Fairchild Engine and Airplane Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsFeb 3, 1947

72 N.L.R.B. 385 (N.L.R.B. 1947)

In the Matter Of PILOTLESS PLANE DIVISION, FAIRCHILD ENGINE AND AIRPLANE CORPORATION, EMPLOYER and METROPOLITAN FEDERATION OF ARCHITECTS, ENGINEERS, CHEMISTS & TECHNICIANS, LOCAL 231, UOPWA, CIO, PETITIONER Case No. 2-R-7337.-Decided February 3, 1947 Mr. William E. Speeler, of Farmingdale, Long Island, N. Y., for the Employer. Messrs. Victor Rabinowitz, Martin Cooper, George Curran, and Dominic Mascio, all of New York City, for the Petitioner. Mr. Herbert C. Kane, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon a petition duly filed hearing in this case was held at New York City, on January 3, 1947, before Sidney Reitman, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudical error and are hereby affilmecl.1 Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations Board makes the following : FINDINGS OF FACT' I. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER Fairchild Engine and Airplane Corporation, a Maryland corpora- tion, is engaged in the business of manufacturing and distributing aircraft and its component parts. For this purpose it maintains five ,divisions, one of which, the Pilotless Plane Division, is the only one involved in this proceeding. This Division was formerly located in Jamaica, and is now located in Farmingdale, Long Island, New York. Part of the Employer's over-all operations, the Division is exclu- sively engaged in design and research on a special project for the United States Navy. From February 1, 1946, to July 31, 1946, the -Division purchased aluminum, hardware, and related products, valued IOn January 20. 1947, the Board denied the motion of UAW-CIO, Local #616, to intervene, to reopen the record, and to dismiss the petition, on the ground that this labor .organization failed to produce proof of interest. 72 N. L. R. B., No. 73. 385 386 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD at approximately $40,000, of which less than $3,000 worth came from points outside the State of New York. Devices to be used by the Divi- sion in the special project have been furnished by the United States Navy; all such devices have come from points outside the State of New York. At various stages during the project, experimental units embodying designs have been delivered to the United States Navy at the plant. All finished products go to the United States Navy, the Division operating on a cost-plus-fixed-fee contract with the Navy. Parties to the contract, however, are the Employer itself and the United States Navy. The Division is under the ultimate control of the Employer's Board of Directors and under the immediate super- vision of the Employer's Vice President in charge of over-all opera- tions. All profits accruing from the work of the Division will be pooled with the other profits of the Employer for tax and dividend purposes. Funds under the contract are advanced to the Employer, which allocates them to the Division. Although the Division has a separate bank account, funds therein are deposited by the Employer upon their receipt from the Navy. The present work of the Division is being performed in anticipation of actual production work if the experiments prove successful. The Board has previously taken juris- diction over other Divisions of the Employer.2 We find, contrary to the Employer's contention, that the operations of the Pilotless Plane Division, as part of the Employer's integrated enterprise, affect commerce within the meaning of the Act.3 H. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, claiming to represent employees of the Employer. III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESE NTATION The Employer refuses to recognize the Petitioner as the exclusive bargaining representative of employees of the Employer until the Petitioner has been certified by the Board in an appropriate unit. We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the representation of employees of the Employer, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. Matter of Ranger Aircraft Division , 61 N. L R . B 1187 ; Matter of Faschild Aircraft Division, 41 N L R B 521. 3 N. L. R B. v Virginia Electric d Power Company, 314 11 S 469 affirming on this point 115 F. (2d) 414 (C C. A. 4), enf'g 20 N L R B 911 iVil0anis Motor Company I N L. R. B., 128 F. (2d) 960 (C C. A 8), enf'g 31 N L R B 715; N L R B v Schmidt Baking Co. Inc, 122 F. (2d) 162 (C C. A. 4), enf'g 27 N L R B 864 FAIRCHILD ENGINE AND AIRPLANE CORPORATION IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT 387 We find, in accordance with a stipulation of the parties, that all machine operators, sheet metal workers, assemblers and riveters, wood- workers, welders, installation men, tool, jig and fixture builders, bench hands and painters in the manufacturing department of the Farm- ingdale plant of the Division, excluding leadmen, clerical and ad- ministrative employees, and all other supervisory employees with authority to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise 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 Pilotless Plane Division, Fairchild Engine and Airplane Corporation, Farmingdale, Long Island, New York, 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 Sec- tions 203.55 and 203.56, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 4, among the employees in the unit found appro- priate in Section IV, above, who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of this Direction, including employees who did not work during said pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation or temporarily laid off, and including 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 re- hired or reinstated prior to the date of the election, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented by Metropolitan Federa- tion of Architects, Engineers, Chemists & Technicians, Local 231, UOPWA, CIO, for the purposes of collective bargaining.