Page Airways, Inc

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 26, 1954

108 N.L.R.B. 1108 (N.L.R.B. 1954)

1108 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
companywide or systemwide departmental4 or multidepart-
mental5 units, even in the face of a contrary bargaining history. 6
The Board's decisions in these public utility cases, rejecting
the narrow units and approving the broad units, have been
predicated upon the highly integrated and interdependent nature
of public utility operations, the similarity of employment condi-
tions and interests, the interests in serving the public of
the various groups involved, and the centralized control of
major policies relating to labor relations. The factors which
the Board found to be controlling in such cases are present
and controlling here. Accordingly, as no reason exists in this
case for departing from the Board's established policy with re-
spect to public utilities, we find that the unit sought by the Peti-
tioner is inappropriate for purposes of collective bargaining,
and shall dismiss the petition.'
[The Board dismissed the petition.]
4 Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Florida Telephone Corporation, New England Telephone
and Telegraph Company, and The Chesapeake and Potomac Telephone Company of Virauua,
footnote 3, supra.
5 Boston Consolidated Gas Company, Rockland Light and Power Company, Southern Colorado
Power Company, and Elizabethtown Consolidated Gas Company, footnote 3, supra.
6Bostoii Consolidated Gas Company, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Ehrabethtown Con-
solidated Gas Company, and The Chesapeake and Potomac Telephone Company of Virguoa,
footnote 3, supra.
7 The Intervenor contends that its current contract with the Employer is a bar to this
proceeding, In ,iew of our dismissal of the petition, we find it Wmecessary to pass upon the
contract-bar issue Rockwood & Company, 106 NLRB 1075.
PAGE AIRWAYS, INC. and INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OP-
ERATING ENGINEERS, LOCAL NO. 6 & 6A, AFL, Petitioner.
Case No. 17-RC-1690. May 26, 1954
AMENDED DECISION , ORDER , AND DIRECTION OF
ELECTION
On December 30, 1953, the Board issued its Decision and
Order in the above-entitled proceeding, dismissing the petition
herein upon the ground that the employment of all employees
in the unit involved herein would soon be terminated. This
disposition was based on uncontradicted testimony of the Em-
ployer that within 6 weeks of the hearing installation of new
equipment would obviate the need for these employees. There-
after, on January 14, 1953, the Petitioner filed a petition for
rehearing, with supporting affidavits stating that these em-
ployees were still working and the machinery had not been in-
stalled, some 8 weeks after the hearing. On March 9, 1954,
the Board issued a notice to show cause why the Board should
not vacate its Decision and Order of December 30, 1953, and
108 NLRB No. 150.
PAGE AIRWAYS, INC. 1109
direct an election . The Employer , in its response to the notice
to show cause , concedes that the employees are still working,
and that the new equipment is not yet installed , but claims
that this equipment is still expected to be installed. On this
state of the record, we now find that we should proceed with
a determination of representatives . We shall therefore set
aside the original Decision and Order issued herein.
Upon the entire record in this case , the Board finds:
1. The Employer is engaged in the storage and protection
of machine tools used in the production of ammunition, arms,
and other military equipment. During an approximately 1-year
period ending June 30, 1953, the Employer received from the
Ordnance Corps of the United States Army approximately
$300,000 for its services in this respect. The Employer also
instructs Ordnance Corps personnel in storage techniques, and
produces field manuals and similar literature for Army use.
On these facts, we find that the Employer's operations sub-
stantially affect the national defense, and we shall assert
jurisdiction herein.
2. The labor organization involved claims to represent cer-
tain employees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the
representation 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 and the Petitioner agree that all condenser
room employees constitute an appropriate unit. They disagree
only with respect to the supervisory status of H. M. Carpenter.
The record shows that Carpenter, although he performs manual
work for an average of 2 hours a day, is in charge of the con-
denser room employees. He has no authority to hire or dis-
charge employees, but does have power effectively to re-
commend hire and discharge. We find that Carpenter is a
supervisor within the meaning of the Act, and we shall there-
fore exclude him from the unit.
Accordingly, we find that all condenser room employees of
the Employer at its Atchison, Kansas , location, excluding all
other employees and all supervisors as defined in the Act, con-
stitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bar-
gaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
[The Board vacated and set aside the Decision and Order
issued on December 30, 1953.]
[Test of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]