WSB

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 14, 1969

175 N.L.R.B. 980 (N.L.R.B. 1969)

980 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
WSB, WSB-FM and WSB-TV and American
Federation of Television and Radio Artists,
AFL-CIO, Atlanta Local ,' Petitioner. Case
l 0-UC-22
May 14, 1969
DECISION AND ORDER DENYING
PETITION TO CLARIFY
CERTIFICATION
BY MEMBERS BROWN, JENKINS, AND ZAGORIA
In a petition for unit clarification filed under
Section 9(b) of the National Labor Relations Act,
as amended, the Petitioner seeks to have included in
its certified bargaining unit of staff announcers at
the Employer's radio and television station in
Atlanta, Georgia certain television newsfilm
reporters who are presently represented by the
Intervenor.' On November 25 and 26, 1968, a
hearing was held before Hearing Officer William E.
Caldwell for the purpose of taking testimony with
respect to the issues raised by this petition.
Following the hearing, on December 31, 1968, this
case was transferred to the Board in Washington, D.
C., pursuant to Section 102.67(h) of the National
Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations and
Statements of Procedure, Series 8, as amended.
Subsequently, the Employer and Petitioner filed
briefs with the Board.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the
Board has delegated its powers in connection with
this case to a three-member panel.
The Board has considered the Hearing Officer's
rulings made at the hearing and finds that no
prejudicial error was committed. The rulings are
hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in this case, including the
briefs filed by the parties, the Board finds:
1. The Employer is a Georgia corporation with its
office and place of business located in Atlanta,
Georgia, where it is engaged in commercial
television and radio broadcasting. 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 Petitioner and Intervenor are labor
organizations representing certain employees of the
Employer.
3. The Petitioner, in December 1944, was certified
as the collective-bargaining representative for a unit
of staff radio announcers at the Employer's
broadcasting station.' Subsequently, in the early
'Herein called Petitioner or AFTRA . Name appears as amended at the
hearing.
'The Intervenor, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local
Union 1193, AFL-CIO, herein also called IBEW , was permitted to
intervene because it has represented the disputed employees since 1965 and
they are presently covered by a bargaining agreement between the
Employer and IBEW . Also, IBEW was certified in 1952 for a bargaining
unit of the Employer's radio engineers in Case 10-RC-1953.
1950's, the Employer and Petitioner commenced
including television newscasters as coming within the
scope of their bargaining agreements. However, it
was not until 1965 that television newscasters were
specifically covered by an addendum to the contract
between AFTRA and the Employer. Currently,
Addendum "A" to the current contract between
these parties contains provisions relating to TV
newscasters.
In 1965, a group of TV newsfilm reporters and
cameramen requested the Petitioner to represent
them but their request was declined by AFTRA's
shop steward. Thereupon, the Intervenor filed a
representation petition with the Board for a
bargaining unit composed of laboratory technicians
who primarily process motion picture newsfilm and
TV newsfilm reporters "who do not regularly appear
on the air." This petition was subsequently
withdrawn by the Intervenor when the Employer
voluntarily recognized IBEW as bargaining agent
for these employee classifications on the basis of
signed IBEW authorization cards. These TV
newsfilm reporters and laboratory technicians are
presently covered by a separate bargaining
agreement between the Employer and Intervenor. It
is this category of TV newsfilm reporters which the
Petitioner seeks to accrete to its existing unit of
announcers and newscasters.
The Employer contends that the petition herein
should be dismissed , inter alia , because the TV
newsfilm reporters sought by the Petitioner do not
constitute a normal accretion to its bargaining unit,
and the bargaining history involving these employees
militates against the propriety of granting the
petition for unit clarification. The Intervenor does
not oppose the petition and declares its acquiescence
in the Board's determination of the matter.
The record demonstrates that the Petitioner is
seeking to represent a group of approximately 8
television newsfilm reporters presently represented
by IBEW as part of its unit of approximately 21
employees.' The television newsfilm reporters
normally perform most of their work on the scene in
the field and away from the Employer's
broadcasting premises. They usually operate in
conjunction with a cameraman as a team which
infrequently may also include a sound man. Nearly
all of the newsfilm reporters can also perform as
cameramen but this doubling of function is
becoming increasingly rare. The newsfilm reporter
primarily prepares or extemporaneously delivers the
news story to be televised and his voice and
frequently his likeness appears on the filmed
segments of the newscast. These reporters often
appear in this manner as part of the Employer's
news programs. However, such appearances are not
'Case 10-RC-1354.
The parties ostensibly stipulated during the hearing that employee D.
McClellan is a supervisor within the meaning of the Act . In any event, in
view of our disposition of this case , we need not resolve this issue.
175 NLRB No. 161
WSB, WSB-FM AND WSB-TV 981
definitely scheduled and vary in number from week
to week. On the other hand, the Employer's
television newscasters who are represented by
AFTRA discharge their duties at the Employer's
television station and are concerned with the
preparation and presentation of live, on-the-air,
regularly scheduled news programs. The newscaster
has a role in writing and developing the text and
format of the particular newscast, or segment
thereof, to which he is usually assigned. Both TV
newsfilm reporters and the newscasters work in the
Employer's news department headed by the news
director and they are all subject to his overall
supervision.
Although the foregoing brief descriptions of the
duties and working conditions of television
newscasters and TV newsfilm reporters tend to
indicate the existence of a community of interest
between these two categories of employees, we find,
in the circumstances of this case, that the newsfilm
reporters cannot be properly considered to be an
accretion to the Petitioner's bargaining unit.'
As mentioned previously, the Employer urges that
clarification of AFTRA's certified unit of staff
announcers to include the newsfilm reporters in issue
would be inappropriate in this case. We agree. At
the outset, we note that the TV newsfilm reporters
are presently represented by the Intervenor and
covered by a bargaining agreement which also
includes cameramen and laboratory technicians.'
This agreement by its terms will not expire until
November 30, 1969, and it expressly. provides that
"this agreement shall cover all newsfilm reporters
who do not regularly appear on the air."' As for
AFTRA's bargaining agreement, it presently covers
television newscasters "whose primary duties are the
preparation and presentation of `on-air' news
programs.i' Thus, it is seen that the pertinent
IBEW and AFTRA bargaining agreements when
read together presently purport to describe
particularly the unit placement of newsfilm
reporters. It is clear that, unlike many cases of this
species, the parties herein have already consciously
resolved the placement of these employees in the
general scheme of representation. In addition,
newsfilm reporters have been utilized by the
Employer's news department for over 15 years but
the Petitioner never has sought to represent them as
a group prior to the advent of this petition. Further,
in 1965, when a group of these employees requested
that AFTRA agree to represent them, their request
was declined' and they came to be represented by
IBEW as described, supra.
In view of the foregoing and the entire record
herein, we find that the petition for unit clarification
raises a question concerning representation which
may not be resolved in this proceeding. The proper
procedure for seeking the inclusion of the newsfilm
reporters in the AFTRA unit is a petition pursuant
to Section 9(c) of the Act seeking an election.'°
Accordingly, we shall dismiss the petition."
ORDER
It is hereby ordered that the petition be, and it
hereby is, dismissed.
'See News Syndicate Co . Inc , 164 NLRB No 69, particularly part of
rationale disposing of issue involved in placement of the "home delivery
operation "
'The laboratory technicians , according to the contract, are primarily
engaged in the processing of motion picture newsfilm We note the fact
that the IBEW agreement covers those employees directly concerned with
the Employer's TV newsfilm enterprise, namely, the reporters and
cameramen who jointly produce the newsfilm and the technicians who
prepare it for telecasting thus indicating a community of interest among
them
'In view of our disposition of this case , we find it unnecessary to decide
whether newsfilm reporters " regularly appear on the air "
'Addendum A, par 1, B, effective until December 31, 1970
'See Stenlon Corporation, 147 NLRB 219, 221 where the Board cited as
adverse to the petitioning union the fact that it had formerly demanded the
stripping of seniority from employees who transferred to the shipping and
receiving department which it later sought to represent via unit
clarification.
We intimate no conclusions with respect to any of the issues which
might be raised in such a proceeding
"Cf. Lufkin Foundry and Machine Company, 174 NLRB No 90;
Westinghouse Electric Corporation, 173 NLRB No. 51