Niagara Hudson Power Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Sep 29, 1948

79 N.L.R.B. 1115 (N.L.R.B. 1948)

In the Matter of NIAGARA HUDSON POWER CORPORATION, EMPLOYER and
INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, A. F. OF L.,
PETITIONER -
Case Nos. 2-RC-337 and 2-RC-413.-Decided September 29,1948
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
Upon separate petitions duly filed, a consolidated hearing was held
before a hearing officer of the National Labor Relations Board. 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, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with
this case to a three-man panel consisting of the undersigned Board
Members.*
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the National Labor Relations Act.
2. The labor organizations named below claim to represent certain
employees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the represen-
tation 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 Petitioner seeks to represent two different groups of the
Employer's employees in separate system-wide units. In Case No.
2-RC-337, it seeks to represent all production, maintenance, and
distribution employees of the Niagara Hudson Power system exclud-
ing technical, professional, office and clerical employees, guards, watch-
men, and supervisors. In Case No. 2-RC-413 it seeks to represent
.Houston, Reynolds , and Gray.
1 District 50, United Mine Workers of America, herein called the Intervenor , has not
complied with Section 9 (f), (g), and (h) of the Act, but was permitted to intervene
because of its present contractual relationship with the Employer' s Eastern Division.
The Intervenor does not contend that this contract, executed after the instant petition
was filed , is a bar to the present proceedings.
79 N. L. It. B., No. 146.
1115
1116 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
all technical, office and clerical employees of the Niagara Hudson
Power system excluding production, maintenance, distribution and
professional employees, guards, watchmen, and- supervisors. The
Employer takes no position with respect to the proposed unit. The
Intervenor contends that system-wide units are inappropriate, and
urges that the present division-wide units should be continued.
The Employer is a holding company having many wholly owned and
partly owned subsidiaries located in upper New York State. The
Buffalo Niagara Electric Corporation, the Central New York Power
Corporation, and the New York Power and Light Corporation, wholly
owned subsidiaries which comprise the Niagara Hudson Power system,
are the only operating companies involved in this proceeding.2
The Employer has three operational divisions which follow, but do
not correspond exactly to the corporate holdings of the three companies
in the system 3 The Eastern Division, operated by the New York
Power and Light Corporation, includes the properties of-that corpora-
tion with the exception of its Oneida District, which is located in,
and operated by, the Central Division. The Western Division, oper-
ated by the Buffalo Niagara Electric Corporation, includes the prop-
erties of that corporation with the exception of its Eastern District,
which is located in, and operated by, the Central Division. The
Central Division, operated by the Central New York Power and
Light Corporation, includes the properties of that corporation, plus
the Oneida District of the New York Power and Light Corporation
and the Eastern District of the Buffalo Niagara Electric Corporation.
Since 1939 all facilities of these three companies have been operated
under common control as a single integrated system.4 All lines, gen-
erating plants, and substations are operated as a single integrated
system to produce and transmit energy at a minimum over-all cost.
All major repairs and maintenance projects are on a system-wide
rather than a division-wide basis. A chief engineer for the entire
system coordinates and directs the work of the divisional chief engi-
neers. Engineering standards for the entire system are prepared
under the direction of the chief engineer on a system-wide basis.5
2 On May 5, 1948 , the Public Service Commission of the State of New York approved a
petition to consolidate the three companies into one operating company to be known as
the Buffalo Niagara Electric Corporation.
3 One of the reasons for the petition for consolidation of the three operating companies
was to eliminate "existing artificial corporate bairiers."
4 The Public Service Commission found that " these three system companies are already
so organized and operated that consolidation into a single corporate entity will require
little or no change in operation and management." At the hearing before the Com-
mission, the Employer expressed the opinion that it is necessary to have a single corporation
in order to assure the permanency of the system integration
5 The Employer has distribution , transmission , and construction standards , and stand-
ards for types of structures . The divisional engineers are responsible for seeing that
these standards are carried out.
NIAGARA HUDSON POWER CORPORATION 1117
There is a chief supervisor, working under the supervision of the chief
engineer, in charge of the divisional load supervisors.
The Employer attempts to obtain uniformity of personnel policies,
conditions of employment and employee benefits in the three sub-
sidiary companies. There is a system-wide Personnel Coordinating
Committee consisting of the three divisional personnel managers,
which considers all major personnel problems throughout the system,
and makes recommendations to the Employer's executives. The Em-
ployer's insurance benefit plan, and retirement and separation allow-
ance plan cover employees of the entire system. Seniority is de-
termined on a system-wide basis. Insofar as practicable, the
Employer has tried to maintain standardized job classifications and
wages throughout the system. While each operating company main-
tains separate pay rolls,' the Employer keeps a paying agents' pay
roll for paying those employees whose work involves more than one
of the subsidiary companies.' There is no interchange of employees
among the divisions except in cases of emergency, and grievances are
handled on a divisional basis.
Before 1942, the Petitioner and the Intervenor had collective bar-
gaining agreements with various of the Employer's subsidiaries.
Upon consolidation of some of these subsidiaries, the Petitioner and
the Intervenor continued to bargain for the larger units resulting from
such consolidation. Since 1942 collective bargaining for the employ-
ees herein concerned has been on a division-wide basis.' The Peti-
tioner has had division-wide contracts with the Western and Central
Divisions covering in separate units (1) the production and mainte-
nance employees, and (2) the technical, office and clerical employees.
The Intervenor has represented the employees of the Eastern Divi-
sion since 1942, after winning two consent elections among (1) the
production and maintenance employees, and (2) the technical, office
and clerical employees. The Intervenor contends that in view of this
bargaining pattern, the system-wide units sought by the Petitioner
are 'inappropriate.
In view of the highly integrated and interdependent character of
the Employer's operations, we are convinced that system-wide units
are appropriate for collective bargaining.9 In reaching this conclu-
6 New York Power and Light Corporation pays its Oneida District employees, and
Buffalo Niagara Electric Corporation pays its Eastern District employees , all of whom
work in , and are controlled by, the Central Division.
The Employer and its subsidiaries filed a consolidated tax return for the year 1946.
While collective bargaining agreements are negotiated on a divisional basis, the sub-
sidiary companies have to obtain approval from the Employer before they put any
proposal into effect which would affect other divisions.
6 The Board has frequently held that system -wide units are the most appropriate
bargaining units for employees of public utilities . Cf. Matter of St. Louis Public Service
Company, 77 N. L. R. B . 749; Matter of Consolidated Telegraph f Electrical Subway
Company, 77 N. L. it. B. 300 ; Matter of Duquesne Light Company, 57 N. L. it. B. 770.
1118 DECISIONS . OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
sion we have considered the history of collective bargaining on a di-
vision-wide basis. We are of the opinion, however, that the factors
in favor of system-wide, units outweigh the bargaining history on a
less comprehensive basis.10
Upon the basis of the entire record we find the following units
appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the mean-
ing of Section 9 (b) of the Act:
(1) All production, maintenance, and distribution employees of
the Niagara Hudson Power system, excluding all technical, profes-
sional, office and clerical employees, guards, watchmen, and
supervisors.
(2) All technical, office and clerical employees of the Niagara Hud-
son Power system, excluding production, maintenance, distribution
and professional employees, guards, watchmen, and supervisors.
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS 11
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining with the Employer, separate elections
-by secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later
than 30 days from the date of this Direction, under the direction and
supervision of the Regional Director for the Region in which this
case was heard, and subject-to Sections 203.61 and 203.62 of National
`Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 5, as amended,
among the employees in the units found appropriate in paragraph
numbered 4, above, who were employed during the pay-roll period im
mediately preceding the date of this Direction of Elections, including
'employees who did not work during said pay-roll period because they
were ill or on vacation or- temporarily laid off, but excluding those
employees who have since quit or been discharged for cause and have
,not been rehired or reinstated prior to the date of the election, and
also excluding employees on strike who are not entitled to reinstate-
ment, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented, for
purposes of collective bargaining, by International Brotherhood of
Electrical Workers, A. F. of L.
10 Matter of The Laclede Gas Light Company, 77 N. L. R. B 354: cf. Matter of The
Ohio Power Company, 77 N. L. R B. 320; Matter of Moraine Products Division, General
Motors Corporation, 56 N. L. R B. 1887.
'i we shall not place the Intervenor on the ballot inasmuch as it has not complied with
` Section 9 ( f), (g), and ( h) of the Act.