Lockheed Aircraft Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsDec 17, 1953

107 N.L.R.B. 436 (N.L.R.B. 1953)

436 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD LOCKHEED AIRCRAFT CORPORATION, GEORGIA DIVISION and WILLIAM E. EVANS, JR., AND J. T. FRENCH, Peti- tioners and ENGINEERS AND ARCHITECTS ASSOCIATION, AIRCRAFT CHAPTER, MARIETTA SECTION. Case No. 10-RD-133. December 17, 1953 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before John S. Patton, hearing officer . The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby af- firmed. Upon the entire record in this case the Board finds: 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the mean- ing of the Act. 2. The Petitioners assert that the Union is no longer the representative of certain employees of the Employer, as de- fined in Section 9 (a) of the Act . The Union is a labor organi- zation recognized by the Employer as the exclusive bargaining representative for the employees designated in the petition. 3. The Union contends that the petition should be dismissed on the grounds that J. T. French, one of the decertification Petitioners , was a supervisor during the period of time that he obtained the showing of interest to support the petition and that he is,closely allied to and identified with management and is therefore disqualified from filing the petition. J. T. French is classified as a manufacturing engineer in the fabrication methods department, group A. Group Ais com- posed of 5 other manufacturing engineers in addition to French, 2 manufacturing technicians, and 1 clerk-typist, all of whom work under the supervision of the group supervisor. French is the senior manufacturing engineer . During the past 212 years he has acted, in the absence of the group supervisor, as supervisor of group A for a total of 18 days. While sub- stituting for the group supervisor , he coordinates group ac- tivities , assigns work to the members of group A when neces- sary, answers questions posed by the employees, and proc- esses the manufacturing engineers ' requests for such things as services , equipment , manufacturing aids, and project tooling. The record shows that French, while substituting for the group supervisor does not posses the same authority, nor does he assume the full duties and responsibilities . In this regard French has no authority to hire, discharge reprimand, disci- pline, or take any other personnel action with respect to the employees. During the absence of the group supervisor, such personnel problems are handled directly by the manager of the fabrication methods department. Moreover, if French is required to make out an employee performance-rating form while acting. as group supervisor, he merely fills in such form in accordance with the detailed instructions left with 107 NLRB No. 122. LOCKHEED AIRCRAFT CORPORATION, GEORGIA DIVISION 437 him by the group supervisor and, unlike the group supervisor, does not sign the performance rating. The record further shows that although French, while substituting for the group supervisor, reviews the numerous request forms of the manufacturing engineers , those requests which he does not approve are sent to the department manager for review. While substituting for the group supervisor, French continues his regular work of manufacturing engineer and spends approxi- mately 30 percent of his time performing the additional duties made necessary by the group supervisor's absence. The regular group supervisor spends 100 percent of his time performing his supervisory duties. As French only sporadically serves as group supervisor, it is clear that he is not a supervisor within the meaning of the Act. i We further find, contrary to the Union, that even during the intervals French substitutes for the group super- visor, he is not a supervisor within the meaning of the Act. And, as the record does not show, as contended by the Union, that French is closely "allied to and identified with manage- ment," or that French "was acting in behalf of" the Employer, we conclude that French is a proper decertification petitioner.' Accordingly, we find that a question affecting commerce exists concerning the representation of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. 3 4. We find that all employees with job classifications listed in Appendix A, attached hereto, employed at the Em- ployer's Marietta, Georgia, plant, excluding all other em- ployees, guards, and supervisors within the meaning of the Act, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collec- tive bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.4 [Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.] i Wayside Press, 104 NLRB 1028 2Calumet & Hecla, Inc , (Wolverine Tube Division), 105 NLRB 950. 3The parties do not urge that the contract covering the employees involved herein which expires December 16, 1953, constitutes a bar to this proceeding. 4The parties agree that this is an appropriate unit for collective-bargaining purposes. APPENDIX A Aerodynamicist A Aerodynamics Engineer Airplane Specifications Engi- neer Analytical Chemist A Assembly Manufacturing En- gineer C.A.A. Liaison Engineer Commercial Artist Construction Engineer A Design Engineer A Design Specialist Electrical Engineer A Engineering Drawings Checker Fabrication Manufacturing Engineer Flight Manuals Engineer A 438 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Flight Test Analysis Engi- neer Flight Test Engineer A Functional Test Engineer-- Electrical Functional Test Engineer-- Electronics Functional Test Engineer-- Hydraulic -Mechanical Functional Test Technician Functional Test Technician- Electronics Instrumentation Engineer A Liaison Engineer Manufacturing Research Engi- neer Manufacturing Technician Mechanical Design Engineer A Methods and Time Standards Engineer A Process Analyst "A" Process Engineer Production Design Engineer Production Methods Engineer Research Engineer Salvage Engineer Service Engineer A Standards Analyst "A" Standards Engineer Stress Analyst Stress Engineer Structures Engineer Tool Engineer Tool Research Engineer Tooling Standards Engineer Tooling Standards Technician Weight Analyst Weight Engineer Wind Tunnel Test Engineer Drafting Engineer A Draftsman A Engineering Assistant Engineering Contact Man, Engineering Technician Flight Test Analyst A Laboratory Assistant Loftsman A Mechanical Design Draftsman Parts Catalog Analyst Parts Catalog Technician Process Control Analyst Research Technician A Technical Computer Technical Writer A Time -Study Man Tool Procurement Analyst P. R. MALLORY & CO., INC. and INTERNATIONAL UNION OF ELECTRICAL RADIO AND MACHINE WORKERS, CIO and EMPLOYEES REPRESENTATIVE COMMITTEE OF P. R. MALLORY & CO., INC. P. R. MALLORY & CO., INC. and INTERNATIONAL UNION OF ELECTRICAL RADIO AND MACHINE WORKERS, CIO, Petitioner . Cases Nos . 13-CA-1297 and 13-RC-2860. De- cember 18, 1953 DECISION AND ORDER On July 10, 1953, Trial Examiner Albert P. Wheatley issued his Intermediate Report in the above-entitled proceeding, finding that the Respondent had engaged in and was engaging in certain unfair labor practices and recommending that it cease and desist therefrom and take certain affirmative action, as set forth in the copy of the Intermediate Report attached hereto. The Trial Examiner also found that the Respondent had not engaged in certain other unfair labor practices alleged in the complaint and recommended dismissal 107 NLRB No. 103.