Astronautics Corp. of America

National Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsMay 16, 1974

210 N.L.R.B. 650 (N.L.R.B. 1974)

650 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Astronautics Corporation of America and Interna- tional Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO-CLC, Petitioner. Cases 30-RC-2170 and 30-RC-2171 May 16, 1974 DECISION AND ORDER BY MEMBERS JENKINS, KENNEDY, AND PENELLO Upon petitions duly filed under Section 9(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, a hearing was held before Hearing Officer Cecil Sutphen. Following the hearing and pursuant to Section 102.67 of the National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations, Series 8 , as amended, this proceeding was transferred to the Board for decision. The Employer and the Petitioner filed briefs. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor Relations Board has delegated its authority in this proceeding to a three-member panel. The Board has reviewed the Hearing Officer's rulings made at the hearing and finds that they are free from prejudicial error. They are hereby affirmed. Upon the entire record 1 in this proceeding, the Board finds: 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. 2. The Petitioner is a labor organization claiming to represent certain employees of the Employer. 3. No question affecting commerce exists con- cerning the representation of certain 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 Employer is engaged in the manufacture and sale of electrical aircraft instruments at three plants, all located in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, within a 2- block radius. It has a quality assurance and reliabili- ty department which is responsible for the testing of materials received from suppliers and of products manufactured by it. This department is subdivided into three separately supervised sections: quality engineering, reliability/maintainability, and inspec- tion. Essentially, the Petitioner is seeking a single i In view of our disposition of the proceeding , we find it unnecessary to rule on the Employer's motion to reopen the record 2 On October 10, 1973, the Petitioner filed the instant petitions seeking separate units of in-process inspectors and "receiving inspection department employees ." Although the Petitioner has not explicated the bases for such separate units, at the hearing it took an "alternate" position that all employees in the inspection section constitute an appropriate unit of technical employees 3 See Decision and Direction of Election (not printed in NLRB volumes) issued by the Regional Director on September 28, 1973, which also unit of all technical employees in the inspection section; 2 and in its brief, the Petitioner has also indicated a desire to represent all technical employ- ees in the three sections of the quality assurance and reliability department if the Board found such unit appropriate. The Employer contends that the only appropriate unit of technical employees should comprise all such employees, including those em- ployed in other departments. The 14 employees in the inspection section are classified as quality assurance specialist , final inspec- tion coordinator, electrical technician , precision mechanical inspector, precision electrical inspector, senior test inspector, test inspector, mechanical receiving inspector (2 employees ), electrical receiving inspector, in-process inspector (3 employees), and in- process inspector lead person . All of them were recently found to be technical employees and were excluded from the production and maintenance unit of the Employer's employees found appropriate in Case 30-RC-2099.3 We agree with the foregoing determination that the employees in the inspection section are technical employees. The record herein4 makes clear that all of these employees possess the requisite minimum education and/or job training required in their use of mechanical and electrical testing equipment, exercise independent judgment in performing their respective job functions, and do not share an identifiable community of interest with the production employees.5 The record further shows that there are 13 additional technical employees in the two other sections of the quality assurance and reliability department who perform more complex tests of materials and products than the employees in the inspection section. In the quality engineering section, there are two employees classified as quality assur- ance specialist, one as a training specialist, and one as an associate engineer ; 6 in the reliability/maintain- ability section there are nine employees, one each classified as associate engineer, calibrating engineer, quality assurance coordinator , senior test technician, environmental test technician, and mechanical tech- nician,7 and three as test technician I. Thus, a total of 27 technicians are employed in the quality assurance and reliability department. However, an undisclosed number of additional technical employees are also employed in the material, engineering , and civil specifically excluded all employees in the quality assurance and reliability department 4 The record in the instant proceeding incorporates the record in Case 30-RC-2099, as agreed upon by the parties. 5 The Armstrong Rubber Company, Pacific Coast Division, 144 NLRB 1115,1118; Robbins & Myers, Inc, 144 NLRB 295, 296-297. 6 There are two quality assurance engineers in this section whom the parties consider as professional employees. r There is also a stenographer -secretary in this section whom the parties consider as an office clerical employee 210 NLRB No. 100 ASTRONAUTICS CORP. OF AMERICA 651 aviation departments, who are not being sought for ed by the Petitioner is inappropriate, and we shall representation by the Petitioner. dismiss the petitions. Under similar circumstances, the Board has held that a unit of technical employees is inappropriate ORDER where it does not include all employees in that category.8 Accordingly, we find that the unit request- It is hereby ordered that the petitions filed herein be, and they hereby are, dismissed. 9 The Bendix Corporation, Kansas City Division, 150 NLRB 718, 721.