Bendix Aviation Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsFeb 14, 1947

72 N.L.R.B. 642 (N.L.R.B. 1947)

In the Matter of ECLIPSE-PIONEER DIVISION : BENDIX AVIATION CoR- PORATION, EMPLOYER and BENDIx LOCAL UNION No. 153, UAW- CIO, AND INTERNATIONAL UNION, UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AIRCRAFT & AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT AVORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO, PETITIONER In the Matter of BENDix AVIATION CORPORATION (ECLIPSE-PIONEER DIVISION) and AIRCRAFT WORKERS' UNION OF NEW JERSEY, INCOR- PORATED (NoN-AFFIlAATED) and UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AIRCRAFT ^C AGRICULTURAL Ll1I'LEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA (UAW-CIO) Cases Nos. 2R-71344 and 2-RE-89, respectively.-Decided February 14, 194'7 Hughes, Hubbard cC Ewing, by Messrs. Curtis E. Frank and Marvin HGidt, of South Bend, Incl., for the Employer. Witt d Cammer, by Mr. Mortimer B. Wolf, of New York City, and Mr. Philip D. Carpenter, of Hasbrouck Heights, N. J., for Local No. 153. Mr. Charles Steiner, of Hackensack, N. J., for the Aircraft Workers. Miss Irene R. Shriber, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon separate petitions 1 duly filed, hearing in this case was held at New York City, on December 21, 1946, before James Paradise, hearing officer . The hearing officer 's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby ailirmed.2 1 These cases were consolidated by older of the Board on November 27. 1946 2 International Association of Machinists, herein called the IAM, and American Federa- tion of Labor, herein called the AF of L, were not served with notice and did not appear at the hearing After the hearing, the JAM and the AF of L each moved to intervene in this proceeding for the purpose of having their names placed on the ballot in the election hereinafter ordered In support of their motions, the JAM and the AF of L each submitted certain authorization cards purporting the bear the names of employees in the unit herein found appropriate Inasmuch as the cards, submitted by the JAM were all dated prior to the date of the hearing on the instant petition, the motion of the IAM to intervene is hereby granted The AF of L, on the other hand, submitted cards all of which are dated alter the hearing in this matter closed Inasmuch as the AF of L has not established that as of the time of the healing, it had a representative interest in the employees here invoked, we shall deny its motion to intervene. See Matter of United Boat Service, 55 N L 11 B,671- 72 N L. 11 B, No 122 642 BENDIX AVIATION CORPORATION 643 Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations Board makes the following : FINDINGS OF FACT 1. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER Bendix Aviation Corporation, a Delaware corporation with its principal office in South Bend, Indiana, operates through several divisions in various parts of the United States. This proceeding is concerned 'solely with the division known as the Eclipse-Pioneer Division at Teterboro, New Jersey. At this division, the Employer is engaged in the manufacture of aircraft instruments and accessories. During the past year, the Eclipse-Pioneer Division purchased in excess of $1,000,000 worth of raw materials, of which approximately 90 percent was obtained from sources outside the State of New Jersey. During the same period, the Employer shipped from this division in excess of $1,000,000 worth of finished products, of which 90 percent was forwarded to out-of-State destinations. The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. II. TIIE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED Bendix Local Union No. 153, UAW-CIO, herein called Local No. 153, and the International Union, United Automobile, Aircraft & Agricultural Implement Workers of America, herein called the Inter- national, are labor organizations affiliated with the Congress of Indus- trial Organizations, claiming to represent employees of the Employer. Aircraft Workers' Union of New Jersey, Incorporated, herein called the Aircraft Workers, is an unaffiliated labor organization, claiming to represent employees of the Employer. International Association of Machinists, herein called the IANI, is a labor organization affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, claiming to represent employees of the Employer., III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION Pursuant to a consent election on June 8, 1943, the Aircraft Workers were designated as the exclusive bargaining representative of the Employer's production and maintenance employees. On November 15, 1943, the Employer and the Aircraft Workers entered into a collec- tive bargaining agreement which continued in effect until January 28, 1946, when a new agreement was executed. The latter agreement terminated on January 28, 1947. On October 4, 1946, Local No. 153 filed its petition with the Board and on November 4, 1946, the Employer filed its petition herein. 644 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the representation of employees of the Employer, within the mean- ing of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT Local No. 153 contends that the appropriate unit should consist of all hourly paid employees including indentured apprentices, group leaders, inspectors, cafeteria employees, receiving and shipping em- ployees, toolroom employees and crib attendants, truckers, stock chasers, stock men and all other storeroom and stockroom employees, but excluding all office and clerical employees, employees of the sales, accounting, personnel and industrial relations departments, time- study men, plant-protection and fire patrol employees, all engineers, production, estimating and planning engineers, draftsmen, detailers, chemists, metallurgists, professional employees, timekeepers, cooper- ative students and professional employees in training; general fore- men, foremen, assistant foremen, and all other supervisory employees. The proposed unit is substantially similar to the unit established in the collective bargaining agreements which have existed between the Aircraft Workers and the Employer since 1943. The other parties are in general agreement with the propriety of this unit except that the Aircraft Workers now desires to include timekeepers and assistant foremen while the Employer would-exclude the cafeteria employees. The cafeteria workers : There are approximately 50 cafeteria em- ployees who prepare and serve food to the Employer's personnel. While they were excluded from the stipulated unit in the consent elec- tion which was held on June 8, 1943, they have been part of all con- tract negotiations which followed the election. The collective bar- gaining agreement which was executed on November 15, 1943, spe- cifically includes cafeteria workers within its coverage as does the bargaining agreement of January 28, 1946. The Employer contends that the cafeteria employees should be excluded from the unit because their functions and the conditions under which they work are substantially different from those of the production employees. While it is true that the duties of these em- ployees are not directly related to the production processes, we have frequently included cafeteria employees in units of production and maintenance employees, especially where, as here, they have been part of an effective bargaining history.3 In an attempt to show that the working conditions of the cafeteria employees are unlike those of the other employees, the Employer points to the following facts : The collective bargaining agreement of 3 Matter of General Cable Corporation, 62 N. L R. B. 437; Matter of The Procter & Gamble Manufacturing Co., 64 N L. R B 1555, Matter of The LUnivis Lens Company, 72 N L R B. 149. BENDIX AVIATION CORPORATION 645 January 1946, which contains 117 sections, excluded cafeteria em- ployees as well as 3 other categories of employees from Section 85, which provided for a 12-cent an hour increase for all employees within its coverage. This section also provided that 3 months after the signing of the agreement, the parties may review the wage rates of cafeteria employees. Thereafter, on July 22, 1946, the Employer and the Aircraft Workers executed t supplementary agreement providing for an average increase of 9 cents an hour for cafeteria employees. The Employer contends that the separate negotiation of wage increases for the cafeteria employees, together with the fact that they did not receive the same wage increase as the employees in the contract unit, indicates-that the conditions under which these employees work are different from those of the production workers and warrants their exclusion from the unit. Except for their separate treatment in the section of the January 1946 contract dealing with the wage increase, the cafeteria employees have been fully covered by all the other nu- merous terms of the collective bargaining contracts .4 Under these circumstances, we do not deem the separate wage negotiations for the cafeteria workers5 as warranting a departure from our usual policy of adhering to a contract unit established as a result of collective bar- gaining.6 We shall, therefore, include the cafeteria employees. The timekeepers : The Aircraft Workers would include this group of employees who work in the accounting or pay-roll department. They handle production and time records. The timekeepers were ex- cluded from the broad industrial unit in the afore-mentioned consent election agreement and from the collective bargaining history predi- cated thereon. Moreover, the timekeepers have been represented by the Aircraft Workers in a separate bargaining unit established by the Board in January 1944.7 The current collective bargaining agree- ment covering these employees will not terminate until April 1947. In view of the Board's earlier unit determination establishing the time- keepers in a separate bargaining unit and the effective bargaining history of these employees on a separate basis, together with the ex- clusion of those employees from the contract unit covering the produc- tion and maintenance employees, we shall, in conformance with our usual practice, not disturb the contract units.s Accordingly, we shall exclude the timekeepers from the broad unit. ' The record shows that these contracts cover the subjects normally appearing in col- lective bargaining agreements , such as check-off, discharge procedure , grievance procedure leave of absence, vacations, etc 6 In this connection we note that the cafeteria employees are not the only category of employees in behalf of whom the Aircraft workers entered into a supplementary agreement with the Employer The seniority of molders,, who are also part of the proposed unit, was also covered in a separate supplementary agreement. O Matter of Petersen & Lytle, 60 N. L R B. 1070 ; Matter of Mississippi Valley Barge Line Company , 69 N. L R. B. 1443. 7 Matter of Eclipse Aviatson -Paoneer Instrument Division, 54 N L. R B. 808. 8 Matter of Petersen & Lytle, 60 N. L R B 1070. 646 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Assistant foremen: The Employer has not employed this classifi- cation of employees for over a year and does not contemplate engaging such employees in the near future.' Under these circumstances, we shall make no finding regarding their inclusion in the unit. We find that all hourly paid employees including indentured ap- prentices, group leaders, inspectors, cafeteria employees, receiving and shipping employees, toolroom employees and crib attendants, truckers, stock chasers, stock men and all other storeroom and stock- room employees, but excluding all office and clerical employees, em- ployees of the sales, accounting, personnel and industrial relations departments, time-study men, plant-protection and fire patrol em- ployees, all engineers, production, estimating and planning engineers, draftsmen, detailers, chemists, metallurgists, professional employees, timekeepers, cooperative students and all professional employees in training, general foremen, foremen, and all other supervisory em- ployees with authority to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or other- wise effect changes in the status of employees, or effectively recommend such action, 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 purposes of collective bargaining with Eclipse-Pioneer Division: Bendix Aviation Corporation, Teterboro, New Jersey, an election by secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than thirty (30) days from the date of this Direction, under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Second Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Sections 203.55 and 203.56, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 4, among the employees in the unit found appropriate in Section IV, above, who were employed dur- ing the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of this Direc- tion, including employees who,did not work during said pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation or temporarily laid off, and includ- ing employees in the armed forces of the United States who present themselves in person at the polls, but excluding those employees who have since quit or been discharged for cause and have not been rehired or reinstated prior to the date of the election, to determine whether or not they desire- to be represented by Bendix Local Union No. 153, UAW-CIO, or by Aircraft Workers' Union of New Jersey, Incor- porated, or by International Association of Machinists, for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by none. s we note, however, that this category of employees was excluded from the earlier con- sent election and the subsequent bargaining history.