Western Union Telegraph Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 15, 1940

23 N.L.R.B. 824 (N.L.R.B. 1940)

In the Matter of WI,STERN UNION TELEGRAPH COMPANY and AMERI-
CAN COMMUNICATIONS ASSOCIATION LOCAL 54-B, AFFILIATED WITH
THE CONGRESS OF INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATIONS
Case No. R-1703.-Decided May 15,19-110
Communications Industry-Investigation of Representatives: controversy
concerning representation of employees : Company refused requests made by
Union for sole recognition in local unit; controversy as to appropriate unit-
Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining: employees in local unit not to be
denied collective bargaining until employees are organized on Nation-wide
basis ; employees in the commercial, traffic, and plant departments, including
furloughed and "furloughed force reduction" employees, but excluding execu-
tives, lawyers, confidential employees, temporary messengers, and supervisory
employees ; exclusion of employees in the accounting department and district
superintendent's office; exclusion of minor supervisory employees-Election
Ordered: ballot: no provision made on, for organization found to be company-
dominated ; name of rival union not to appear on, in view of absence of claim
or evidence showing that it represents employees in appropriate unit-Dissent
by Mr. Leiserson: since Company admits it has continued to deal with a labor
organization which the Board found company-dominated and ordered Company
to disestablish, petition should be dismissed pending court determination of
validity of Board's Order
Mr. Henry Shore, for the Board.
Mr. William Wendt, and Mr. Ralph H. Kimball, of New York
City, for the Company.
Mr. Benjamin C. Sigal, and Mr. Arthur R. Rack, of Pittsburgh, Pa.,
for the A. C. A.
Mr. Hugh C. McKenny, of Washington, D. C., and Mr. S. Harold
Grossman, of Pittsburgh, Pa., for the C. T. U.
Mr. J. H. Krug, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On October 26, 1939, American Communications Association,
Local 54-B, affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations,
herein called the A. C. A., filed with the Regional Director for thA
23 N. L. R. B., No. 87.
824
WESTERN UNION TELEGRAPH COMPANY 825
Sixth Region (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) a petition, and on Decem-
ber 16, 1939, an amended petition alleging that a question affecting
commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees
of The Western Union Telegraph Company, Pittsburgh, Pennsyl-
vania, herein called the Company, and requesting an investigation
and certification of representatives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the
National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act.
On December 22, 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 January 13, 1940, the Regional Director issued a notice of
hearing, copies of which were duly served upon the Company, upon
the A. C. A., and upon The Commercial Telegraphers Union, affili-
ated with, the American Federation of Labor, herein called the
C. T. U. On January' 22, 1940, Association of Western Union
Employees, herein called the Association, a labor organization claim-
ing to represent employees directly affected by the investigation,
filed with the Regional Director a motion and petition to intervene.
On the same day the Regional Director denied the motion and peti-
tion. The ruling of the Regional Director denying the motion and
petition is hereby affirmed. Pursuant to notice a hearing was held
on January 25 and 26, 1940, at Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, before
John T. Lindsay, the Trial Examiner duly designated by the Board.
The Board, the Company, and the A. C. A. were represented by
counsel and participated in the hearing. The Association and the
C. T. U. entered special appearances. Full opportunity to be heard,
to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence
bearing on the issues was afforded the Board, the Company, the
A. C. A., and the C. T. U. At the opening of the hearing the Com-
pany moved that the proceeding be dismissed or, in the alternative,
that it be adjourned pending disposition of its petition for review
and of the Board's petition for enforcement of an Order of the
Board in Matter of The Western Union, Telegraph Company, a
Corporation and American Communications Association," herein
called Case No. C-344, pending before the Circuit Court of Appeals
for the Second Circuit. The Association joined in this motion. The
Association also moved that the hearing be adjourned until a rul-
117 N L R . B. 34. In its Decision and Order in that case the Board found that
the Company had dominated and interfered with the administration of the Association,
and ordered the Company to disestablish the Association as the revresentative of its
employees for the purposes of collective bare ainina.
826 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ing was made on a motion theretofore filed by the Association with
the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit seeking to
stay the Board from all proceedings involving the Company and the
Association. These motions were denied by the Trial Examiner.
The Association renewed its motion to intervene, which was also
denied by the Trial Examiner. The above rulings are hereby
affirmed.2 The Company moved that the evidence in the record in
Case No. C-344 showing the history of collective bargaining by the
Company with the Association on a Nation-wide basis and the
difficulties of bargaining on any other basis be incorporated by ref-
erence in the record of the instant case. The A. C. A. moved that
the evidence in the record in Case No. C-344 showing which em-
ployees of the Company exercise supervisory functions be similarly
incorporated in the record. Both motions were granted by the Trial
Examiner. During the course of the hearing the Trial Examiner
made several rulings on other motions and on objections to the ad-
mission of evidence. The Board has reviewed all the rulings of the
Trial Examiner and finds that no prejudicial errors were committed.
With the exceptions noted immediately below, the rulings are hereby
affirmed.
On March 1, 1940, the Board reversed the rulings of the Trial
Examiner granting the afore-mentioned motions to incorporate by
reference certain evidence in Case No. C-344, and ordered that the
record be reopened and that a further hearing be held. On March
6, 1940, the Regional Director issued a notice of further hearing,
copies of which were duly served upon the Company, the A. C. A.
and the C. T. U. Pursuant to the notice a further hearing was held
on March 14, 1940, at Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, before Joseph L.
Maguire, the Trial Examiner duly designated by the Board. The
Board, the Company, the A. C. A., and the C. T. U. were represented
by counsel and participated in the hearing. Full opportunity to be
heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evi-
dence bearing on the issues was afforded all parties. At the opening
of the hearing the Company renewed its motion, made at the previous
hearing, that the proceeding be continued until the final court decision
in Case No. C-344. Trial Examiner Maguire denied the motion.
During the course of the hearing he made several rulings on other
motions and on objections to the admission of evidence. The Board
has reviewed all the rulings of Trial Examiner Maguire and finds
that no prejudicial errors were committed. The rulings are hereby
affirmed.
2 See 11attei of The Western Union Telegraph Company and Commercial Telegraphers
Union. Indianapolis Local Western Union Div #2, Aff. with A. F of L., 17 N. L.
R B 683
WESTERN UNION TELEGRAPH COMPANY 827
Subsequent to the close of the second hearing, pursuant to per-
mission granted by the Board, the A. C. A. and the C. T. U. filed
briefs which the Board has considered.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY 3
The Western Union Telegraph Company, a New York corporation
with its principal office at New York City, is engaged throughout
the United States and in foreign countries in the receiving and trans-
mission by telegraph and cable of intrastate, interstate, and interna-
tional communications. At the close of 1939 the Company employed
approximately 43,500 persons, of which number approximately 1,350
were located outside the United States. The present proceeding con-
cerns only those employees of the Company working in Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania, where the Company employs approximately 540
persons.
The Company admits that it is engaged in interstate commerce
within the meaning of the Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
American Communications Association, Local 54-B, is a labor
organization affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations,
admitting to its membership employees of the Company at Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania.
The Commercial Telegraphers Union is a labor organization affili-
ated with the American Federation of Labor, admitting to its
membership employees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The A. C. A. claims to represent a majority of employees of the
Company at Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, within an appropriate unit.
During 1939 the Company refused several requests made by the
A. C. A. for recognition as exclusive bargaining agency for such
employees. The Company contends that all the employees throughout
its entire system constitute an appropriate bargaining unit and that
they are represented by the Association.
The Company and the Association contend that the pendency of
Case No. C-344 before the Circuit Court of Appeals precludes the
existence of a question concerning representation. We find no merit
in this contention.
3 These findings are based on a stipulation of facts
828 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
We find that a question has arisen concerning the representation of
employees of the Company.
IV. THE EFFECT OF THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION UPON
COMMERCE
We find that the question concerning representation which has
arisen, occurring in connection with the operations of the Company
described in Section I above, has a close, intimate, and substantial
relation to trade, traffic, and commerce among the several States and
with foreign countries, and tends to lead to labor disputes burdening
and obstructing commerce and the free flow of commerce.
V. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The A. C. A. contends that the unit appropriate for the purposes
of collective bargaining should be confined to employees of the Com-
pany in Metropolitan Pittsburgh. The Metropolitan Pittsburgh area
consists of the city of Pittsburgh and several adjacent communities,
including McKeesport, Coraopolis, Braddock, Sewickley, Homestead,
Ambridge, and East Pittsburgh. As stated above, the Company
contends that all its employees throughout its entire system constitute
an appropriate unit.
The Board has in many decisions involving the communications
industry found a Nation-wide bargaining unit appropriate, and
under ordinary circumstances would give considerable weight to,the
claim made by the Company in the determination of the appropriate
unit.4 In Case No. C-344 it appeared that the Association had or-
ganized and bargained with the Company on a Nation-wide basis.
In that case, however, we found that the Company had dominated
the administration of the Association, and ordered the Company to
disestablish the Association as a collective bargaining representative.
Thus, while the A. C. A. has organized employees of the Company
in Metropolitan Pittsburgh and claims to represent them, no bona
fide labor organization is now requesting a bargaining unit more
extensive in area than Metropolitan Pittsburgh. To deprive the
employees in the localities to which union organization has extended,
of the possibility of collective bargaining until such time as the
employees of the Company are organized on a Nation-wide basis
4See Matter of Mackay Radio Corporation of Delaware , Inc, and Mackay Radio t
Telegraph Company , a Corporation , and American Radio Telegraphists ' Association, 5
N. L R. B . 657; Matter of Columbia Broadcasting System , Inc, and American Radio
Telegraphists Association, 6 N. L. R. B 166 ; Matter of Columbia Broadcasting System,
Inc, and American Communications Association (Formerly American Radio Telegraphists'
Association ), 8 N. L R B. .508 ; Matter of R . C A. Communications , Inc., and American
Radio Telegraphists Association and Independent Employees Association of R C. A.-C,
9 N L. R B 915 ; Matter of Postal Telegraph -Cable Corporation and Commercial Teleg-
raphers ' Union, 9 N. L . R. B. 1060.
WESTERN UNION TELEGRAPH COMPANY 829
would in no way effectuate the policies of the Act.5 In two recent
cases we have rejected a similar contention advanced by the Com-
pany, and have determined upon a bargaining unit confined to em-
ployees in a single city.' We find that a collective bargaining unit
limited to employees of the Company in the Metropolitan Pitts-
burgh area is appropriate.
Five separate units of the Company's business organization have
their headquarters in Pittsburgh. These are the commercial depart-
ment, the traffic department, the accounting department, the plant
department, and the district superintendent's organization. The
A. C. A. contends that the appropriate bargaining unit consists of
employees working in Metropolitan Pittsburgh in the commercial
and traffic departments, excluding executives, lawyers, solicitors 7
confidential employees, and supervisory employees." The Company
apparently contends that if the bargaining unit is confined to Met-
ropolitan Pittsburgh, the employees of all five departments should
be included, with the exception of supervisory employees having
power to hire and discharge.
The pay rolls for the period ending January 20, 1940, show that
the number of employees in the respective departments who were
stationed in Metropolitan Pittsburgh was as follows : Commercial,
201; traffic, 286; district superintendent's office, 6; accounting, 25;
and plant, 22. The commercial department deals with the pick-up
and delivery of messages and the operation of branch offices in
Metropolitan Pittsburgh. The traffic department has charge of the
transmission of messages which originate in or which are delivered
in Metropolitan Pittsburgh. It operates and maintains the tele-
graph equipment located on two floors of the Chamber of Commerce
Building in Pittsburgh.' We find that employees in the commercial
and traffic departments should be included in the appropriate unit.
The plant department serves Western Pennsylvania, including
Pittsburgh, most of West Virginia, and parts of Maryland and
5Matter of Postal Telegraph -Cable Company of Massachusetts and American Radio
Telegraphists Association , 7 N. L R B 444.
6Matter of The Western Union Telegraph Company , Inc., and The Commercial Teleg-
raphers ' Union, 11 N L R B 1154; Matter of The Western Union Telegraph Company
and Commercial Telegraphers Union , Indianapolis Local #7, Western Union Div. #2,
Af WithA F ofL, 17N L R.B 683
'The record does not show what employees the A . C. A intended to designate by the
term "solicitors " The A C A clearly wishes to include in the unit certain employees
in the commercial department who solicit business . In our finding as to the appropriate
unit we shall disregard the A C A request for exclusion of "solicitors."
8 The C T U. contends that the appropriate unit should include, in addition, super-
visory employees without the power to hire and discharge , and employees in the plant
department and accounting department The C. T U, however, made no showing of, or
claim to , representation among employees of the Company in the Metropolitan Pittsburgh
area Under these circumstances, we do not consider the contentions of the C. T. U. as
to the appropiiate unit
O The traffic department also delivers messages by telephone , and through teleprinter
lines terminating in the offices of business firms.
830 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Western New York. Of approximately 45 employees in the depart-
ment, about 22 work in Metropolitan Pittsburgh. These employees
maintain the physical plant outside the traffic-department premises
and install and disconnect equipment. While the jurisdiction of
the plant department extends far beyond Pittsburgh, approximately
half of the employees within the department are directly engaged in
carrying on the Company's business in Metropolitan Pittsburgh.
Although in an emergency these employees may be sent to any part
of the area served by the plant department, they regularly are
stationed and perform their services in Metropolitan Pittsburgh.
We are of the opinion that the plant-department employees who
are stationed in Pittsburgh should be included in the appropriate,
unit 1o
The district superintendent's organization, with headquarters in
Pittsburgh, has a territorial jurisdiction covering Western Penn-
sylvania exclusive of Metropolitan Pittsburgh, all of West Virginia,
and Western New York. Throughout this area the work of the
district superintendent's unit is similar to the functions of the Pitts-
burgh commercial department. There are approximately 450 em-
ployees under the district superintendent, but only 6, including the
district superintendent, are stationed in Pittsburgh. These 6 em-
ployees have no relation to the Metropolitan Pittsburgh employees
of the Company, except that they work in Pittsburgh. Transfers
of employees between the district superintendent's unit and the Met-
ropolitan Pittsburgh commercial department rarely, if ever, occur.
The respective organizations maintain separate seniority systems.
We shall exclude the employees in the district superintendent's Pitts-
burgh headquarters from the appropriate unit.
The accounting department audits the monthly reports prepared
by the local offices within the jurisdiction of the district superin-
tendent, and it also, apparently, audits the accounts of the Pittsburgh
commercial and traffic departments.11 While the work of the ac-
counting-department employees is related to the conduct of the
Company's business in Metropolitan Pittsburgh, as well as in the
district superintendent's territory, these employees are not directly
engaged in carrying on the Company's operations in Pittsburgh.
We shall exclude them from the unit.
As stated above, the A. C. A. would exclude from the appropriate
unit all supervisory employees, while the Company would apparently
include all supervisory employees except those with power to hire
10 See cases cited in footnote 6, supra
"Prior to Novembei 1, 1939 . the accounting staff was within the commercial depart-
ment. It is now a part of the auditing department and the Pittsburgh accounting man-
ager reports to the division auditor, whose headquarters are in New York City
WESTERN UNION TELEGRAPH COMPANY 831
and discharge.' In two recent cases involving the representation of
employees of the Company, herein called the Washington case and
the Indianapolis case,13 the Board included in the appropriate unit
all supervisory employees except those with power to hire and dis-
charge. These employees were included in the unit in the Wash-
ington case at the request of the C. T. U., and in the Indianapolis
case over the objection of the C. T. U., which changed its prior
position. In the Indianapolis case the American Communications
Association was not a party, and in the Washington case it made no
claim with respect to the appropriate unit. Thus the American
Communications Association has not heretofore taken a position with
respect to the inclusion or exclusion of minor supervisory employees.
Under these circumstances, the only bona fide union involved re-
questing their exclusion '14 we shall exclude supervisory employees
from the unit.
The A. C. A. contends that the following employees in the com-
mercial department are supervisory and should be excluded from
the unit : Superintendent, office manager, delivery manager, assistant
delivery manager, delivery supervisors , sales manager, branch solicit-
ing managers , cashier, assistant cashier, manager of commercial
service, and one J. W. Bartell, who is listed on the Company pay
roll as delivery clerk. We shall consider briefly the nature of each
of these positions. The superintendent is in charge of the department
and will be excluded. The office manager has authority to recom-
mend hiring, discharge, and promotion, and to assign work under
the direction of the superintendent. We shall exclude him, also,
from the unit. The delivery manager supervises the messengers;
he assigns work to them and has authority to recommend discharge
and promotion. In his absence, these duties are assumed by the assist-
ant delivery manager. We shall exclude both of these employees from
the unit. There are two delivery supervisors, one of whom works
at night. It is the function of the delivery supervisor to see that
the messages are delivered. George T. Harris, superintendent of
the commercial department, testified that the delivery supervisor
12 See footnote 4, supra By the teams of the American Communications Association
Constitution , supei visory employees with power to hire and discharge are ineligible to
membership , while other supervisory employees "may be eligible to membership subject
to approval by the members present at the regular meeting of a local anion " The record
does not show whether or not any supervisory employees in the Metropolitan Pittsburgh
area have been admitted to membership by the A. C. A. Mervyn Rathborne, president
of Amei ican Communications Association , testified that supervisory employees of the
Company exercise a greater degree of authority than employees in similar positions in
other communications companies
Is These cases are cited in footnote 6, supi a.
14 See, for example, Matter of A. Fink and Sons Co, Inc, and Amalgamated Meat
Cutters & Butcher Workmen of N A, Local 422, A F of L, 9 N L R B 441; Matter of
Southern California Gas Company and Utility ll'oikers Omganizinq Committee , Local No.,
132, 10 N L R. B 112^
832 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
"supervises the operations of the delivery department rather than
supervising the messengers." Although Harris was evasive, it is
apparent from his testimony and from that of Michael Sotek, a mes-
senger, that the delivery supervisors exercise a substantial degree
of supervision over the messengers. We are of the- opinion that they
are essentially identified with the management and that they should
be excluded from the unit. We shall also exclude the sales manager
who, under Harris' direction, assigns work to the sales employees
and has authority to recommend promotion and discharge.
Branch managers and branch soliciting managers are in charge
of branch offices, one to each office ; in addition, branch soliciting
managers have the duty of soliciting business. Every branch solicit-
ing manager has at least one clerk and one messenger under his
supervision. The Company's pay roll for the period ending Jan-
uary 20, 1940, bears the name of 9 branch clerks, 109 messengers,
and 11 temporary messengers. The same pay roll contains the names
of 5 branch soliciting managers and 31 branch managers.15 Since
every branch soliciting manager supervises at least one branch clerk,
and since there are only nine branch clerks, it is evident that, with
possibly one or two exceptions, none of the branch managers exer-
cises supervision over a branch clerk. Branch soliciting managers
are thus entrusted with greater supervisory powers than branch
managers.16 We shall exclude branch soliciting managers from the
unit and include branch managers.
In addition to the cashier and assistant cashier, there is only one
other employee, a clerk, in the cashier's office. We are of the opinion
that the cashier and the assistant cashier should be included in the
unit. The A. C. A. would also exclude an employee designated as
"Manager, Commercial Service." The only testimony in the record
is to the effect that this employee supplies information to the public.
We shall include her in the unit. The A. C. A. would also exclude
J. W. Bartell, who is listed on the pay roll as a delivery clerk. Sotek,
a messenger, testified as witness for the A. C. A. that "the messen-
gers are hired from the Uniform Department with the approval of
the delivery manager," and that Bartell is in charge of the uniform
department. Harris did not testify regarding the duties of Bartel].
We think the evidence in the record is insufficient to warrant the
exclusion of Bartell as a supervisory employee. We shall therefore
include him in the unit.
Ii Of the 31 branch managers, 2 are designated on the pay roll as "relief manager" and
1 as "manager."
11 Harris testified that some employees listed as branch managers also solicit business,
and that occasionally a designation of blanch manager is changed to branch soliciting
manager. It is clear from his testimony, however, that the number of branch soliciting
managers on the pay roll is always small, and that ordinarily there are not more than 7
or 8 employees so designated.
WESTERN UNION TELEGRAPH COMPANY 833
Of the traffic-department employees, the A. C. A. would exclude
from the unit the traffic manager, night traffic managers, assistant
chief operator, automatic chief, testing and regulating chief, night
testing and regulating chief, repeater chief, automatic supervisors,
teleprinter supervisors, telephone supervisors, Morse supervisor,
route supervisors, service supervisors, and automatic monitor. We
shall exclude from the unit the traffic manager, who is in charge of
the department, and the two night traffic managers, who take the
traffic manager's place during their respective night shifts. The
traffic department is divided functionally into the following depart-
ments : Automatic, teleprinting, testing and regulating, telephone,
Morse, route, and service. The assistant chief operator is in charge
of the automatic and teleprinter departments. He assigns work to the
employees in these departments, and has authority to discipline by
caution and warning, and to order temporary suspensions from duty
for infractions of the rules. We shall exclude the assistant chief
operator from the unit. The automatic chief reports to the assistant
chief operator. He supervises the work of at least seven employees
and assigns work to them. We shall exclude him from the -unit. We
shall also exclude the testing and regulating chief, who has authority
in his department similar to that possessed by the assistant chief
operator. The night testing and regulating chief is in charge of the
department on the early night shift. We shall exclude him from the
unit. Subordinate to the testing and regulating chief is the repeater
chief, who supervises the work of approximately eight assistant re-
peater chiefs.', We shall exclude him from the unit.
On the traffic-department pay roll are six automatic supervisors,"
five teleprinter supervisors, four telephone supervisors, a Morse su-
pervisor, two route supervisors, and two service supervisors. The
automatic and teleprinter supervisors are subordinate to the assistant
chief operator, while the others report directly to the traffic manager.
The record is clear that all these supervisors have essentially the
same degree of authority in their respective departments. The aver-
age difference between the salary of each supervisor and of the oper-
ators who work under him is approximately $40.00 per month. The
supervisors assign work to the employees who work under them and
have general responsibility for the performance of that work. Upon
all the evidence we shall exclude the above supervisors.
The A. C. A. would also exclude an employee listed as automatic
Inonitor.19 This employee reports on the quality and quantity of
11 Certain titles on the traffic-department pay roll appear to be misnomers. Assistant
repeater chiefs, assistant wire chiefs, assistant regulating chiefs, assistant testing chiefs,
and assistant automatic chiefs apparently do not supervise other employees.
11 One of these is entitled senior automatic supervisor.
19 It is not clear whether this employee works in the automatic department or in the
telephone department
834 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
work performed by the employees of her department. We shall
exclude the automatic monitor from the unit.
The A. C. A. requests that in the event the Board includes in the
unit employees of the plant department, the maintenance foreman
and city foreman be excluded. The maintenance foreman, in charge
of the plant department, will be excluded from the unit The city
foreman assigns work to all except four of the plant_department em-
ployees who work in Pittsburgh. He inspects the work, supervises
the manner in which it is performed, and reports to the maintenance
foreman any infractions of the rules. Although the city foreman
has no authority to discipline employees or to hire and discharge, he
exercises such supervisory authority that we believe he is essentially
identified with the management in the minds of the employees, and
we shall exclude him from the unit.
On the commercial-department pay roll for the period ending Jan-
uary 20, 1940, there are 109 messengers and 11 temporary messengers.
The record shows that temporary messengers are hired at rush pe-
riods and that there is little or no prospect that they will be changed
to a permanent status. We shall exclude temporary messengers from
the unit.
The A. C. A. desires'to include in the appropriate unit furloughed
employees and "furloughed force reduction" employees. Furloughed
Employees are those who are granted voluntary furloughs for a period
not exceeding 6 months; the furlough may be extended beyond the
6 months' period on the approval of a vice president of the Company.
During the furlough period, these employees may return to work
whenever they so desire, and they are expected to return at the expi-
ration of the period. "Furloughed force reduction" employees are
those furloughed by the Company for reasons of economy. The fur-
lough period continues for 2 years. We shall include the furloughed
and "furloughed force reduction" employees in the unit.20
We find that the employees of the Company working in Metropoli-
tan Pittsburgh in the commercial, traffic, and plant departments, in-
cluding furloughed and "furloughed force reduction" employees, but
excluding executives, lawyers, confidential employees, temporary mes-
sengers, and the supervisory employees occupying the positions listed
in Appendices A, B, and C, constitute a unit appropriate for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining, and that said unit will insure to
employees of the Company the full benefit of their right to self-
organization and to collective bargaining and otherwise effectuate
the policies of the Act.
20 See the Indianapolis case , footnote 6, supra
WESTERN UNION TELEGRAPH COMPANY
VI. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
835
At the hearing the A. C. A. claimed to represent a substantial
number of the Company's employees in the appropriate unit but did
not introduce documentary evidence showing such representation.
The A. C. A. requested an election to settle the question concerning
representation.
We find that an election by secret ballot is necessary to resolve
the question concerning representation. Those persons eligible to
vote shall be the employees in the appropriate unit who were em-
ployed by the Company during the pay-roll period next preceding the
date of our Direction of Election'21 including employees who did not
work during such pay-roll period because they were ill or on vaca-
tion and furloughed and "furloughed force reduction" employees
on the pay roll of the Company, but excluding employees who be-
tween such pay-roll date and the date of the election have quit or
been discharged for cause.
Since we found in Case No. C-344 that the Company dominated
and interfered with the administration of the Association and that
the Association must be disestablished as a bargaining representative,
no provision will be made for the designation of the Association
upon the ballot.
The C. T. U. did not participate in the first hearing, except to
state its contentions regarding the appropriate unit. At the second
hearing counsel for the C. T. U. cross-examined several witnesses
with respect to the authority of supervisory employees. The C. T. U.
did not introduce evidence showing that it represents employees in
the appropriate unit, nor did it claim to represent any such em-
ployees. Under these circumstances , we are of the opinion that
the name of the C. T. U. should not appear upon the ballot.
Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and upon the entire
record in the case, the Board makes the following :
CONCLusIONS OF LAW
1. A question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the repre-
sentation of employees of The Western Union Telegraph Company,
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and
Section 2 (6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act.
u On January 26, 1940, at the close of the first hearing , before Trial Examiner Lindsay,
the A C. A. requested that eligibility to vote in an election directed by the Board be
determined by the pay rolls for the period ending January 20, 1940 This request was
not repeated at the second hearing, before Trial Examiner Maguire, nor in the brief filed
by the A. C A on April 1, 1940 We find that the determination of eligibility to vote
by the pay rolls next preceding the date of our Direction of Election will best effectuate
the policies of the Act
836 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
2. The employees of the Company working in Metropolitan Pitts-
burgh in the commercial , traffic, and plant departments , including
furloughed and "furloughed force reduction " employees on the pay
roll of the Company, but excluding executives , lawyers, confidential
employees, temporary messengers , and the supervisory employees
occupying the positions listed in Appendices A, B, and C, constitute
a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within
the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
By virtue of and pursuant to the authority vested in the National
Labor Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 8, of National
Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended,
it is hereby
DIRECTED that , as part of the investigation ordered by the Board
to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining
with The Western Union Telegraph Company, Pittsburgh, Pennsyl-
vania, 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 of Election , under the direction and supervision of the
Regional Director for the Sixth Region, acting in this matter as
agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Arti-
cle III , Section 9 , of said Rules and Regulations , among the em-
ployees of the Company working in Metropolitan Pittsburgh in the
commercial , traffic, and plant departments , who were employed dur-
ing the pay-roll period next preceding the date of this Direction,
including employees who did not work during such pay-roll period
because they were ill or on vacation and furloughed and "furloughed
force reduction " employees on the pay roll of the Company, but
excluding executives , lawyers, confidential employees, temporary
messengers , and the supervisory employees occupying the positions
listed in Appendices A, B, and C, hereto, and further excluding any
employees who between such pay-roll date and the date of the elec-
tion have quit or been discharged for cause , to determine whether
or not they wish to be represented for the purposes of collective
bargaining by American Communications Association , Local 54-B,
affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations.
MR. WILLIAM M. LEISERSON , dissenting :
I cannot concur in the issuance of this Direction of Election. In
Case No. C-344 the Board found that the Company had engaged in
and was engaging in unfair labor practices by dominating and inter-
fering with the administration of the Association , and ordered the
WESTERN UNION TELEGRAPH COMPANY 837
Company to cease and desist from its unfair labor practices and
completely to disestablish the Association as the representative of
any of the Company's employees. The Company has not complied
with the Board's Order, but has filed a petition to review that Order,
and has, according to the statement of its counsel, continued to recog-
nize and to deal with the Association. By continuing to deal with the
Association the Company is, in the eyes of the Board, engaging in
labor practices which the Board has found to be unfair. The Board
sets aside elections when it is shown that unfair labor practices accom-
pany the conduct of the elections.22 Since the Company admits that
it is continuing the practices condemned by the Board, I am of the
opinion that the petition should be dismissed pending court determi-
nation of the validity of the Board's Order.
APPENDIX A
Commercial Department
Superintendent Delivery supervisors
Office manager Sales manager
Delivery manager Branch soliciting managers
Assistant delivery manager
APPENDIX B
Traffic Department
Traffic manager
Night traffic managers
Assistant chief operator
Automatic chief
Testing and regulating chief
Night testing and regulating chief
Repeater chief
Automatic supervisors
Teleprinter supervisors
Telephone supervisors
Morse supervisor
Route supervisors
Service supervisors
Automatic monitor
APPENDIX C
Plant Department
Maintenance foreman City foreman
22 See , for example , Matter of Carrollton Metal Products Company and Amalgamated
Association of Iron, Steel cC Tin Workers of North Amertca, Local No 1571, 6 N . L. R. B.
569, 589; Matter of Tennessee Copper Company and A F. of L Federal Union No. 21164,
8 N L R B. 575, 9 N L R B 117, Matter of Pacific Gas and Electric Company and
United Electrical and Radio Workers of America, 13 N L R. B. 268, 291, 296.
283034-41-vol. 23-54