New England Telephone and Telegraph Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Nov 7, 1969

179 N.L.R.B. 531 (N.L.R.B. 1969)

NEW ENGLAND TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH COMPANY 531
New England Telephone and Telegraph Company
and Communications Workers of America,
AFL-CIO, Petitioner and International
Brotherhood of Electrical Workers,
AFL-CIO-CLC, Petitioner . Cases 1-RC-10718
and 1-RC-10720
November 7, 1969
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF
ELECTION
BY CHAIRMAN MCCULLOCH AND MEMBERS
JENKINS AND ZAGORIA
Upon petitions duly filed under Section 9(c) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, a
hearing was held before Hearing Officer Ramey
Donovan. Following the hearing and pursuant to
Section 102.67 of the National Labor Relations
Board Rules and Regulations and Statements of
Procedure, Series 8, as amended, and by direction of
the Regional Director for Region 1, this case was
transferred to the National Labor Relations Board
for decision. Thereafter, the Employer,' the
Petitioners, and New England Federation of
Telephone Traffic Workers, an Intervenor,' filed
timely briefs.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
Act, as amended, the Board has delegated its powers
in connection with this case 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 in this case, including the
briefs filed herein, the Board finds:
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within
the meaning of the Act, and it will effectuate the
purposes of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein.
2. The labor organizations involved claim to
represent certain employees of the Employer.
3. 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.
The New England Telephone and Telegraph
Company owns and operates a communications
system in all New England States except
The Employer has requested oral argument This request is hereby
denied, as the record and briefs adequately present the issues and the
positions of the parties
'International Brotherhood of Telephone Workers, herein called IBTW,
and New England Federation of Telephone Traffic Workers, herein called
the Federation, appeared and participated as Intervenors The Federation
is the incumbent union and clearly has a contractual interest, and we are
administratively advised that the IBTW made a sufficient showing of
interest for the purpose of intervening New England Federation of
Telephone Operators appeared at the hearing, but we have not been
advised that it showed any interest which would allow it to participate as
an intervenor, nor did it indicate any interest in appearing on the ballot
Connecticut. In each of the instant petitions, the
employees sought to be represented are all central
office employees, clerical and staff employees,
administrative employees, and dining service
employees in the Employer's Traffic Department,
excluding guards, professional employees, and
supervisors as defined in the Act. The stipulated unit
is identical to that presently represented by the
incumbent Federation.3
The Traffic unit has long been covered by
contracts between the Federation and the Employer,
the immediately preceding one being an agreement
executed April 7, 1967. Pursuant to the "Reopener"
provision of that contract,4 a new agreement was
executed May 7, 1968, effective April 26, 1968 to
April 26, 1971. The Employer and the Federation
contend that this latter contract bars the instant
proceeding, while the Petitioners contend that it
constituted a premature extension of the previous
contract and therefore the petitions herein may be
processed.
In furtherance of its desire to reopen pursuant to
article 42.02(a), the Federation sent notice thereof to
This is referred to herein as the Traffic unit The parties stipulated as to
the job titles which are encompassed within this unit
'The following are the relevant provisions of the 1967 contract
Article 42 Duration of Agreement
42 01 Effective Date
This agreement shall be effective at 11 59 P M on April 7, 1967
(except that wage schedule increases shall be effective as of 12 01 A M
on October 23, 1966), and shall continue in full force and effect (except
as suspended pursuant to Paragraph 42 02 below) until terminated
pursuant to Paragraph 42 03 below
42 02 Reopeners
In accordance with and subject to the following provisions, this
Agreement may be reopened once as hereinafter specified, solely for the
purpose of negotiating changes in Appendices A, B, C and D (Wage
Schedules including Job and Town Upgrades and Trick Differentials),
Overtime Rates specified in Article 14, (Payment for Overtime), Sunday
rates specified in Article 15, Holiday Rates specified in Article 16
(Payment for Holidays), Premium Payments specified in Article 18, and
it is agreed that no other subject shall be reopened for negotiations
(a) This Agreement may be reopened by either party by written notice
which is received by the other party at least 60 calendar days prior to
5 00 P M , April 25, 1968 to negotiate only the changes enumerated
above Such changes, if any, which are agreed to as a result of any such
negotiations shall not be effective earlier than 11 59 P M , April 25,
1968
(b) Negotiations shall commence at least 30 days after receipt of any
such notice, as provided in 42 02 (a), by the other party If no agreement
is reached prior to 11 59 April 25, 1968, the provisions of Articles 2, 3,
30, 31 and 32 of this Agreement (except that providing for its
reinstatement, which shall be a continuing obligation) shall be
suspended As of the date agreement is reached on changes, if any,
under this reopener, all provisions of this Agreement shall be reinstated
and such changes, if any have been agreed to by the parties, shall be
incorporated in this Agreement, which shall thereafter, as modified,
continue in full force and effect as provided in Paragraph 42 01 above
42 03 Termination
Either party may terminate this Agreement at 12 01 A M on the later
of the following two dates by notifying the other party in writing, at
least 60 days prior to the date of termination (a) October 26, 1969 or
(b) 18 months after the effective date of the Agreement resulting from
the Agreement opener provided in Paragraph 42 02 above If no such
notice of termination is given, this Agreement shall automatically
continue in full force and effect after the later of these two dates subject
to the right of either party to terminate this Agreement by notifying the
other party in writing, at least 60 days prior to the date of termination,
of its intention to terminate this Agreement
179 ;NLRB No. 92
532 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
the Employer, which was received on February 23,
1968. Negotiations ensued, and agreement not
having been reached by 11:59 p.m. April 25, 1968,
the following contract provisions were suspended
automatically pursuant to article 42.02(b) thereof:
article 2, Deduction by Company of Union Dues;
article 3, Union Bulletin Boards on Company
Premises; article 30, Discipline and Discharge;
article 31, Grievance Procedure; and article 32,
Arbitration. As noted above, a new contract was
executed May 7, 1968. The instant petitions were
filed on July 29, 1969 - 89 days prior to October
26, 1969, the termination date specified in article
42.03 of the 1967 Agreement.'
In determining when a petition has been timely
filed, the Board has consistently sought to provide
guidance as to the appropriate time to organize for
and seek a change of representatives, and to secure
to employees the right to change representatives at
reasonable intervals. The Board is of the view that
stability in labor relations is facilitated by using
reasonable guides as to timeliness of petitions. To
this end, we have long held6 that a new contract for
a longer period signed during the term of a
previously executed agreement, at a time when that
prior agreement would bar a petition, can itself
prevent the processing of a rival petition only for the
remainder of the period when the prior contract
would have been such a bar. It has been held that,
where such a premature extension occurs, the proper
time for the filing of a rival petition in order to
promote such stability and employee protection is
the 30-day period between the 90th day and the 60th
day prior to the expiration date of the original
contract of 3 years or less duration.'
These considerations are equally applicable to the
facts of this case. The 1967 contract was to
terminate on October 26, 1969, or 18 months after
the effective date of any new agreement pursuant to
the reopener clause, in this case also October 26,
1969. The parties were free from possible
interference by a rival petition during the time they
were negotiating pursuant to the midterm reopening8
and no special circumstances exist which might
'We note that under either alternative of Article 42 03, quoted in
footnote 4, above, the termination date would be October 26, 1969, under
the circumstances of this case
'Memphis Furniture Mfg Co, 51 NLRB 1447, 1450
'Deluxe Metal Furniture Co. 121 NLRB 995, 999, 1001-02, Leonard
Wholesale Meats , Inc, 136 NLRB 1000
'Cf Firestone Synthetic Rubber and Latex Company . 173 NLRB No
178 (Member Brown dissenting on the facts)
justify a departure from our long-standing practice.'
Accordingly, as the current contract was executed at
a time when the prior contract would have been a
bar, and as the instant petitions were filed during
the 60- to 90-day period prior to the expiration date
of that prior agreement, we find that the petitions
were timely filed.'°
4. In accordance with the stipulation of the
parties, we find that the following constitutes a unit
appropriate for the purposes of collective
bargaining:
All central office employees, clerical and staff
employees, administrative employees and dining
service employees in the Employer's Traffic
Department, excluding guards, professional
employees, and supervisors as defined in the Act."
[Direction of Election' z omitted from publication.]
'Cf Aerotet-General Corporation , 144 NLRB 368
'' in order to promote the stability of the bargaining relationship and to
protect the right of the employees to change representatives at reasonable
and predictable intervals, we find , on the facts of this case, that the current
contract does not bar the petitions herein We find no merit in the
contention of the Employer and the Intervenor that, although the
underlying policy expressed in the Board's determinations as to the
timeliness of petitions is sound , the Board ' s contract bar rules cannot be
applied here because they were not adopted in accordance with the
rule-making procedures of the Administrative Procedure Act, as they
assert is required by N L R B v Wyman -Gordon Company. 394 U S
759 Cf N L R B v Grace Company, 184 F 2d 126, 129 (C A 8)
"In stipulating the unit description , the parties specified the inclusion of
the "job classifications set forth in Appendix A" That Appendix lists the
following Central Office Employees, Group I, Junior Supervisor,
Operator, Rest Room Matron, Supervisor, Group II, Central Office Clerk,
Chief Clerk, Schedule Clerk, Senior Schedule Clerk Clerical and Staff
Employees. Clerk, Clerical Assistant , Engineering Assistant, Facilities
Clerk, Force Assistant, Force Clerk, General Clerk, Senior Clerk, Senior
Facilities Clerk, Traffic Clerk Administrative Employees, Assistant Force
Supervisor-Division, Chief Line Assignor, Customer Instructor, District
Force Coordinator, District Personnel Visitor, Loading and Service
Supervisor, PBX-TWX Instructor, Service Observer, Service Observing
Summarizer , Supervising Engineering Assistant Dining Service
Employees, Baker, Cafeteria Attendant, Cafeteria Supervisor, Cashier,
Cook, Head Baker , Head Cook, Senior Cafeteria Attendant
"In order to assure that all eligible voters may have the opportunity to
be informed of the issues in the exercise of their statutory right to vote, all
parties to the election should have access to a list of voters and their
addresses which may be used to communicate with them Excelsior
Underwear Inc. 156 NLRB 1236, N L R B v Wyman-Gordon Company,
394 U S 759 Accordingly, it is hereby directed that an election eligibility
list, containing the names and addresses of all the eligible voters , must be
filed by the Employer with the Regional Director for Region I within 7
days of the date of this Decision and Direction of Election The Regional
Director shall make the list available to all parties to the election No
extension of time to file this list shall be granted by the Regional Director
except in extraordinary circumstances Failure to comply with this
requirement shall be grounds for setting aside the election whenever proper
objections are filed