Parsons Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 24, 1951

95 N.L.R.B. 1336 (N.L.R.B. 1951)

1336 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
carried out by stage electricians or engineers, do not bring into play
advanced electronic knowledge or skills acquired through higher learn-
ing or special training and experience .6 Having reconsidered the
record on which the decision in this case was based, we are convinced
that this work can be and is effectively being accomplished by the
traditional stage electrician of the stage and amusement world. When
an engineer ceases to perform such work as a mere incident to his
all-around engineering functions, but regularly takes on these duties
as his main operation, he thereby foresakes his special field and assumes
the character of a stage electrician.
Without modifying the above-stated unit description, we find, there-
fore, that engineers or any other NBC employees, irrespective of their
job designations, who regularly spend more than 50 percent of their
time handling and placing television lights in the manner set forth
in the unit for which IATSE has been certified as exclusive bar-
gaining representative.
CHAIRMAN HERZOG and MEMBER STYLES took no part in the consid-
eration of the above Supplemental Decision Clarifying Certification.
PARSONS CORPORATION and INTERNATIONAL UNION, UNITED AUTO-
MOBILE, AIRCRAFT & AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMER-
ICA, CIO, PETITIONER . Case No. 7-RC-1336. August 21, 1951
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 Joseph Kulkis, hear-
ing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free
from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, the Board
has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member
panel [Members Houston, Reynolds, and Murdock].
track down lighting failures , repair circuits , and do wiring . They also operate, maintain,
and repair dimmer boards and switch boxes."
The decision also indicates that "television lighting equipment in almost all respects
is identical to lighting equipment used in motion picture and photography studios and
on the theatrical stage. The same methods for rigging , fastening , and manipulating
lights are used. Special lighting such as a flickering fireplace or moonbeams likewise are
obtained through the use of standard theatrical equipment or by improvisation , just as
it is done on the stage or in motion pictures."
8 NBC requires that its engineering department employees have a theoretical or practical
knowledge of electronics and prefers to hire college graduates with degrees in electrical
engineering or related technical fields. These employees receive formal instruction in
New York City in several television engineering jobs, including lighting.
95 NLRB No. 173.
PARSONS CORPORATION .1337
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the Act.
2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain em-
.ployees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa.-
tion. of employees of the Employer. within the meaning of Section 9
(c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The Petitioner requests a unit of production and maintenance
,employees at the Employer's two plants in Traverse City, Michigan.
Early in the hearing the Employer moved to dismiss the petition on
the ground that only a separate unit for each plant is appropriate,'
which motion was referred to the Board for ruling. At the close of
the hearing the Petitioner moved' to- amend its petition to provide
for a separate unit for each plant should the Board find inappropriate
the single unit it had requested. This motion was granted 'y the
bearing officer.
The Employer's main plant and office are in Detroit, Michigan. In
addition it has two plants at Traverse City, the plants here involved.
One of these is the Bay Street or Helicopter Plant, consisting of two
buildings with 48,000 square feet of floor area, principally devoted to
the manufacture of helicopter rotor blades from wood and metal. The
Traverse City office of the Employer is located at the Bay Street
Plant, the payroll for all Traverse City employees is there made up,
.new employees for both plants are hired there, and maintenance for
both plants is directed from there.
The other Traverse City plant is known as the Airport or Stamping
.Plant. It is a demountable steel structure with approximately 4,800
square feet of floor space, located about 3 miles from Bay Street
Plant. It is devoted principally to the manufacture of rockets under
Government contract and the stamping of metal automotive parts.
,In addition it stamps the metal retention plates for the helicopter
blades. Because of a space shortage at the Airport Plant, approxi-
mately 1,200 square feet of the Bay Street Plant are used for spot-
welding' automotive parts.
The record contains references to numerous instances of interchange
of employees between the two plants. Although this interchange
has been limited to the work in connection with rockets and automotive
parts, the Employer testified that employees from the Airport Plant
are given opportunities to apply for and be trained to do permanently
the more difficult work of helicopter blade manufacture at the Bay
I The Employer also urged , as a ground for its motion to dismiss, the untimeliness of
the petition because "radical changes of operation and employment are now pending."
For reasons fully detailed in this decision , the motion is denied.
1338 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Street Plant. The latter plant had approximately 138 employees at
the time of the hearing and the Airport Plant 49. The record does not
show comparative wage scales of these employees.
At the time of the hearing in this case, the ground upon which the
Bay Street Plant stood had been condemned for municipal purposes.
The Employer proposed however to continue the Bay Street, opera-
tions at a new plant immediately adjacent to the Airport Plant. At
the new plant, scheduled for completion about August 1, 1951, the
Employer expects to do only helicopter work.
Upon these facts we find that although employees at the Employer's
two plants perform different duties and have separate supervision, a
single unit for the two Traverse City plants is appropriate for the
following reasons : (a) The two plants, which have been located
within 3 miles of each other, will after August 1 of this year be lo-
cated within 100 feet of each other, thus further facilitating contact
among the employees; (b) interchange of personnel between the plants
occurs and advancement is open for employment in the helicopter
plant from the stamping plant; (c) the office administration and plant
maintenance of the Employer's Traverse City operations are com-
pletely integrated; and (d) there is no history of separate representa-
tion at these plants.2
We find that all employees of the Employer's helicopter plant and
of its stamping plant in Traverse City, Michigan, excluding office and
clerical employees, foremen , the laboratory technician at the heli-
copterplant, guards, and supervisory employees as defined in the Act,
constitute a unit appropriate for purpose of collective bargaining
within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act..
5. As indicated above the Employer contends that no election should
be conducted at this time because of proposed changes in its opera-
tions. Thus the Employer urges that its helicopter work, scheduled
for transfer to a new plant site, will: be increased. Instead of the
48,000 square feet of floor area which the helicopter plant now has,
the new plant will have less than 20,000. In spite of the decreased
plant size , however, the Employer alleges that it expects to increase
its production of helicopter rotor blades and employ additional per-
sonnel , apparently by making the second shift more nearly equal to the
first. No decision as to a third shift had been reached at the time of
' Pine Hall Brick cf Pipe Company, 93 NLRB 362; compare : William R. Whittaker Co.,
Ltd., 93 NLRB 520.
See also Parsons Corporation , 86 NLRB 74, where, in September 1949, the Board
dismissed a petition by the petitioner herein for a unit at the so-called 12th Street Plant
of the Employer in Traverse City, which plant was then in the process of being dismantled
for sale: Some of the presses from that plant were not included in the sale and several i
months later constituted the machinery nucleus for establishment of the Employer 's'Airport'
or stamping plant involved herein . The Board did not pass upon the appropriateness of
a 2-plant unit in its earlier decision.
HOLLAND FURNACE COMPANY 1339
the hearing. In the 6-week period prior to the hearing the Employer
had employed about 50 additional employees for the'rotor blade work.
It estimated at the hearing that it would hire 15 to 20 more before
completion of the new plant, but stated that it was possible that no
hirings would occur during August because of the move into the new
plant. The record contains no further information as to the number
of prospective employees.
The Employer also alleged that while it considers its helicopter
blade manufacture a permanent endeavor, it may discontinue opera-
tions at the stamping plant. because they have not been profitable.
So far as the record indicates, however, plans for discontinuance are
indefinite.
On this record we are not persuaded that the proposed expansion
of the helicopter plant operation or the possible discontinuance of the
stamping plant operation constitute sufficient reason for denying the
employees an election at this time.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this
volume.]
HOLLAND FURNACE COMPANY and LOCAL 585, INTERNATIONAL UNION,
UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AIRCRAFT AND AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT
WORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO1 PETITIONER . Case, No. 4-RC-1134.
August 24, 1951
Decision and Direction of Elections
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a hearing was held before Harold X. Summers, hearing
officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from
prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. At the hearing, the-Em-
ployer moved to dismiss the petition on the grounds that the branches
of its operations involved in this proceeding are not engaged in com-
merce within the meaning of the Act, and that the unit sought is
inappropriate. The Intervenor, Sheet Metal Workers' International
Association, Local 19, A. F. L., also moved to dismiss the petition on
the ground that an existing contrict is a bar. Finally, the Petitioner
moved to dismiss the Intervenor's intervention because of an alleged
insufficient showing of interest. For reasons given hereinafter, all
these motions are hereby denied.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, the Board
has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member
panel [Chairman.Herzog and Members Houston and Reynolds].
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
95 NLRB No. 180.