Sperry Gyroscope Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 2, 1950

88 N.L.R.B. 907 (N.L.R.B. 1950)

In the Matter of SPERRY GYROSCOPE COMPANY, EMPLOYER. and INTER-
NATIONAL UNION OF ELECTRICAL, RADIO AND MACHINE WORKERS,
C. I. 0., AND LOCAL 450, INTERNATIONAL UNION OF ELECTRICAL, RADIO
AND MACHINE WORKERS, C. I. 0., PETITIONER
Case No. O-RC-1804.Decided March, R, 1950
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before Lloyd S. Green-
idge, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing
are free from prejudicial error, and are hereby affirmed.'
In the course of the hearing,' United Electrical, Radio and Machine
Workers of America, herein called UE, and its Local 450, herein called
Local 450-UE, together herein also called the Intervenor, offered evi-
dence relating to property-right disputes between the Intervenor and
the Petitioner. As the Board does not purport to pass upon the prop-
erty rights of any parties appearing before it , the hearing officer prop-
erly excluded all such evidence 2
The Intervenor also moved to dismiss the petition on constitutional
grounds, and on the further ground that the aforesaid property right
dispute bars the Board from proceeding in this matter. The motion
is denied, as we find no merit in either of these contentions. We have
already held that constitutionality arguments will not impede Board
proceedings pending court decisions ; 3 that court litigation of property
rights bears no relationship to our investigation of questions concern-
ing representation of employees.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is a Division of the Sperry Corporation, a Dela-
ware corporation , and maintains its principal office and place of busi-
1 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 -member panel
[ Chairman Herzog, and Members Reynolds and Styles].
2 For the same reason, we hereby deny the motion to strike the entire testimony of Wil-
liam Brady , secretary of co-petitioner Local 450, International Union of Electrical, Radio
and Machine Workers, CIO , herein called Local 450-IUE. The Intervenor urged this mo-
tion because Brady refused , on advice of counsel, to answer questions concerning the disposi-
tion of property claimed by both Local 450-UE and Local 450 -IUE. All questions relating
to this property dispute were improper and should not have been allowed.
3 Rite Form Corset Company , 75 NLRB 174.
88 NLRB No. 181.
907
908 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ness in Great Neck, Long Island, New York, where it is engaged in the
manufacture of precision instruments. During the year preceding
the hearing, the Employer purchased raw materials, consisting prin-
cipally of steel, brass, and aluminum; valued in excess of $1,000,000, of
which approximately 90 percent was shipped to the Great Neck plant
from places outside the State of New York. During the same period,
it sold finished products valued at more than $1,000,000, of which
approximately 90 percent was shipped to points outside the State of
New York.
We find that the Employer is engaged in commerce within the mean-
ing of the National Labor Relations Act.
2. The labor organizations involved :
All parties agreed that both the International Petitioner-IUE-
CIO-and the parent Intervenor-UE-are labor organizations.
However, the copetitioners, IUE and Local 450-IUE, contend that
Local 450-UE is not a labor organization, and, conversely, the co-
intervenors, UE and Local 450-UE, dispute the status of Local 450-
IUE as a labor organization.
Local 450-IUE is composed of employees of the Employer who were
formerly members of Local 450-UE. On November 10, 1949, at a
membership meeting of Local 450-UE, an overwhelming majority of
employees present voted to disaffiliate from the UE and to seek affilia-
tion with the CIO. On November 14, this group received a charter
from the IUE ; under the name Local 450, International Union of
Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers, CIO, it then complied with
the filing requirements of the Act and filed the instant proceeding.
All its officers and the members of its Executive Board had held similar
positions in Local 450-UE.
Local 450-UE was chartered by the UE in November 1942 and has
represented employees of the Employer for the purposes of collective
bargaining since that date. Following the disaffiliation meeting of
November 10, 19497 it has continued to function through an organizing
committee consisting of approximately 15 members, which was
established to reorganize the plant.
The Intervenor's contention that Local 450-IUE is not a labor
organization is based upon alleged violations of the UE's constitutions
in the disaffiliation maneuvers leading to establishment of Local 450-
IUE. Thus, it asserts that the various meetings and referenda were
improperly conducted, and that employees loyal to the UE were un-
justly denied speech-making opportunities. But we do not deem these
matters relevant to the issues here presented. The Board has fre-
quently held that it will not concern itself with the internal regulations
of labor organizations. It suffices for the purposes of this proceeding
SPERRY GYROSCOPE COMPANY 909
that both Local 450-IUE and Local 450-UE are organizations admit-
ting employees to membership and existing for the purpose of dealing
with the Employer on matters relating to wages and other working
conditions 4 Accordingly, we find, contrary to the conflicting conten-
tions of the parties, that International Union of Electrical, Radio and
Machine Workers, CIO, and its affiliate, Local 450, as well as United
Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America, and its affiliate,
Local 450, are labor organizations claiming to represent certain
employees of the Employer.
3. The question concerning representation :
The Intervenor contends that two collective bargaining agreements
now in effect between the Employer and the Intervenor constitute a
bar to this proceeding. By their terms, these concurrent contracts,
,each covering a separate unit of employees, are to remain in effect until
April 14, 1950, and from year to year thereafter unless either party
gives written notice of desire to terminate or modify the agreement
30 days before April 14, 1950, or any anniversary thereof.
Although the Intervenor was never authorized, as provided in Sec-
tion S (a) (3) of the Act, to incorporate union-security provisions in
its contracts, each of these agreements contain clauses making member-
ship in the Intervenor a condition of employment 5 Each contract also
provides that the union-shop provision "shall be effective only to
the extent permitted by law." It is clear, under now well-established
principles, that as the contracts contain unauthorized union-security
clauses, they are unlawful.' Nor is this imperfection cured by the
purported saving clause set'forth above; or, as we have already held,
such a general severability clause does not defer application of the
union-shop provision.7 In view of these provisions in the contracts,
and further as they will expiie in about 6 weeks, we find that they do
not bar the instant proceedings.
We find therefore that a question affecting commerce exists concern-
ing the representation of employees of the Employer within the mean-
ing of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The appropriate unit :
The Petitioner and the Employer agree on the composition of two
separate bargaining units, one embracing salaried employees and the
other hourly paid production and maintenance employees. Except for
General Motors Corporation , 88 NLRB 450. See, also, DeMays ' Inc., 81 NLRB 1374.
In each contract the union membership clause reads as follows :
All present employees of the Employer and those who in the future enter the bargain-
ing unit who have completed their respective probationary periods shall be and remain
members of the union in good standing as a term and condition of employment.
C. Hager. & Sons Hinge Manufacturing Co., 80 NLRB 163.
Unique Art Manufacturing Co., 83 NLRB 1250.
910 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
the placement of stationary engineers and the exclusion of guards, dis-
cussed below, these units conform with those described in past contracts
between the Employer and the Intervenor, including the agreements
expiring on April 14, 1950. The Intervenor does not object to this
proposed continuation of the existing units, although it took no affirma-
tive position in this regard .8
In view of the stipulation between the Employer and the Petitioner
respecting the bargaining units, the Intervenor's apparent acquiescence
therein, and the established pattern in the collective bargaining history
of the employees here involved, we see no reason for disturbing the
present unit arrangements which the Petitioner seeks to continue in
these proceedings. We shall also include in the salaried employees'
unit, in accordance with the agreement of the parties, the stationary
engineers, who are salaried employees and whose interests are closely
related to those of other employees in the unit. On this point, we have
considered the fact that since October 1949 the Employer has recog-
nized the Intervenor as the bargaining representative of these engi-
neers and has included them in the salaried employees unit, and that
no other labor organization seeks to represent them in a separate bar-
gaining unit.°
Accordingly, we find that the following groups of employees con-
stitute separate units appropriate for the purpose of collective bar-
gaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act :
1. All Class II salaried employees in the Production Control Depart-
ment at the Employer's Great Neck, Long Island, New York, plant
classified as expediter, follow-up man, dispatcher-machine and assem-
bly, coverage analyst, coverage clerk, traffic rate clerk, posting clerk,
stenographer-secretarial, stenographer, typist, addressograph opera-
tor, messenger; all timekeepers, timekeepers foundry, senior labora-
tory technicians, fire guards, and stationary engineers, excluding em-
ployees classified as chief clerk, assistant store supervisor, secretaries
assigned to the production control manager, production control mana-
ger's administrative assistant, the foundry production control super-
intendent, all in the production control department, and all assistant
timekeeping supervisors, timekeeping supervisors, chief timekeepers,
a As a further ground for urging dismissal of the petition on the contract bar basis, the
Intervenor argues that exclusion of guards from the proposed units would deprive them of
contract rights which they now enjoy . However, it does not dispute the clear evidence in
the record showing that they are "guards " within the meaning of Section 9 ( b) of the
Amended Act and are therefore properly excluded from the units hereinafter found
appropriate.
9 The salaried employee unit also includes fire guards , as distinguished from guards who
are excluded . As the record shows that fire guards devote over 90 percent of their time
to fire protection duties and only a small portion enforcing rules protecting the company's
property against employees and other persons, we shall not disturb the parties ' stipulation
to continue them in the unit in which they have heretofore been represented.
SPERRY GYROSCOPE COMPANY -911
engineering technicians, guards and watchmen, and all supervisors as
defined in the Act.
2. All hourly paid production and maintenance employees at the
Employer's Great Neck, Long Island, New York, plant, including
porters, elevator operators, internal transportation employees, outside
chauffeurs and helpers, stock clerks, food service employees; hourly
paid employees in the Production Control Department, leadmen and
instructors, die casting machine operators, and die casting cleaners,
but excluding executives, superintendents, engineers, office and cleri-
cal employees, draftsmen, methods-men, foremen, assistant foremen,
section foremen, subforemen, salaried employees in the Production
Control Department, timekeeper leaders, pattern makers, pattern-
maker apprentices, foundry employees consisting of molders, coke
makers, furnace men, coke maker and molder apprentices and helpers,
sand casting cleaners, foundry laborers, machine molders, machine
molder apprentices, pourers, sand muller operators and shake-out men,
all electricians, electrician leaders and electrician apprentices, elevator
maintenance men and their helpers, timekeepers, guards, plant protec-
tion foremen, fire wardens, junior flight mechanics, flight mechanics,
senior flight mechanics, junior aircraft mechanics, aircraft mechanics,
senior aircraft mechanics, ground service men, crew chiefs, pilots, and
all professional employees and supervisors as defined in the Act.
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS 10
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the
purposes of collective bargaining with the Employer, separate elec-
tions 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, among the employees in
the units found appropriate in paragraph numbered 4, above, who were
employed during the payroll period immediately preceding the date
of this Direction of Elections, including employees who did not work
during said payroll 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 rein-
30 Local 450-UE is not in compliance with the filing requirements of Section 9 (f), (g),
and (h) of the Act. The UE is in full compliance and stated at the hearing that its Local
450 would comply if an election was ordered by the Board. Therefore, unless Local 450-UE
effects compliance with the filing requirements within 2 weeks from the date of this Direc-
tion, the Regional Director is instructed to remove both Local 450-UE and its parent, the
UE, from the ballot in the elections directed herein.
Any participant in the proceeding herein may , upon its prompt request to , and approval
thereof by , the Regional Director , have its name removed from the ballot.
912 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
stated prior to the date of the elections , and also excluding employees
on strike who are not entitled to reinstatement, to determine whether
they desire to be represented, for purposes of collective bargaining,
by International Union of Electrical , Radio and Machine Workers,
CIO, and Local 450 , International Union of Electrical , Radio and
Machine Workers, CIO, or by United Electrical , Radio and Machine
Workers of America and Local 450 , United Electrical , Radio and
Machine Workers' of America, or by neither.