwise, their work resembles
that done by combination welders. Their main- function is to perform
electric are and gas welding in the maintenance and repair of ma-
chinery and equipment.
Welders-tooling and welders-setup men work with production
welders in the preparation of fixtures and layouts. While no certifi-
cation is required for employees in these categories, as they do not work
directly on production aircraft parts, they must have a complete
knowledge of gas and electric arc welding, and work to exacting
tolerances.
Careful consideration of the record in the instant case convinces
us that the Employer's aircraft welders, like those involved in Hughes
Aircraft, supra, and later cases,5 perform skilled work, subject to rigid
r. See Northrop Aircraft, Inc, 117 NLRB 1717 ; Royal Jet Incorporated , 118 NLRB
1558 ; North American Aviation, Inc., 120 NLRB 1155; Arrowhead Products , etc., 120
NLRB 075. Cf . C. F. Braun & Co , supra, where welders who , functioned only as part of a
recognized craft , and did not devote full time to welding, were denied severance.
LOCKHEED AIRCRAFT CORPORATION 1543_
inspection, and requiring a long period of training and experience c
They are engaged in the same industry, and exercise generally the
same duties and skills, as the welders found to be craftsmen and per-
mitted severance in the Hughes Aircraft line of cases, which we re-
,affirm. Accordingly, we find that the employees requested by the
Petitioner constitute a craft group, and they may, as the Petitioner
is a traditional representative of such employees,' constitute a separate
appropriate craft unit.
There remains for consideration the question as to whether certain
additional employees should be included in the craft voting group.
We shall exclude the flash welders and spot welders-as they operate
automatic welding machines and are therefore not required,to possess
or exercise the complex of welding skills utilized by the other aircraft
welders." We shall also exclude profile cutting torch operators as it
appears that these employees use welding torches primarily for cutting
and shaping and doi not perform functions normally associated with
the welding craft.
Of the model builders, wind tunnel A,-only one, Owens, is primarily
engaged in welding. As he has 7 Army-Navy certificates, and spends
at least 50 percent of his time performing aircraft welding, we shall
include him in the unit. All other model builders, wind tunnel A,
are excluded.
Likewise we shall exclude the research mechanics A, flight test shop
mechanics; and flight instrument mechanics, A., Although many of
these employees perform welding in the course of their'work, none
spends as much as 50 percent of his time welding. Accordingly, em-
ployees in these-classifications shall be excluded.'
• •In view of the foregoing; we find that, all- aircraft 'aluminum, air-
craft -arc, aircraft combination, aircraft gas, aircraft inert gas are,
maintenance, -maintenance B, tooling, and -tooling setup welders, and
including-model builder wind tunnel A Owens, at Employer's Cali-
fornia,Division plants, but excluding all other employees, flash and
spot welders, profile cutting torch operators, model builders'wind tun-
nel A, research mechanics A, flight test shop' mechanics, and flight
6 Superintendent Calaba testified that, after a walkout in 1941, the Employer trained a
new complement of welders in a matter of 30 to 60 days. We do not view this as con-
trolling, however, as it is obvious from the record that welders with such limited skill
and experience would not currently be doing aircraft welding for the Employer.
7 Hughes Aircraft Company, supra.
8 See Arrowhead Products, etc., supra; Royal Jet Incorporated, supra
O Aside from the categories discussed above, which were specifically put in question at
the hearing, the Intervenor and the Employer introduced evidence that-many other cate-
gories of employees at the California Division are required to be familiar with welding
techniques. The Intervenor moved to dismiss the petition on the basis that the Petitioner
sought only a small fragment of employees performing welding operations. However, as
these additional employees spend only a minor fraction of their time in welding, we find
they are not "primarily engaged" in welding and are therefore not properly within the
unit. See American Potash and Chemical Corporation, 107 NLRB 1418, 1423. Accord-
ingly, the Intervenor's motion to dismiss on this basis is denied.
I
1544 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
instrument mechanics A, and all professional employees, guards, and'
supervisors as defined in the Act, may, if they so desire, constitute
an appropriate unit. We shall not, however, make a final unit deter-
mination at this time, but shall direct that the question concerning
representation which exists be resolved by an election by secret ballot
among the employees in such voting group. If a majority vote for
the Petitioner, they will be taken to have indicated their desire to con-
stitute a separate appropriate unit, and the Regional Director con-
ducting the election directed .herein is instructed to issue a certifica-
tion of representatives to the Petitioner for such unit, which the
Board,) under • such circumstances, finds to be appropriate for pur-
poses of collective bargaining. In the event a majority do not vote
for the Petitioner, -these employees shall,remain a part of the existing
unit and the Regional Director will issue a certification of results of
election to such effect.
[Text'of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
Reflector Hardware Corp. and Machinery, Scrap 'Iron , Metal &'
Steel, Chauffeurs , Warehousemen Handlers, Helpers ' & Alloy
Fabricators Union Local 741 , I. B. of T. ' Case No. 13-RM-388.
October 27, 1958
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND CERTIFICATION OF
THE RESULTS OF ELECTION
Pursuant to the Board's Decision and Direction of,Election,l dated
May 28, 1958, an election by secret ballot was conducted on June 5,
1958, under the direction, and supervision of the Regional Director
for the Thirteenth Region among the employees in the unit found
appropriate by the Board. At the close of the election, the parties
were furnished a tally of ballots which showed that of the approxi-
mately 299 eligible voters 278 cast valid ballots, 180 were against, and
98 were for, the Union. No ballots were void or challenged.
Thereafter, the Union filed timely objections to the conduct of the
election and to conduct affecting the results of the election. There-
after on June 28, 19581 the Union filed supplemental objections, which
the Regional Director properly rejected as untimely. In accordance
with the Rules and Regulations of the Board the Regional Director
investigated the objections and on July 10, 1958, issued and served
on the parties his report on objections, in which he recommended that
they be overruled in their entirety. Thereafter the Union filed timely
exceptions to the Regional Director's report.
Unpublished.
121 NLRB No. 197.