Douglas Aircraft Co., Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Nov 21, 1952

101 N.L.R.B. 515 (N.L.R.B. 1952)

DOUGLAS AIRCRAFT CO., INC. 515
difficulty in ascertaining the identity of the contracting labor organza=
tion but has continued to deal with the Intervenor and its local affili-
ates. Under these circumstances, as part of the contract unit is un-
touched by the alleged schism and the Intervenor's local affiliates con-
tinue to administer the contract with active organizations, we find that
no 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 Acts We shall therefore dismiss the
petitions.
Order
IT Is HEREBY ORDERED that the petitions filed herein in Cases Nos.
11-RC-417, 11-RC-418, 11-RC-421, 11-RC-422, 11-RC-423, and
11-RC-429 be, and they hereby are, dismissed.
MEMBERS HOUSTON and MuBDocK took no part in the consideration
of the above Decision and Order.
B See Harris Products Company, supra ; Allied Container Corporation, 98 NLRB 580;
and cases cited therein.
DOUGLAS AIRCRAFT CO., INC.' and LOCAL UNION 45, INTERNATIONAL
BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, AFL, PETITIo.xER. Case
No. 21-RC-2741. November 21, 1952
Decision and Order
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a hearing was held before H. C. Bumgarner, hearing
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-mem-
ber panel [Chairman Herzog and Members Murdock and Peterson].
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 organizations involved claim to represent employees
of the Employer?
3. No question affecting commerce exists concerning the repre-
sentation of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section
1 The Employer's name appears as amended at the hearing.
' District Lodge 720, International Association of Machinists, AFL, was permitted to.
intervene at the hearing on the basis of its current plant-wide contract.
101 NLRB No. 113.
242305-53-34
516 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act, for the following
reasons:
The Petitioner seeks to sever a group of radio and radar electricians
from the existing plant-wide unit represented by the Intervenor. The
Employer and the Intervenor oppose the severance on the ground
that the employees sought to be represented by the Petitioner are
not a true craft group and that the requested unit is therefore
inappropriate.
The radio and radar electricians all work in department 597 of the
Employer's aircraft manufacturing plant at El Segundo, California.
They are classified as radio and radar technicians and radio and radar
mechanics A and B. The technicians are in labor grade 1 and the
mechanics are in labor grades 3 and 8. There are approximately 115
employees in the group sought, a large majority of whom are A and
B mechanics 8
After an airplane has been completely fabricated in other parts
of the plant, it is brought to department 597 for electronic installation
and final operational checkup. The radio and radar group work
exclusively on checking the operation of the radio and radar equip-
ment in the airplane and make all adjustments and repairs necessary
to assure proper functioning. This work requires the highest type of
skills in the electrical craft, and the record shows that the technicians
and the A mechanics possess and use all such craft skills. The B
mechanics are somewhat lesser skilled and are similar to apprentices.
Promotion within the group is from B mechanic to A mechanic to
technician. We are satisfied that the radio and radar employees are
craftsmen of the type ordinarily entitled to separate representation
despite a history of collective bargaining on a broader basis.
However, the record shows that there are at least 40 other electri-
cians in department 597 who are also electrical craftsmen and whom
the Petitioner does not desire to represent. These employees are
classified as field and service electricians A and B, and are in the
same labor grades, 3 and 8, as the bulk of the radio and radar employ-
ees. The field and service electricians are responsible for the final
operational checkup of all other electrical installations, described
in the record as "the big stuff" in the airplane. In other words, the
field and service electricians and the radio and radar electricians
perform the same relative functions on different types of electrical
installations. Furthermore, in many instances, the field and service
electricians are in the same working groups as the radio and radar
employees. We are satisfied from the record that the field and service
electricians possess and use skills of the electrical craft comparable
to those of the radio and radar mechanics.
s The radio and radar technicians , who do not appear to constitute more than 10 percent
of the group sought by the Petitioner, are the top skilled electricians in the plant.
GARNER AVIATION SERVICE CORPORATION 517
The radio and radar electricians constitute, therefore, but a segment
of the electrical craft in the Employer's plant .4 As it is well estab-
lished that the Board will not find a segment of a craft to be appro-
priate,5 we shall dismiss the petition.e
Order
IT Is HEREBY ORDERED that the petition filed herein be, and it hereby
is, dismissed.
'Although there is a reference in the record to a maintenance electrician classification
elsewhere in the plant , the record does not establish whether or not such employees are
craftsmen.
6 Misprint, Inc., 90 NLRB 98; Lockheed Aircraft Corporation, 87 NLRB 40. See also
The Baldwin Locomotive Works, 89 NLRB 403.
If the field and service electricians were added to the voting group , the Petitioner's
showing of interest would not be sufficient for the purpose of directing an election.
GARNER AVIATION SERVICE CORPORATION AND LYNCHBURG AIR TRANS-
PORT & SALES CORPORATION , VIRGINIA CORPORATIONS AUTHORIZED TO DO
BUSINESS IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA, D/B/A GARNER AVIATION SERVICE
CORPORATION 1 and' INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS,
AFL, PETITIONER. Case No. 10-1C-1956. November 21, 1952
Decision and Order
Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before Frank E.
Hamilton, Jr., hearing 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 [Chairman Herzog and Members Houston and Murdock].
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged, under contract with the United States
Government, in the operation of a facility at Bartow, Florida, where
it trains aviation cadets and performs the necessary maintenance on
aircraft used in such training. Pursuant to the contract, title to all
property and equipment is vested in the United States Government .2
As additional supplies or items of equipment are needed, the Employer
obtains them from the nearest Air Force depot, or if they are not thus
available, it purchases them locally and is reimbursed by the Govern-
ment for the purchase price plus freight charges. Title to supplies
or equipment thus purchased vests in the Government upon delivery
The name of the Employer appears as amended at the hearing.
The real estate on which this training base is located is leased by the Air Force from
the city of Bartow.
101 NLRB No. 102.