Westinghouse Electric Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 24, 1962

137 N.L.R.B. 332 (N.L.R.B. 1962)

332 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
volume of business or available jobs is entirely beyond Respondent's control. Ac-
cordingly, it is recommended that Respondent make reasonable and businesslike
efforts to restore its wholesale shirt operations to substantially the same scope and
volume as prevailed prior to February 23, 1961.
With due regard to the experience and qualifications of the employees named in the
complaint who have not been offered reinstatement, it is recommended that Respond-
ent offer these employees reinstatement to their former or substantially equivalent
jobs, as available, without prejudice to any rights or privileges previously enjoyed.
In the event that there are not sufficient job openings for the said employees, it is
recommended that Respondent create a preferential hiring list, notify the Union
and the employees of such list, and offer to said employees on the list reinstatement
to their former or substantially equivalent jobs, as such are available, without preju-
dice to their rights and privileges previously enjoyed.
With respect to those employees named in the complaint to whom Respondent
has offered or does offer reinstatement to their former or substantially equivalent
jobs, it is recommended that Respondent make them whole for any loss of pay
suffered by reason of the discrimination against them. The employees' net earnings
during the period from the date of their discharge to the date of the offer of rein-
statement shall be deducted from gross backpay in -a manner consistent with Board
policy.44
As to those employees named in the complaint for whom, during the 12-month
period commencing from the date of this report, no job openings are available in
Respondent's employ that are the same or substantially equivalent to their former
jobs, with due regard for reasonable standards of qualification, and who have there-
fore not been offered reinstatement, it is recommended that they be made whole for
any loss of pay suffered by reason of the discrimination against them by paying to
each of them a sum of money equal to the amount she would normally have earned
as wages from the date of the original discharge on February 23 or 24, 1961, until
such time as each secures, or did secure, substantially equivalent employment with
other employers 45
In the event that the Board adopts the foregoing recommendations or in the event
that Respondent undertakes compliance with these recommendations initially, it is
recommended that the Board expressly reserve right to modify the backpay and rein-
statement provisions if made necessary by a change of conditions in the future, and
to make such supplements thereto as may hereafter become necessary in order to
define or clarify their application to a specific set of circumstances not now apparent.
Since the Union represented and represents a majority of the employees in an
appropriate unit that was not confined to employees who were terminated in Febru-
ary 1961 and since any effect that the terminations may have had upon the Union's
strength was due to the illegal conduct of Respondent, it is recommended that Re-
spondent bargain with the Union upon request.46
[Recommendations omitted from publication.]
"F. W. Woolworth Company, 90 NLRB 289.
'6Bonnie Lass Knitting Mills, Inc., 120 NLRB 1390; The R. C. Mahon Company, 118
NLRB 1537; Steward Hog Ring Company, Inc., 131 NLRB 310; St. Cloud Foundry &
Machine Company, Inc., 130 NLRB 911.
10 Frank Bros. Company v. N.L.R.B., 321 U.S. 702 ; N.L.R.B. v. Philamon Laboratories,
Inc., 298 F. 2d 170 (C.A. 2).
Westinghouse Electric Corporation (Naval Reactors Facility) I
and Eastern Idaho Metal Trades Council, AFL-CIO, Peti-
tioner. Cases Not. 19-11C-2956 and 19-RC-2957. May 24, 1962
DECISION AND ORDER
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9(c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a hearing was held before Orville W. Turnbaugh, hear-
1 The name of the Employer appears as amended at the hearing.
137 NLRB No. 30.
WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION, ETC. 333
ing officer. 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 Act, the Board
has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-
member panel [Chairman McCulloch and Members Rodgers and
Fanning].
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the Act.
2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain em-
ployees of the Employer.
3. No question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section
9(c) (1) and Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act, for the following
reasons:
The Naval Reactors Facility (NRF) is one of a number of facilities
at the National Reactor Testing Station (NRTS), which is located
about 60 miles west of Idaho Falls, Idaho. NRTS was established in
1949 to test and operate various types of nuclear reactors as part of
a basic Reactor Development Program of the Atomic Energy Com-
mission (AEC). NRF is the only facility of NRTS operated by the
Employer. The entire operation of NRF is enclosed in one area,
approximately 60 acres. On this site are located the following in-
stallations: Expended Core Facility (ECF), A1W, S1W, Admin-
istration Services (A/S), Testing Services (T/S), and Plant Services
(P/S), and various "support buildings," with which we are not con-
cerned herein. Each installation has its headquarters in a separate
building.
Along with some supporting facilities, S1W was started in 1952,
and was then a basic prototype propulsion plant for the submarine
Nautilus. The venture was successful, and was converted into a
flexible test and training facility. It is now used primarily for car-
rying out various test programs to gain technical information that
will assist in developing new equipment for both submarines and sur-
face ships, and for certain commercial reactor projects. An ancillary
function of S1W is to train Navy personnel in the operation and
maintenance of the reactor propulsion plants which are constructed
and experimented with there.
In 1957, A1W was constructed, and was set up as the prototype
propulsion plant to the aircraft carrier Enterprise and the missile
cruiser Long Beach. The basic functions of A1W and S1W today
are the same.
In 1958, the ECF was added. It is basically a large laboratory,
and is devoted to the study and analysis of expended reactor cores
from the Naval Reactor Proram, the conducting of various test pro-2D
334 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
grams involving structural materials, fuel materials, and planning
materials (loop experiments), the interim examination of prototype
fuels from S1W and A1W, and the training of Navy personnel. As
will be pointed out below, some of the functions which are an integral
part of ECF's experiments are carried on in the A1W or S1W areas.
The service groups which operate to assist ECF, A1W, and S1W
technicians are A/S, P/S, and T/S. The A/S services are industrial
relations, accounting, purchasing, warehousing, budgeting, etc. P/S
provides installation and maintenance work, as well as janitorial serv-
ices. T/S provides services in the following categories : industrial
hygiene, quality control and safety, inspection, drafting, plant chem-
istry, instrumentation, and training support.
A single site manager is responsible for the overall operations of
NRF. NRF cannot in any sense be called a "plant," for it produces
no product in the usual sense. NRF is one big scientific laboratory for
the development and simulation of scientific problems, and the analy-
sis and discovery of answers to those problems.
In Case No. 19-RC-2956, the Petitioner seeks a unit of "all em-
ployees employed by Westinghouse (Naval Reactor Test Facility)
who work in or out of the Expended Core Facility including em-
ployees classified by the Company as technician `B' radio chemistry,
technician `B' hot cell, technician `B' fuel handling, technician `A' op-
erations, technician `A' radio chemistry, technician `A' hot cell, tech-
nician `A' fuel handling, instrumentation specialist, and technical
specialist (a total of 49 employees), but excluding all office clerical
employees, supervisory and professional employees, and guards as de-
fined in the Act, and all other employees." 2
In Case No. 19-RC-2957, the Petitioner seeks a unit of "all em-
ployees classified as inspectors (a total of 8) excluding all office cleri-
cal employees, technicians, guards, supervisors, and professional
employees as defined in the Act, and all other employees." As
an alternative, Petitioner stated it would have no objection to
a unit combining the above referred to technical classifications and
inspectors.
The Employer contends that its total operations at NRF are so
thoroughly integrated and interdependent that the ECF does not
constitute a functionally distinct or homogeneous group of employees.
It further contends that the only appropriate unit is one which en-
compasses all its technical employees, a total of 127, of which the
units sought by Petitioner are only a segment. It urges that, in
addition to the employees sought by Petitioner, the unit to be appro-
priate must also include : the photographer and master photographer
at A/S, the technical specialist at P/S, the eight technicians "A"
operations and five technicians "A" reactor test at A1W, the tech-
2 This unit description is in conformity with the unit description urged by the Peti-
tioner, as amended just prior to the close of the hearing
WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION, ETC. 335
nician "B" operations, seven technicians "A" operations, technician
"A" reactor test, and the technical specialist at S1W, and the tech-
nician "B" chemistry, five technicians "B" industrial hygiene, drafts-
man "B," seven technicians "A" chemistry, fifteen technicians "A"
instrumentation, seven draftsmen "A," seven technicians "A" indus-
trial hygiene, eight inspectors "A," and the instrumentation specialist
at T/S.
There are three technical specialists employed it NRF-one each
assigned to ECF, P/S, and S1W. All three perform similar func-
tions within the processes of the section in which they are working
at any given time. Their job consists of preparing sketches and draw-
ings for panel layouts of mechanical and/or electrical apparatus, and
devising testing methods and interpreting data. Each is responsible
for organizing technicians into concerted plans of action for accom-
plishing test objectives, and consulting with and advising technicians
(e.g., hot cell, operations, and fuel handling technicians) in their
testing procedures. They also coordinate the efforts of the drafting
department. Petitioner would include only the technical specialist
working in ECF.
Petitioner would exclude the operations technicians assigned to
A1W and S1W. The technicians "A" are required to know the work-
ings and operation of all the equipment in the facility to which as-
signed, and their job is to instruct trainees in operation techniques,
to report unsafe conditions, and to recommend corrective mainte-
nance. Technicians "B" perform the actual operational jobs for the
most part. Although required to be "experts" in their own facility
only, the record shows that these technicians also work as industrial
hygiene technicians and as chemistry technicians when they are needed
and are therefore sometimes assigned to other facilities. They also
work, on occasion, as inspectors. The basic job functions of these
technicians is the same at ECF, A1W, and S1W 3
The chemistry technicians, "A" and "B," are assigned to the T/S
facility. The function of T/S is to supply ECF, A1W, and S1W with
the many and varied types of technical services which they need, at
the time they are needed. The nature of the services is such that
it would be impracticable to have employees in each of the classifica-
tions in T/S assigned permanently to ECF, A1W, or S1W. The
chemistry technicians perform analyses of water samples, test gross
radioactivity, conductivity, chemical composition of materials used
in the various facilities, etc. They work with other technicians or
with engineers in performing numerous nonrepetitive chemical analy-
ses. They may be assigned for periods of time to a particular facil-
ity-usually to A1W or S1W. However, on some occasions they are
assigned to work at ECF. Petitioner would exclude these employees.
$ The designation of technicians as "A" technicians means those employees have com-
pleted their on-the-job training. "B" technicians are still "apprentices"
336 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Another group of technicians assigned to T/S is the industrial hy-
giene technicians. Their main function is to check on contamination
levels in the different facilities, and to prescribe interim correction
of hazardous conditions, and the proper repair of defective equip-
ment. In carrying out this function, these technicians work along-
side the various technicians in ECF, A1W, and S1W, observing and
instructing them as to proper safety techniques. Their presence is
an absolute necessity at all stages of some functions of these facilities.
Petitioner seeks to exclude these employees.
Although all hot cell technicians and fuel handling technicians are
assigned to ECF, the fuel handlers spend 90 percent of their time
in S1W, and, in order to carry out some programs or experiments,
some hot cell technicians spend from 3 to 4 weeks at a time, about
four times a year, working in S1W. The hot cell technicians conduct
experiments in hot cell chambers built to withstand heat, pressures,
and radiation. Their manipulations are by way of "master-slave"
remote control instruments. Fuel handlers install, operate, adjust,
dismantle, inspect, and test expended reactor components and shield-
ing devices by use of remotely operated underwater tools and
equipment.
There is one instrumentation specialist assigned to ECF, and one
assigned to T/S. Petitioner would include only the former. Their
jobs are basically the same: to provide direct technical assistance to
lower classified technicians in their departments, and to coordinate the
overlapping technical functions of engineers and lower technicians.
They must know thoroughly the job of the instrumentation techni-
cians, whose job it is to analyze circuits, determine their theory of
operation, and instruct others in operating and maintaining them.
The Petitioner would also exclude all instrumentation technicians,
since all are assigned to T/S. But these employees often work along
with the technicians in ECF, and one was assigned permanently to
ECF until recently.
Reactor mechanical maintenance technicians are assigned to ECF
and the Petitioner seeks to include them. However, they spend only
10 percent of their time in ECF, during which time they work as hot
cell technicians or as water pit technicians (part of fuel handling).
The remainder of their time is spent at A1W or S1W, where they per-
form fuel handling functions.
The photographer and master photographer are both assigned to
A/S, but perform their work in ECF, S1W, and A1W, where their
work requires the assistance of technicians in these facilities. Their
function is to take photos of equipment and of testing results in the
hot cells and water pits. Their basic job activity is that of a typical
photographer. Petitioner would exclude them.
The draftsmen are assigned to T/S, but their time is equally divided
between ECF, S1W, and A1W. Basically, they perform normal draft-
THE DAYTON POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY 337
ing duties-making layout and design drawings for mechanical, struc-
tural, and electrical equipment. It is necessary that they work along
with the inspectors at times in the process of inspecting structures
and electrical circuits and comparing them with the blueprints.
Petitioner would exclude them.
Petitioner seeks a separate unit of inspectors, all of whom are as-
signed to T/S. They are required to know the intricacies of all me-
chanical apparatus and some of the less intricate electrical apparatus.
It is their job to inspect this apparatus, diagnose errors and flaws, and
recommend corrective action. They must know thoroughly the job
of the industrial hygiene technicians and sometimes take their places.
As mentioned above, operations technicians sometimes work as in-
spectors. Their work takes them into ECF, S1W, and A1W.
The technical functions of NRF are thoroughly integrated and
interdependent, and all the employees spoken of above must be taken
together as constituting an appropriate unit. The interests and skills
of all those employees are quite similar. With the possible exception
of the photographers, all are technical employees within the meaning
of the Act. All are salaried, are on the same payroll, are subject to
the same personnel policies, are under the same progression program,
have common facilities for eating, receive the same training course in
criticality, and have identical employee benefits. Petitioner seeks
arbitrary and artificial groups of these employees. The units peti-
tioned for do not constitute functionally distinct or homogeneous
groups of employees, nor administrative or departmental units, such
as the Board might recognize 3
In view of the foregoing facts, and the entire record, the Board con-
cludes that neither of the two separate units petitioned for, nor the
proposed alternative unit, is appropriate. Hence, the petitions herein
must be dismissed.
[The Board dismissed the petitions.]
3 The result herein is consistent with the rule set forth in The Sheffield Corporation,
134 NLRB 1101
The Dayton Power and Light Company and Local 175 , Utility
Workers Union of America , AFL-CIO.' Case No. 9-R-1069.
May 24, 1962
ORDER DENYING MOTION
On July 7, 1943, following an election pursuant to an agreement for
consent election, Local 175 was certified as the collective-bargaining
' This is the present name of the Union Its name at the time it was certified in 1943
was Local 175, Utility Workers Organizing Committee. C 10 _\ motion to change the
records in this case to reflect the new name of the Union was granted at the hearing
The Union is hereinafter referred to as Local 175
137 NLRB No. 29
649856-63-vol. 13 7-2 3