West Coast Telephone Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 22, 1946

66 N.L.R.B. 1073 (N.L.R.B. 1946)

In the Matter of WEST COAST TELEPHONE COMPANY and NORTHWEST
COMMUNICATIONS COUNCIL OF THE INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF
ELECTRICAL WORKERS, AFL
In the Matter of WEST COAST TELEPHONE COMPANt and INDEPENDENT
COMMUNIcATIONS EMPLOYEES
Cases Nos . 19-R-1656 and 19-R-1675, respectively.-
Decided March 22, 19116
Mr. Paul H. Graves, of Spokane, Wash., and Mir. Ray Dalton, of
Everett, Wash., for the Company.
Messrs. Thomas G. McCrea and Kenneth E. Tallmadge, of Everett,
Wash., for the ICE.
Messrs. L. Presley Gill, G. S. Winter, and Miss Della E. McIntyre.
of Seattle, Wash., for the IBEW.
Mr. Sidney Grossman, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon separate petitions filed by the Northwest Communications
Council of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers,
AFL,' herein called the IBEW, and the Independent Communica-
tions Employees, herein called the ICE, each alleging that a question
affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of em-
ployees of the West Coast Telephone Company, Everett, Washington.
herein called the Company, the National Labor Relations Board pro-
vided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice before Joseph D.
Holmes, Trial Examiner. The hearing was held in Everett, Wash-
ington, on January 22, 1946. The Company, the IBEW, and the ICE
appeared and participated. All parties were afforded full opportunity
to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce
evidence bearing on the issues.
1 The Council, which is comprised of Locals 48 and 77 of the IBEW, was formed for
the purpose of organizing communications employees in the States of Oregon and Wash-
ington.
66 N. L . R. B., No. 132.
1073
686572-46-69
1074 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
At the hearing, the Trial Examiner reserved ruling upon the ICE's
notion to dismiss the IBEW's petition on the ground that the unit
petitioned for therein is inappropriate. For the reasons set forth in
Section IV, infra, the motion is denied. The Trial Examiner also
reserved ruling upon the motions of the Company and the ICE to
dismiss the IBEW's petition for the alleged reason that the petitioner
in Case No. 19-R-1656 is not the real party in interest. The motions
are hereby denied. The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hearing
are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. All parties
were afforded an opportunity to file briefs with the Board.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
West Coast Telephone Company, a Washington corporation, is en-
gaged in the operation of telephone systems in various small com-
munities throughout the States of Oregon, Washington, and Cali-
fornia. It owns the West Coast Telephone Company of California
which operates the California section of its business as a subsidiary
corporation. The Company's telephone systems transmit calls to
local stations and across State lines between its stations throughout
the three States. Messages also are transmitted throughout the Nation
through interconnecting facilities with the Bell Telephone System.
The Company admits that it is engaged in interstate commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
11. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
Northwest Communications Council of the International Brother-
hood of Electrical Workers, affiliated with the American Federation
of Labor, is a labor organization admitting to membership employees
of the Company.
Independent Communications Employees, unaffiliated, is a labor
organization admitting to membership employees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Company refuses to grant recognition to the ICE and the
IBEW as the ,exclusive bargaining representative of the employees
each seeks to represent.
A statement of a Board agent, introduced into evidence at the
WEST COAST TELEPHONE COMPANY 107S
hearing, indicates that the IBEW represents a substantial number
of the employees in the unit hereinafter found appropriate.'-
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning
the representation of employees of the Company , within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The IBEW requests a unit consisting of all plant and traffic de-
partment employees throughout the Company's system, excluding
commercial department and supervisory employees. The ICE seeks
a system-wide unit of all employees of the Company, including em-
ployees in the commercial department. The Company contends that
separate system-wide units for each of its three departments are ap-
propriate and, as an alternative, asserts its preference for the unit
sought by the ICE.
The Company's local service area is included within five districts
embracing parts of three States. Each district is divided into three
departments corresponding to the following groups of employees :
plant department, consisting of construction and maintenance em-
ployees; traffic department, consisting of telephone operators; and
commercial department, consisting of clerical employees. Inasmuch
as all the parties are in agreement as to the propriety of a system-
Ns i de unit, the only issue with which we are here concerned is whether
the employees in the plant and traffic departments, as well as those
in the commercial department. should be included in a single system-
wide unit or constitute separate appropriate units.
The ICE has been accorded recognition as the bargaining repre-
sentative of all the Company's employees throughout its system since
1937. In July 1941, it entered into a recognition agreement with the
Company wherein it was recognized as the exclusive bargaining - repre-
sentative of all employees of the Company throughout its system.
The various locals of the ICE. however, have each entered into sep-
arate working agreements with the Company generally in behalf of
each department within a district.3 The executive board of the ICE
coordinates the activities of the districts and at its annual meetings
considers problems common to allemployees. In the prior proceeding
involving certain of the Company's employees, we found that a unit
2 The Field Examiner reported that the IBEW submitted 145 cards , bearing the names
of 144 employees on the Company 's pai roll, in an alleged appropriate unit consisting of
488 employees . The ICE relies upon its contracts with the Company as evidence of its
representation interest.
3 Separate locals of the ICE represent each of the departments in the Everett district
and in the Forest Grove district, which include the major portion of the Company's per-
sonnel Plant and traffic department employees of the LaGrande district and of the
Marshfield district are each represented by a single local No local has been organized
in the Klamath district.
1076 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
confined to the employees in one district of the Company was in-
appropriate.4 However, no determination was made as to whether
the interest of the employees would be more appropriately served by
a system-wide departmental unit, as urged by the Company, or by a
unit broader in scope, as requested by the IBEW and the ICE.
Although a departmental division of employees exists because of
functional differences and variances in working conditions,' it is
nevertheless our conviction that the employees in all three depart-
ments of the Company may bargain successfully in a single system-
wide unit; all three have a common interest in the rendition of serv-
ice to the public." The Company's operations are highly integrated
and its managerial policies are centrally formulated. Moreover, as
indicated in the prior proceeding, the method employed in effectuating
a working relationship between the Company and the ICE for bar-
gaining purposes has not established separate and independent rela-
tions on a local or departmental level, but exists within the framework
of the comprehensive recognition agreement. In view of the fore-
going, we find that plant, traffic, and commercial employees through-
out the Company's system may bargain collectively in a single unit.
We find that all employees of the Company's plant, traffic, and
commercial departments throughout its system. excluding all super-
visory employees with authority to hire, promote, discharge, disci-
pline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or ef-
fectively recommend such action, constitute a unit appropriate for
the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section
9 (b) of the Act.
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
We shall direct that the question concerning representation which
has arisen be resolved by an election by secret ballot among employees
in the appropriate unit who were employed during the pay-roll period
immediately preceding the date of the Direction of Election herein.
subject to the limitations and additions set forth in the Direction.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National Labor
Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations
Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor Rela-
tions Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3, as amended, it is hereby
• See Matter of West Coast Telephone Company, 64 N. L. R. B. 70.
• This department division also is mandatory in accordance with the bookkeeping regu
lations of the Federal Communications Commission.
"See Matter of Illinois Consolidated Telephone Company , 61 N. L R. B 447; Matte?
of Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph 'Company, 55 N L. R B 1058.
1VEST COAST TELEPHONE COMPANY 1077
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with West Coast Tele-
phone Company, Everett, Washington, 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 super-
vision of the Regional Director for the Nineteenth Region, acting in
this matter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and
subject to Article III, Sections 10 and 11, of said Rules and Regula-
tions, among employees in the unit found appropriate 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 rehired or reinstated prior to the date of
the election, to determine whether they desire to be represented by
Northwest Communications Council of the International Brotherhood
of Electrical Workers, AFL, or by Independent Communications Em-
ployees, for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by neither.