Western Union Telegraph Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 8, 1941

31 N.L.R.B. 653 (N.L.R.B. 1941)

In the Matter Of WESTERN' UNION TELEGRAPH COMPANY and COM-,
MERCIAL TELEGRAPHERS UNION, LOCAL 48, A. F. L.
Case No. R-2150.Decided May 8, 1941
Jurisdiction : telegraph industry.
Practice and Procedure : petition dismissed where no appropriate unit within
the, scope of the petition.
Mr. M. T. Cook, Mr. W. L. Glasheen, Mr. L. M. Messner, and
Mr. C. J. Eldridge, of San Francisco, Calif., Mr. J. W. Inwood, of
Los Angeles, Calif., and Mr. Ralph H. Kimball, of New York City,
for the Company.
Mr. A. H. Petersen, of Los Angeles, Calif., Mr. George R. Graint,
of North Hollywood, Calif., Miss Anne L. Walker, and Miss V.
Dorothy Weimaan, of Los Angeles, Calif., Mr. -Hugh C. McKenney,
of Washington, D. C., and Mr. Frank Powers, of Chicago, Ill., for
the C. T. U.
Mr. Paul G. Henderson and Mr. J. B. Williams, of Los Angeles,
Calif., and Mr. Roland L. Hansen, of Glendale, Calif., for the
Independent.
Mr. Gene Gaillac and Mr. E. E. Hediger, of Los Angeles, Calif.,
and Mr. Lawson, Wimberly, of Washington, D. C., for the I. B. E. W.
Mr. Harry A. Kaplan and Mr. Bruce Risley, of Los Angeles, Calif.,
Boudin, Cohn e€ Glickstein, by Mr. Sidney Elliott Cohn and Mr.
Victor Rabinowitz, of New York City; and Mr. J. P. Selly, of New
York City, for the A. C. A. '
Mr. N. Barr Miller, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND .
ORDER
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On September 19, 1940, Commercial Telegraphers Union, Local 48,
A. F. L., herein called the C. T. U., filed with the Regional Director
for the Twenty-first Region (Los Angeles, California) a petition
alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning
the representation of employees of Western Union Telegraph Com-
31 N. L R 13, No. 106.
653
654- DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
pany, Los Angeles, California, herein called the Company, and re-
questing an investigation and certification of representatives pursuant
to Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449,
herein called the Act. On November 2, 1940, "the National Labor
Relations, Board, herein called the Board, acting pursuant to Sec-
tion 9 (c) of the Act and Article III, Section 3, of the National
Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended,
ordered an investigation and authorized the Regional Director to
conduct it and to provide for an appropriate hearing upon. due
notice.
On November 7, 1940, the Regional Director issued a notice of
hearing, copies of which were duly served upon the Company, upon
the C. T. U., and upon United Communication Workers of America,
herein called the Independent, a labor organization claiming to
represent employees directly affected by the investigation. Pursuant.
to notice, a hearing was held on November 14, 1940, at Los Angeles,
California, before James A. Cobey, the Trial Examiner duly desig-
nated by the Chief Trial Examiner. - The Company, the C. T. U.,
and the Independent were represented and participated in the hear-
ing. The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, herein
called the I. B. E. W., entered a speci-,il appearance.' Full oppor-
tunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to
introduce evidence bearing upon the issues was afforded all parties.
At the outset of the hearing the Independent orally requested the
Board to establish as appropriate a bargaining unit consisting of
all the Company's employees in the Los Angeles metropolitan dis-
trict instead of a unit of traffic department employees as petitioned
for by the C. T. U. The C. T. U. objected to this request and to
the admission of evidence offered in support thereof on the ground
that the Independent had not filed a petition setting forth such unit
in compliance with the Board's Rules and Regulations. The Trial
Examiner ruled that evidence of the appropriateness of a larger
unit was admissible because it was relevant to a determination of
the appropriateness of the smaller unit petitioned for by the C. T. U.,
but reserved for consideration by the Board the question of whether
the unit requested by the Independent should be established as appro-
priate in the absence of a petition filed in accordance with the
Board's Rules and Regulations. The ruling of the Trial Examiner
admitting the evidence is affirmed. In view of our findings below,
we deem it unnecessary to rule on the effect of the failure of the
Independent to file a petition.'
1 All the' parties, including the I. B E. W., stipulated that they had received "due notice"
of this hearing.
2 Cf. Matter of Elliott Bay Lumber Company, Elliott Bay Hill Company and Plywood and
Veneer Workers Union, Local No 26, 8 N. L. R. B. 753, 754.
WESTERN UNION TELEGRAPH CO. 655
During the course of the hearing the Trial Examiner made sev-
eeral other rulings on motions and on objections to the admission of
evidence. The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial exami-
ner and finds that no prejudicial errors were committed. The rulings
are hereby affirmed.
On December 3, 1940, after the close of the hearing, American
Communications Association and American Communications Asso-
ciation, Local 32, both hereinafter called the A. C. A., filed,a motion
that the hearing in this proceeding be reopened and,that the A. C. A.
be permitted to intervene therein. On December 12, 1940, the Board
granted the motion of the A. C. A. and ordered that the record be
reopened and the A. C. A. permitted to intervene in the proceeding.3
On December 26, 1940, the I. B. E. W. filed with the Board a mo-
tion for leave to file a petition for investigation and certification of
representatives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the Act, for the plant
department employees in, the Western Division4 of the Company
which includes Los Angeles, and for consolidation of said petition
with the proceedings herein. The motion is hereby denied.,'
On January 16, 1941, the Regional Director issued a notice of
further hearing, copies of which were duly served upon the Company,
the C. T. U., the Independent, the I. B. E. W., and the A. C. A. A
further hearing was held on January 24, 1941, at Los Angeles, Cali-
fornia, before James A. Cobey, the Trial Examiner duly designated
by the Chief Trial Examiner. All parties were represented and par-
ticipated in the hearing and were afforded full opportunity to be
heard, to examine aiid cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evi-
dence bearing upon the issues. During the course of -the further
hearing, the Trial Examiner made several rulings on motions and on
objections to the admission of evidence. The Board has reviewed the
rulings of the Trial Examiner and finds that no prejudicial errors
were committed. The rulings are hereby affirmed.
On February 18, 1941, upon request of the C. T. U. and pursuant
to notice duly served upon all the parties, a,hearing for the purpose
of oral 'argument was held before the Board in Washington, D. C.
The Company, the C. T. U., the I. B. E. W., and the A. C. A. ap-
peared and participated in the hearing.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
3 On December 19, 1940, the Independent filed a memorandum in response to the motion
of-the A C. A. requesting that the Board deny said motion.
The Western Division referred to in the I B. E W. motion is designated by the Company
as its Pacific Division
5 A petition of the I. B. E. W for investigation and certification of representatives of
plant department employees in the Pacific Division, filed in the Twentieth Region (San
Francisco, California), is under investigation by the Boaid.
e
I
656 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Western Union Telegraph Company is a corporation organized
and existing, pursuant to the laws of the State of New York. Its
principal office is located at 'New York City. It is engaged through-
out the United States and in various foreign countries in the re-
ceiving and transmission by` telegraph and cable of intrastate,
interstate, and international communications. In the United States
it maintains a vast system of wire network for the' purpose of
receiving and transmitting communications. In addition to its corrt-
munication system in the United States, the respondent owns or
leases cables connecting directly or indirectly certain points in
foreign countries and in the United States. In operating its na-
tional and international communicating system, the respondent owned
or operated as of December f, 1939, 211,530 miles of pole lines, 4,070
miles of land line cable, 1,876,867 miles'of wire, 30,324 nautical miles
of ocean cable, and 19,543 telegraph offices, not including 16,208
telegraph-agency stations. ,
At the close of 1939 the respondent employed 44,299 persons. In
the Los 'Angeles metropolitan area there were employed, at the time
of the first hearing herein, 1;115 persons.
The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
II. THE LABOR ORGANIZATIONS INYOLVED
Commercial Telegraphers Union, Local 48, A. , F. L., affiliated with
the American Federation of Labor, United Communication Workers
of America, unaffiliated, American Communications Association, and
American Communications Association, Local 32, affiliated,with the
Congress of Industrial Organizations,, and International Brother-
hood of Electrical Workers,-affiliated with the American Federation
of Labor, are labor organizations admitting to membership employees
of the Company in the Los Angeles metropolitan area.
III. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The C. T. U. in its petition requests the Board to find appropriate
a unit composed of all employees in the traffic department of the
Company in the Los Angeles metropolitan area. 'The Independent
and the A. C. A. contend that a unit consisting. of employees in
the traffic department only is inappropriate . At the hearing the
Independent requested that the Board - find appropriate a unit con-
WiESffERN UNION'- TELE'GR'APH Co. 657
sisting of all employees of the Company in, the Los Angeles metro-
politan area, that is, employees in the traffic, commercial, accounting,
,and plant departniiuents.6 The I. B. E. W. desires the exclusion of
plant-department employees from any unit established in the Los
Angeles metropolitan area.7 The Company, while favoring a single
Nation-wide -bargaining unit, admits, as contended by the C. T. U.
and the Independent, that its employees in Los Angeles should not
be denied the right of collective bargaining pending organization
of the employees on a Nation-wide basis.
,The Los Angeles metropolitan area constitutes a functional office
within the Pacific Division of the Company, which division is one
of eight territorial divisions in the operating structure of the Com-
pany. The business in the Los Angeles area is conducted through four
departments, namely : traffic, commercial, accounting, plant. Each de-
partment is in the charge of a superintendent who directs all the opera-
tions in his department and is responsible to the head of his re-
spective department in the Pacific Division. The head of each of the
four departments in the Pacific Division is in turn responsible-to a
vice president of the Company who coordinates all the operations of
that department throughout the United States.
In the Los Angeles metropolitan area, the traffic department, employ-
ing some 430 persons handles the transmission of all incoming and out-
going messages, tests and regulates' the wire service, and maintains
the equipment in the operating rooms. The commercial department,
with 586 employees, including 331 messengers, is responsible for the
acceptance of messages for transmission by the traffic department,
the delivery of all incoming messages received by the traffic depart-
ment, the making of rates, development of new business, and the
maintenance of public relations. In the branch offices, the com-
mercial department also is responsible for the sending of messages,
a function performed by employees of the traffic department in the
central- office. The accounting department, employing 44 persons,
handles the collection of fees for all messages and prepares statistical
'reports of revenue and disbursements. The 48 employees in the plant
department are responsible for- the construction and maintenance of
land lines, wires, and cables and also have charge of the installation
of offices-and equipment. Operations in the four departments are
iiiterdependent and closely integrated.
8 Prior to January 1, 1941, there were five departments in the Los Angeles metropolitan
area On that date the purchasing and stores department was transferred to the San
-Francisco office of 'the Company
7 As stated above , the I . B E. W. has filed ' with the Regional Office for the Twentieth
Region ( San Francisco , California ) a petition for investigation and certification as the
representative of all plant -department employees in nine western States, constituting the
Pacific Division of the Company.
658 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
The C. T. U., the Independent, and the A. C. A. each recognizes
that a metropolitan-wide unit in Los Angeles is more appropriate
for the purposes of collective bargaining than departmental units, and
each admits to membership substantially all employees of the Com-
pany in the Los Angeles metropolitan area.' The showings of mem-
berships in the labor organizations here involved, indicate that self-
organization has to some extent advanced beyond the traffic depart-
ment.9 Each of the organizations has already admitted to its mem-
bership some employees in the Los Angeles metropolitan area outside
the traffic department, and each indicated at the hearing that it is
engaged in, or expects to engage in, active efforts to organize the
employees of other departments at Los Angeles. Under these cir-
cumstances, we find that the employees of the traffic department in
the Los Angeles metropolitan area do not constitute a unit appropriate
for the purposes of collective bargaining.
The Independent, the only labor organization presently desiring
an election in the Los Angeles area in a unit larger than the traffic
department, has made no sufficient showing of representation of
employees in other departments than traffic to warrant holding an
election in a metropolitan-wide unit at this time. Therefore, we
'shall not consider in this proceeding the request of the Independent
for a bargaining unit-of all employees in the Los Angeles metropoli-
tan area.
IV. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On the basis of the above findings, we find that no, question has
arisen concerning the representation of employees of the Company
in the Los Angeles metropolitan area in a unit appropriate for the
purposes of collective bargaining. We shall accordingly order the
petition dismissed.
Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and upon the entire
record in the case, the Board makes the following :
CONCLUSION OF LAW
No question concerning representation of employees of Western
Union Telegraph Company, Los Angeles, California , in a unit which
8 The C T. U. stated at the hearing that in Los Angeles it had waived its claim to em-
ployees of the plant department in favor of the I B E W, which claims to be organizing
such employees throughout the Pacific Division of the Company. However, plant-depart-
ment empl8yees are eligible to membership in the C. T. U and the C T. U has included them
in metro poli tan-wide units in other cities '
9 The C T U. made no showing of the extent of its membership among employees in other
departments than traffic. The Independent submitted 109 authorization cards which, ac-
cording to the statements of the Regional Director and the Trial Examiner, appear to bear
original, genuine signatures of employees in other departments than traffic There are a
total of 685 employees in such departments The record does not disclose how many
members the I B E W has enlisted among employees in the plant department at Los
Angeles.
WESTERN UON TETiE 'GRAPH CO. 659
is appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining has arisen
within the meaning- of Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations
Act.
ORDER
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and conclusion
of law, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that the
petition for investigation and certification of representatives of
employees of Western Union Telegraph Company, Los Angeles,
California, filed by Commercial Telegraphers Union, Local `48,
A. F. L., be, and it hereby is, dismissed.
441843-42-vol. 31-43