Space Services International Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Feb 3, 1966

156 N.L.R.B. 1227 (N.L.R.B. 1966)

SPACE SERVICES INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION 1227
Space Services International Corporation 1 and International
Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local Union No. 903,
AFL-CIO and International Association of Machinists & Aero-
space Workers , AFL-CIO, Petitioners
H. R. Morgan Contracting Company, M & T Company, and James
N. Travirca, General Contractor and International Association
of Machinists & Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO, Petitioner
M & T Company, Petitioner and International Association of
Machinists & Aerospace Workers , AFL-CIO
General Electric Company, Mississippi Test Support Department;
M & T Company ; Allied-Webb, a Joint Venture; Glantz Con-
tracting Corporation ; Consolidated American Services, Inc.;
J. W. Cook and O. M. Cook, Partners , d/b/a Cook Brothers
Leasing Company ; H. R. Morgan Contracting Company; James
N. Travirca , General Contractor ; Southern Cafeteria Operat-
ing Company ; and Space Services International Corporation
and South Central Mississippi Metal Trades Council , AFL-CIO,
Petitioner . Cases Was. 15-RC-3168, 15-RC-3220, 15-RC-3217,
15-RC-3219, 15-RC-3236, 15-RM-195, and 15-RC-3232. Febru-
ary 3,1966
DECISION, ORDER, AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
Upon petitions duly filed under Section 9(c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, as amended, a hearing on the consolidated cases was
held before Hearing Officer Loren P. Jones. The Hearing Officer's
rulings made at the hearing were free from prejudicial error and are
hereby affirmed. Briefs have been filed by Space Services Interna-
tional Corporation, H. R. Morgan Contracting Company, M & T Com-
pany, James N. Travirca, General Electric Company, Cook Brothers
Leasing Company, Southern Cafeteria Operating Company, and South
Central Mississippi Metal Trades Council, AFL-CIO.2
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, the National
Labor Relations Board has delegated its powers in connection with
these cases to a three-member panel [Chairman McCulloch and Mem-
bers Brown and Zagoria].
1 The names of parties are designated in the caption in accord with the evidence.
2 Herein referred to respectively as Space Services , Morgan, M & T, Travirca , GE, Cook,
Southern Cafeteria , and the Council.
156 NLRB No. 122.
1228 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Upon the entire record 3 in these cases, the Board finds:
1. GE is engaged at the Mississippi Test Facility in Hancock
County, Mississippi, in performing certain services under a prime con-
tract with National Aeronautics and Space Administration .4 During
the first 11 months of 1965, GE received at the facility, directly from
outside the State of Mississippi, materials valued in excess of $100,000.
GE concedes, and we find, that it is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the Act.5 Morgan, M Sc T, Travirca, Cook, and Space Serv-
ices are engaged, under subcontracts with GE, in performing services
at the facility, for which services each received from GE in excess of
$50,000 during the first 11 months of 1965. We therefore find that
these Employers are engaged in commerce.' Southern Cafeteria has a
subcontract with GE under which it pays GE for the privilege of pro-
viding food service at the facility. Its gross sales at retail exceed
$500,000 in value a year, and it receives annually from outside the
State of Mississippi goods valued in excess of $10,000. We therefore
find that Southern Cafeteria is engaged in commerce.7 We further
find that it will effectuate the policies of the Act to assert jurisdiction
herein.8 The contentions by some of the above Employers disputing
the Board's assertion of jurisdiction over them are found to be without
merit.
2. The parties stipulated, and we find, that International Associa-
tion of Machinists & Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO, and International
Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local Union No. 903, AFL-CIO,9
are labor organizations within the meaning of Section 2 (5) of the Act.
s Subsequent to the hearing , the Council filed with the Board a motion to admit into
evidence a document entitled " Constitution and By -Laws of the Metal Trades Department
of the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations." As no
objection has been made to the motion , it is hereby granted. The Hearing Officer , appar-
ently inadvertently , failed to receive in evidence Travirca Exhibit No . 1 to which no ob-
jection was made. This document is therefore hereby received in evidence.
4 For the reasons set forth in the unit discussion below, we find that GE is not, as
asserted by the Council , a joint employer of the employees here involved.
S Siemons Mailing Service , 122 NLRB 81, 85.
9 Ibid.
7 Carolina Supplies and Cement Co ., 122 NLRB 88; James D. Jackson, d/b/a Jackson's
Party Service, 126 NLRB 875.
8 The Council , whose primary request in Case No . 15-RC-3232 Is for a multiemployer
unit, indicated in its brief to the Board that Allied -Webb, Glantz Contracting Corpora-
tion, and Consolidated American Services , Inc., should be excluded therefrom as their work
is covered by the Davis -Bacon Act and existing collective -bargaining agreements. None
of the parties seeks representation of their employees. Accordingly, we shall dismiss the
petition in Case No . 15-RC-3232 insofar as it relates to these three Employers . Sheet
Metal Workers International Association , Local No. 11 , AFL-CIO, intervened in this
proceeding as to sheet metal workers employed by Allied-Webb only. As no petition has
been filed , however, for a unit of sheet metal workers, and Local No. 11 has presented no
interest showing in any other unit, its name will not be placed on the ballot in any of
the elections directed herein.
9 Herein respectively referred to as LAM, and IBEW Local 903.
SPACE SERVICES INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION 1229
The Employers contend, however, that the Council is not a labor orga-
nization within the meaning of the Act, and that the petition in Case
No. 15-RC-3232 should be dismissed on this ground. These motions
to dismiss are hereby denied for the reasons set forth below.
The Council, composed of several local labor unions, was recently
organized by delegates designated for that purpose by the participat-
ing Unions. The delegates elected officers and requested a charter from
the Metal Trades Department, AFL-CIO, which was granted
March 17, 1965. The record shows that the Council has a, constitution
and bylaws, which are the same as the constitution and bylaws of the
Metal Trades Department, AFL-CIO, and which were read to the
delegates at one of the meetings of the Council.10 The Council has no
employee-members. Its business is conducted by delegates dispatched
by the member-locals who are notified of all meetings. The Council's
revenues are received from its member-locals and their International
Unions. Although the Council has not as yet engaged in collective-
bargaining or arbitration proceedings, its secretary testified that the
Council was formed for the purpose of organizing maintenance em-
ployees in the area of the facility, and that the Council is "an organiza-
tion in which employees participate in whole or in part, dealing with
employers concerning grievances, labor disputes, wage rates in pay,
hours of employment or conditions of work [sic]." The Council has
secured authorization cards from employees of Employers herein, and
its brief to the Board states that the Council "is a permanent organiza-
tion that, if certified, will bargain on behalf of the employees in its
member unions." In view of the foregoing, particularly the evidence
that the Council was recently established for the purpose of organizing
and representing employees in this area, and that employees in each of
its member-unions participate through their delegates in the affairs of
the Council, and have designated it as their representative, we find that
it is a labor organization within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the
Act."
3. Questions affecting commerce exist concerning the representation
of certain employees of the Employers within the meaning of Sections
9(c) (1) and 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
10 The constitution and bylaws provide, inter alga, that the object of the Metal Trades
Department , AFL-CIO, is to encourage the formation of local metal trades councils, to
adjust trade disputes, to establish harmonious relations between employers and employees,
and to adjust jurisdictional disputes. It also provides for the local metal trades councils
to act as collective -bargaining representatives for employees . We do not consider it
significant that no vote was taken on the adoption of the Metal Trades Department con-
stitution and bylaws by the Council herein as the bylaws provide that local metal trades
councils , such as the Council herein, "shall be governed in accordance with the laws of
this Department."
"Metallic Building Company , 98 NLRB 386 , enfd. 204 F . 2d 826 ( C.A. 5) ; Halliburton
Company, 142 NLRB 644.
1230 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
4. The appropriate units
A. The positions of the parties
The Council seeks a unit described as all maintenance and service
employees at the facility employed by Morgan, M & T, Travirca,
Cook, Southern Cafeteria, and Space Services; it would not include
any employees of GE, but contends that GE is a joint employer of the
employees of the aforesaid subcontractors. In the alternative, the
Council requests elections in separate units of employees of these sub-
contractors. IAM and all the Employers contend that GE is not a
joint employer of the requested employees and that only the separate
subcontractor units are appropriate. IBEW Local 903, the Petitioner
in Case No. 15-RC-3168, requests an election in a separate unit of
maintenance electricians employed at the facility by Space Services.
IAM petitioned for separate units of employees of Space Services,
Morgan, M & T, and Travirca, but stated at the hearing that it wishes
to appear on the ballots in all the elections that the Board might
direct. There is no bargaining history.
B. The contractor-subcontractor relationship
The Mississippi Test Facility occupies a 140,000-acre tract of land
in Hancock County, Mississippi. NASA owns the land, the buildings,
and substantially all the equipment there. As indicated above, NASA
has a prime contract wtih GE providing that GE will furnish services
to the facility on a cost-plus-fixed-fee basis. This contract, which
expires June 30, 1968, requires GE to subcontract for some of these
services. GE has a materials and logistics section at the facility, with
a subcontracting subsection which solicits and evaluates proposals,
and negotiates and administers subcontracts. The subcontracts are
entered into as a result of competitive bidding under procedure defined
by NASA procurement regulations. Some of the subcontracts expire
on June 30 and others on October 31,1966.12
As to the subcontractors here involved,13 the following have cost-
plus-fixed-fee subcontracts : (1) Space Services provides minor build-
ing maintenance, including carpentry, electrical, heating and refrig-
12 The subcontracts provide that the performance of work thereunder may be terminated
by GE for default or whenever GE determines that "such termination is in the best in-
terest of General Electric and the Government ." The record does not disclose that the
NASA-GE prime contract is terminable before its expiration date.
"At the time of the hearing, GE had 38 to 40 subcontracts for services at the facility
with 471 subcontractors . The subcontractors not involved herein may be grouped as'
(1) Those with no employees at the facility , such as a subcontractor which provides
laundry service but operates at a different location ; ( 2) security service; ( 3) fire pro-
tection ; ( 4) those which provide professional and technical services; (5) the Mississippi
State Division for the Blind , which operates concession stands ; ( 6) air transportation
service to and from the facility ; and ( 7) the subcontractors performing work covered by
the Davis-Bacon Act.
SPACE SERVICES INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION 1231
eration, mechanical , plumbing , painting, and welding services; (2)
M & T operates the central heating, air conditioning , water, and
sewerage systems; ( 3) Travirca is responsible for furniture moving,
sign painting , mosquito, insect , and rodent control, and grounds, roads,
and waterways maintenance; and (4 ) Cook operates , maintains, and
services transportation equipment on the facility such as taxicabs,
J-boats, and trucks. Morgan, on the other hand, operates on the basis
of a "Fixed Price Per Square Foot" contract under which it provides
custodial and refuse services in specified areas at a specific price per
square foot. Southern Cafeteria has a "Privilege C, Type K" contract
under which it provides custodial and refuse services in specified
areas at a specific price per square foot. Southern Cafeteria has a
"Privilege C, Type K" contract under which it pays GE for the
privilege of providing food service at retail to people at the facility.
GE pays the subcontractors monthly or bimonthly, on the basis of
cost invoices they submit, which must be approved by GE subcon-
tracting specialists . GE then bills such costs to NASA as part of the
prime contract costs. All costs , including wages , overtime , and fringe
benefits, are governed by the "Allowability of Costs" provision of
NASA procurement regulations. GE remits payments received from
Southern Cafeteria to NASA as an offset. GE purchases through
General Services Administration, and NASA takes title to most of
the equipment and materials required by the subcontractors in the
performance of their work; Southern Cafeteria, however, purchases
food and some vehicles for transportation of food on the facility.
All the subcontracts are expressed in terms of the scope of the work
to be performed . Subcontractors are required to submit organization
charts with their proposals to show how they intend to make the work
flow, and, in making subcontract awards, GE relies to a substantial
extent on the technical competence and management capabilities of
the subcontractors' key personnel, whose names must be submitted.
Some of the contracts are expressed in general terms and others in
detail, including the time of day or night such operations as furnishing
food, gasoline , and drivers must be available to be of service . Custo-
dial employees are required to wear uniforms, and all employees at
the facility are required to obey safety and fire regulations. The
Space Services subcontract contains qualifications for the electricians,
mechanics, plumbers, and painters, to be employed. Attached to the
subcontracts, and made a part thereof, are uniform provisions entitled
"General Terms and Conditions Services Contracts" which, among
other things , require subcontractors to comply with Federal laws
respecting fair labor standards and equal employment opportunities,
and to notify GE of any labor dispute which is delaying or threatening
to delay the timely performance of the subcontract . The NASA-GE
1232 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
contract holds GE, and the GE subcontracts in turn hold the sub-
contractors, responsible for providing appropriate supervision; for
maintaining satisfactory standards of employee competency, conduct,
and integrity; and for taking such disciplinary action as may be
necessary.
The Council maintains that GE is a joint employer of the subcon-
tractors' employees on the ground, among others, that a GE subcon-
tract representative or specialist is assigned to administer each sub-
contract. This individual, however, is concerned chiefly with costs,
not supervision of employees. Moreover, while a GE administrative
technician examines the work performed to determine whether it ful-
fills the requirements of the subcontract, and employees in the GE
quality assurance subsection examine the quality of the work or prod-
uct delivered by the subcontractors, the work of these individuals
brings them into contact only with management and supervisory
personnel of the subcontractors. Further, although in the administra-
tion of both the NASA-GE prime contract and some of the GE sub-
contracts, orders for work to be performed are issued, progress reports
on work performed are rendered, and discussions are held on the basis
of such orders and reports, all such discussions are held by GE exclu-
sively with subcontractors' management and supervisory personnel.
NASA and GE reserve the right to require the removal of any
employee whose employment they deem contrary to the public interest,
and GE reserves the right to require removal from the work of any
employee it deems incompetent, careless, or insubordinate. GE has
exercised this right on only one occasion, however, and that involved
the removal of a management representative; it has never exercised
it with regard to any employee of a subcontractor.
The subcontracts do not specify the number of employees to be
employed by the subcontractors, their hours, or their wages. GE
takes no part in hiring or discharging, nor does it give orders or
directions to employees of subcontractors. GE does not attempt to
dictate the wages, benefits, or hours of such employees, and keeps no
personnel or accounting records regarding them. It does not partici-
pate in the handling of grievances or in collective bargaining relative
to such employees. The subcontractors alone hire, pay, discipline, and
discharge their employees, and determine their wages, hours, and
benefits. They keep their own payroll, social security, tax withhold-
ing, workmen's compensation, and unemployment insurance records.
Neither GE nor any of its officers or employees own any interest in
any of these subcontractors, nor is there any financial or management
connection or interchange of employees among them. No employees
SPACE SERVICES INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION 1233
directly employed by GE perform duties similar to the duties of these
subcontractors' employees, nor do the subcontractors' employees share
GE employee-benefit plans.
It is apparent from all the foregoing that control of wages, hours,
fringe benefits, day-to-day operations, grievances, and other matters
directly affecting the subcontractors' employees are lodged with these
subcontractors, notwithstanding GE's policing of costs (which the
subcontractors must justify under NASA procurement regulations)
and of satisfactory and timely performance of work within the scope
of the subcontracts (necessary to GE's fulfillment of its commitments
to NASA under the prime contract), in the course of which GE
communicates with subcontractor management and supervisory per-
sonnel only, in much the same manner that NASA administers its
prime contract with GE. Accordingly, we find, upon the entire record,
that GE does not exercise joint control over the employees of the sub-
contractors and is therefore not a joint employer of the employees
here involved.14 In these circumstances, we find that the Council has
failed to establish the appropriateness of a single unit covering the
employees of all these subcontractors in Case No. 15-RC-3232.
Accordingly, we turn now to the requests for separate subcontractor
units.
C. The units
As indicated above, IBEW Local 903 requested a unit of mainte-
nance electricians employed at the facility by Space Services. Space
Services refused to stipulate that this is an appropriate unit, and the
other parties failed to take a specific position as to such unit. IBE'V
Local 903 was absent during most of the hearing, and presented no
witnesses.
The GE-Space Services subcontract, which is in evidence, provides
that :
[Space Services] will be responsible to General Electric for the
satisfactory performance of minor plant maintenance including
carpentry, electrical, heating and refrigeration, mechanical,
plumbing, painting and welding crafts. The term "maintained"
and "maintenance" as used herein shall mean operations, custo-
dial, housekeeping and maintenance work and services of a routine
or recurring nature, the purpose of which is to keep facilities in a
state of functional usefulness.
11 See National Petro -Chemicals Corporation, 116 NLRB 1197; Thiokol Chemical Corpo-
ration ( Longhorn Division), 113 NLRB 547 ; Reynolds Corporation, 74 NLRB 1622.
Frostco Super Save Stores, Inc., 138 NLRB 125, relied on by the Council , is clearly dis-
tinguishable on its facts . As none of the labor organizations herein claim to represent
any employees directly employed by GE, and as none of the parties contend that such
employees should be included in any unit found appropriate, we shall dismiss the peti-
tion in Case No. 15-RC-3232 insofar as it relates to GE.
1234 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Space Services is required to provide overall supervision, as well as
foremen "with special orientation toward one specialty such as elec-
trical, heating and refrigeration, mechanical and carpentry and paint-
ing." The subcontract also provides:
Electricians will be required to do overall electrical repair and
some minor installation type work. The mix of personnel shall be
such that mien are versatile and oriented toward such fields as
circuit trouble shooting, controls, and new circuit installation
with conduit. All work will be 440 volts or less systems and
would not include any instrumentation or test related work.
Helpers will be required to assist craftsmen and maintain good
housekeeping in the shops and work areas.
The parties stipulated that Space Services employs a project manager,
3 foremen including an "electrician" who is a supervisor, and 33
employees in 8 classifications, including "electricians." In view of the
indication in the subcontract that the work performed by Space Serv-
ices is of a "minor" and "routine or recurring" nature, and of the
absence of evidence that the electrical work requires the exercise of
special skills, that the electricians' duties consist mainly of electrical
work, or that the electricians constitute a separate department, we find
no basis for establishing the electricians as a separate appropriate
unit. Accordingly, we shall dismiss the petition in Case No. 15-
RC-3168.
As noted above, the Council's alternative unit position was that
separate units of employees of Space Services, Morgan, M & T,
Travirca, Cook, and Southern Cafeteria, employed at the facility,
are appropriate, and IAM and the Employers have taken the position,
with which we agree, that only such separate units are appropriate.15
There is no dispute as to the composition of such units. Accordingly,
we find that the following employees employed at the Mississippi Test
Facility, Hancock County, Mississippi, constitute separate units
appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the mean-
ing of Section 9 (b) of the Act, excluding from each unit all office
clerical, professional, and technical employees, guards, watchmen, and
supervisors as defined in the Act.
(1) All production and maintenance employees of Space Services
International Corporation including electricians, carpenters, painters,
plumbers, mechanics, heating and refrigeration mechanics, and help-
11 We find that the motions of the Employers to dismiss the petition in Case No . 15-IiC-
3232, and of Morgan and Travirca to remand for separation of rights of parties, on the
ground that the multiemployer unit is inappropriate , have no merit in the circumstances
of these cases, and they are therefore hereby denied.
SPACE SERVICES INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION 1235
ers; but excluding the project manager, and the electrician, carpenter,
and mechanic foremen' ' 16
(2) All production and maintenance employees of H. R. Morgan
Contracting Company, including janitors, matrons, and refuse
employees; but excluding the project manager, bookkeeper, secretarial
employees, clerks, and supervisors.
(3) All service employees of M & T Company, excluding the project
manager and air-conditioning supervisor.17
(4) All production and maintenance employees of James N. Tra-
virca, General Contractor, including toolroom keepers, small mower
operators, small engine mechanics, sign painters and helpers, light
trimmers, material handling leadermen, office rearrangement mechan-
ics, furniture repairmen, office equipment deliverymen, mosquito con-
trol inspectors, and laborers; but excluding the project manager,
superintendent, and grounds, roads and canals, and general material
handling foremen.
(5) All employees of Southern Cafeteria Operating Company,
including sandwich preparers, dishwashers, relief snackbar operators,
busmen, salad preparers, grill cooks, cashiers, cook helpers, baker
helpers, snackbar attendants, pots and pans washers, kitchen helpers,
counter attendants, and regular part-tinge employees and snackbar
operators; but excluding clerical employees, head cook, head baker,
and all other supervisors.18
(6) All employees of Cook Brothers Leasing Company, including
service station attendants, light truckdrivers, mechanics, chauffeurs,
busdrivers, equipment operators, J-boat operators, heavy truckdrivers,
driver leaders, mechanic leaders, equipment operator leaders, and
equipment operator riggers; but excluding bookkeepers, secretary,
clerks, project manager, foremen of maintenance service, transporta-
tion, and operations divisions, and dispatcher-driver leader.19
16 As IAM has demonstrated a petitioner ' s, and IBEW Local 903 an Intervenor s, show-
ing of interest in this unit , their names will appear on the ballot. The name of the
Council will also appear If it demonstrates to the Regional Director that it has an inter-
venor ' s showing of interest among these employees . As IBEW Local 903 has expressed
no desire to take part in the elections in other -units , and presented no interest showing
therein , Its name will not be placed on the ballots in such elections.
17 As IAM has demonstrated a petitioner ' s Interest showing in this unit, its name will
appear on the ballot, but the name of the Council will appear only if it demonstrates to
the Regional Director that it has an Intervenor 's showing.
is As the Council has demonstrated a petitioner ' s Interest showing in this unit, its
name will appear on the ballot. The name of IAM will appear only if it demonstrates
an intervenor 's showing.
"The election in this unit is directed contingent on the presentation of a petitioner's
showing of interest therein. If no such showing of interest is presented , the Regional
Director will dismiss the petition In Case No . 15-RC-3232 insofar as It relates to Cook
Brothers Leasing Company . If an election is held , the name of the Council will appear on
the ballot as it has an intervenor ' s Interest showing in this unit.
217-919-66-vol. 15 6-7 9
1236 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
[The Board dismissed the petition in Case No. 15-RC-3232 insofar
as it relates to General Electric Company, Mississippi Test Support
Department; Allied-Webb, a Joint Venture; Glantz Contracting Cor-
poration; and Consolidated American Services, Inc.; and dismissed
the petition in Case No. 15-RC-3168 in its entirety.]
[Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication.]
Excelsior Underwear Inc. and Saluda Knitting Inc.' and Amal-
gamated Clothing Workers of America , AFL-CIO, Petitioner
K. L. Kellogg & Sons 2 and International Union of Operating
Engineers, Local No. 3, AFL-CIO, and International Union of
Operating Engineers, Local Union No. 12, AFL-CIO, Joint Peti-
tioners. Cases Nos. 11-RC-1876, and 01-RC--8955. February 4,
1966
DECISIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS OF
RESULTS OF ELECTIONS
In the Excelsior case, pursuant to a stipulation for certification upon
consent election, an election by secret ballot was conducted by the
Regional Director for Region 11 on December 6, 1963, among the
employees in the unit described below. After the election, the parties
were furnished with a tally of ballots which showed that of approxi-
mately 247 eligible voters, 246 cast ballots, of which 35 were for, and
206 against, the Petitioner, and 5 challenged. The challenges were
insufficient in number to affect the results of the election. The Peti-
tioner filed timely objections to conduct affecting the results.
The objections, as summarized by the Regional Director, related to
the following :
(1) The Employer's conduct on November 29 in mailing to all
employees an 8-page letter allegedly containing material misstate-
ments as to Union dues and initiation fees, as well as provisions of
the National Labor Relations Act, threats of plant closings, strikes
and violence, and a predetermined position of refusing to bargain
in the event the Union were to be selected as bargaining
representative.
(2) The Employer's conduct in refusing to supply the Union
with a list of employees and their addresses for the purpose of
allowing the Union to answer the letter referred to in Objection
No. 1.
Referred to herein as the Excelsior case.
z Referred to herein as the Kellogg case.
156 NLRB No. 111.