Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsMar 2, 1940

21 N.L.R.B. 65 (N.L.R.B. 1940)

hi the Matter of CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY OF NEW YORK, INC., BROOKLYN EDISON COMPANY, INC., NEW YORK AND QUEENS ELECTRIC LIGHT AND POWER COMPANY, WESTCHESTER LIGHTING COMPANY, THE YONKERS ELECTRIC LIGHT AND POWER COMPANY, NEW YORK STEAM CORPORATION, AND CONSOLIDATED TELEGRAPH AND ELECTRICAL SUBWAY COMPANY and AMALGAMATED UTILITY WORKERS AFFILIATED WITH UTILITY WORKERS ORGANIZING COMMITTEE, C. I. O. In the Matter of CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY OF NEW YORK, INC., BROOKLYN EDISON COMPANY, INC., NEW YORK AND QUEENS ELECTRIC LIGHT AND POWER COMPANY, WESTCHESTER LIGHTING COMPANY, THE YONKERS ELECTRIC LIGHT AND POWER COMPANY,. NEW YORK STEAM CORPORATION , AND CONSOLIDATED TELEGRAPH AND ELECTRICAL SUBWAY COMPANY and INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, LOCAL UNIONS Nos. B-825, B-826, B-828, B-829, B-830, B-832, AND B-839, A. E. OF L. Cases Nos. R-1739 and R-1740, respectively. Decided March 2, 1940 Gas and Electric Utility Industry-Investigation of Representatives: con- troversy concerning representation of employees. rival organizations ; refusal to bargain by employer-Units Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : ( 1) produc- tion , maintenanc, . operation , construction , and other stated classifications of employees throughout system, excluding supervisory . engineering , sales, clerical and other stated classifications of employees , pursuant to stipulation; (2) engineering , sales, clerical , and other stated classifications of employees through- out system , excluding supervisory , production . maintenance , operation, con- struction , and other stated classifications of employees , pursuant to stipulation- Elections Ordered: employees on stipulated pay roll eligible to vote Mr. Mark Lauter and Mr. Alan F. Perl, for the Board. Whitman, Ransom, Coulson ct3 Goetz, by Mr. William L. Ransom, Mr. Henry S. Reeder, and Mr. P. M. Berksov, of New York City, for the Companies. Boudin, Cohn d Glickstein, by Mr. Leonard B. Boudin and Mr. Sidney Elliott Cohn, of New York City, for the Amalgamated. Mr. Isaac Lobe Straus, of Baltimore . Md., and Delafield, Marsh, Porter d Hope, by Mr. Claude A. Hope, of New York City, for the I. B. E. W. and its affiliated locals. Mr. Herman E. Cooper, of New York City, for the Edison Brother- hood and its affiliated locals. Mr. David Findling , of counsel to the Board. 21 N.L. R B.,No.1]. 65 66 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS STATEMENT OF THE CASE On April 12, 1939, Amalgamated Utility Workers affiliated with Utility Workers Organizing Committee, C. I. 0., herein called the Amalgamated, filed with the Regional Director for the Second Region (New York City) a petition alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc., New York City; Brooklyn Edison Company, Inc., New York City ; New York and Queens Electric Light and Power Company,' New York City; West- chester Lighting Company, Yonkers, New York; and The Yonkers Electric Light and Power Company, Yonkers, New York ; and requesting an investigation and certification of representatives, pur- suant to Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act.' On September 1, 1939, the National Labor Relations Board, herein called the Board, acting pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the Act and Article III, Section 3, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, ordered an investigation and authorized the Regional Director to conduct it and to provide for an appropriate hearing upon due notice. On September 5, 1939, the Regional Director issued a notice of hearing, and on September 21, 1939, a notice of postponement of hearing, copies of which notices were duly served upon the above- named Companies ; upon the Amalgamated ; upon International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local Unions Nos. B-825, B-829, B-830, B-832, and B-839, described in the petition as labor organ- izations claiming to represent employees of the Companies directly affected by the investigation; and upon International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, herein called the I. B. E. W. Pursuant to the notice of postponement, a hearing was held on October 16 and 17, 1939, at New York City, before Edward Gran- I Sometimes designated in the record as New York & Queens Electric Light & Power Company 2 The petition was styled "amended petition " On November 20, 1937, Local 1212, United Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers of America. C 1 0 , which counsel for the Amalgamated stated at the hearing was the predecessor organization of the Amalgamated, had filed a petition alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of Consolidated Edison Company of New Yoik, Inc, Brooklyn Edison Company, Inc , New York and Queens Electric Light and Power Com- pany, Westchester Lighting Company, The Yonkers Electric Light and Power Company, New York Steam Corporation, and Consolidated Telegraph and Electrical Subway Com- pany No order directing an investigation was issued, and no other proceedings were taken on this petition, and for the purposes of this proceeding the petition filed on April 12, 1939, by the Amalgamated will be deemed "the petition" herein CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY OF NEW YORK, INC. 67 Bison Smith, the Trial Examiner duly designated by the Board. The Board, the above-named Companies, the Amalgamated, and the I. B. E. W. and the above-named local unions were represented by counsel and participated in the hearing. No testimony was taken at the hearing. At the commencement thereof, the Companies, and the I. B. E. W. and the above-named local unions moved to dismiss the petition upon the grounds, inter alia, (1) that the petition was defective in that New York Steam Corporation and Consolidated Telegraph and Electrical Subway Company, claimed by the moving parties to be necessary and proper parties to the proceeding, were not named as parties thereto, and (2) that the unit claimed in the petition to be appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining was inappropriate and arbitrary, for the reason that it did not include employees of New York Steam Corporation and Consolidated Telegraph and Electrical Subway Company, and for the further reason that it failed to include employees in certain classifications. The Trial Examiner referred this motion to the Board. For the reasons stated below, the motions are hereby denied 3 During the hearing, the Trial Examiner granted the motion of the Amalgamated to amend the petition in certain particulars with respect to the alleged appropriate unit.4 During the hearing, the Trial Examiner also made rulings on other motions. The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner and finds that no prejudicial errors were committed. The rulings are hereby affirmed. At the conclusion of the hearing on October 17, New York Steam Corporation and Con- solidated Telegraph and Electrical Subway Company filed separate applications alleging that they, together with the Companies named in the petition, collectively constitute a "unitary and integrated system" and are under "unified ownership, management, and operation" ; and requesting that they be made parties to, and be permitted to inter- vene in the proceeding. The Trial Examiner reserved rulings on these applications. The Trial Examiner then adjourned the hearing to October 20 upon the motions made by the Companies, and the I. B. E. W. and the above-named local unions, on the ground that they were not prepared ro proceed on the petition as amended. Pursuant to the order of adjournment, the hearing was continued ,on October 20, 1939, at New York City, before Gustaf B. Erickson, the Trial Examiner duly designated by the Board in place and stead of Edward Grandison Smith. No testimony was taken at the hear- E See footnotes 8 and 9, infra 4 The amendment changed the terminoioey in which the alleged appropriate unit was expressed and, according to the, attorney for the Amalgamated, was intended only (1) to include within the unit construction workers previously excluded and (2 ) to set forth -with greater particularity other classifications of employees sought to be included by the petition The amendment was not directed to the gionnds specified in the motions to dismiss 68 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD ing. The Companies, and the I. B. E. W. and the above-named local unions again moved to dismiss the petition upon substantially the same grounds urged by them previously. The Trial Examiner did not rule on these motions. For the reasons stated below the mo- tions are denied.b Pursuant to agreement of all parties, the Trial Ex- aminer then ordered that the hearing be adjourned until October 26. No hearing was held on October 26, the hearing being adjourned and thereafter from time to time again adjourned, until February 9, 1940.