White Mountain Power Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 29, 1949

85 N.L.R.B. 962 (N.L.R.B. 1949)

In the Matter Of WHITE MOUNTAIN POWER COMPANY, EMPLOYER and
INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD Or ELECTRICAL WORKERS, AFL, PETI-
TIONER
Case No. 1-RC-1027.-Decided August 29, 1949
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before Thomas H.
Ramsey, hearing officer of the National Labor Relations Board. 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 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 Gray].
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board fuids :
1. The business of the Employer :
The Employer, a_ New Hampshire corporation, with its principal
place of business at Meredith, New Hampshire, is engaged within the
State in generating and distributing electric energy, and selling elec-
trical appliances to customers located entirely within the State of
New Hampshire. It annually purchases from sources outside the State,
between $60,000 and $100,000 worth of replacement parts for its equip-
ment, and about $12,000 worth of electrical appliances for sale locally.
The Employer purchases about 93 percent of the energy it distributes
from the Public Service Company of New Hampshire,2 and sells it to
home owners, resort hotels, recreational facilities such as the Eastern
Slope and Cranmore Skimobiles, and a few manufacturing concerns.
The Employer's gross revenue in 1948 was approximately $500,000.
' The Employer moved to dismiss the petition upon the grounds that: ( 1) its business
will shortly be sold, and (2 ) the Petitioner , by failing to attend an informal conference at
the Board ' s Regional Office, disclaimed any interest in this proceeding . The motion is
hereby denied: first , for the reasons given in paragraph 3, below ; second , because the
Petitioner appeared at the hearing and offered testimony , thus definitely evincing an interest
in this proceeding.
2 The Board has asserted jurisdiction over the Public Service Company of New Hamp-
shire. See Matter of Public Service Company of New Hampshire , 52 N. L. R. B. 874,
and 996.
85 N. L. R. B., No. 170.
962
WHITE MOUNTAIN POWER COMPANY 963
From the nature and scope of the Employer's public utility busi-
ness, we find, contrary to the Employer's contention, that its operations
affect commerce within the meaning of the Act, and that it will effec-
tuate the policies of the Act to assert jurisdiction in this case.'
2. The Petitioner is a labor organization claiming to represent em-
ployees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the represen-
tation of employees of the Employer, within the meaning of Section
9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
The Employer urges that the petition be dismissed because on May
24, 1949, it signed a contract to sell its business to the New Hampshire
Electric Cooperative, Inc. The purchaser, financed by the Rural Elec-
trification Administration, will assume control if and when the Pub-
lic Service Commission of the State of New Hampshire approves the
contract of sale. At the time of the hearing in this case, the Em-
ployer's petition requesting such approval had not been filed with the
Commission. If the Commission's approval is given, and the sale
consummated, the operation of the utility will continue as at present,
except for a change in officers and directors. In view of these facts,
we perceive no reason why the employees should presently be denied
the opportunity to select a bargaining representative to represent
their interests with the Employer or any contemplated successor.4
4. The appropriate unit :
The Petitioner seeks to represent a unit consisting of all linemen and
ground men, excluding executives, office and clerical employees, full-
time meter readers, professional employees, watchmen, and super-
visors. The Petitioner would also exclude two district representatives
whom the Employer would include in the unit.
Each district representative lives and works in a separate, outlying
area not easily accessible to the Employer's line crews. Each is a
former lineman of more than average skill, who is trusted to work
without immediate supervision. He spends 75 percent of his time
doing the work of an ordinary lineman, and the rest in reading meters
and transmitting collections front customers to the main office. He
receives a slightly higher hourly rate than a lineman. He has the
same vacation rights, works the same number of hours, and enjoys
insurance and other benefits of linemen. In view of the foregoing
facts, we shall include the district representatives in the unit.
3 Matter of Illinois Electric R Gas Company , 82 N. L . R. B. 1420; Matter of Lynchburg
Gas Company, 80 N. L . R. B. 1237. Cf . Matter of Platte-Clay Electric Cooperative, Inc.,
83 N. L. R . B. 863 , where the Board decided not to assert jurisdiction over a small
utility cooperative whose sales of electricity , amounting to only $136 , 000 per year, were
made entirely to small farms.
4 Cf. Matter of The Northwest Glove Co., Inc., 74 N. L. R. B. 1697; Matter of South
Carolina Granite Company , 58 N. L . R. B. 1448, enf ' d 152 F . 2d 25 ( C. A. 4).
857829-50-vol. 85-62
964 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Accordingly, we find that all linemen and ground men, employed by
White Mountain Power Company, Meredith, New Hampshire, in-
cluding district representatives, but excluding executives, office and
clerical employees, full-time meter readers, professional employees,
watchmen, guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act, constitute a
unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the
meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining with the Employer, an election by se-
cret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than
30 days from the date of this Direction, under the direction and super-
vision 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
unit found appropriate in paragraph numbered 4, above, who were
employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date
of this Direction of Election, including employees who did not work
during said pay-roll 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-
stated prior to the date of the election, and also excluding employees
on strike who are not entitled to reinstatement, to determine whether
or not they desire to be represented, for purposes of collective bar-
gaining, by International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL.