Intercontinent Aircraft Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 4, 1943

50 N.L.R.B. 99 (N.L.R.B. 1943)

I
In the Matter of INTERCONTINENT AIRCRAFT CORPORATION and PALM
CITY LODGE #745, I. A. OF M. -
In the Matter Of INTERCONTINENT AIRCRAFT CORPORATION and PALM
-CITY LODGE #745, I. A. OF M.
In the Matter Of INTERCONTINENT AIRCRAFT CORPORATION and PALM
CITY LODGE #745, I. A. opM.
Cases Nos. 8-5335 to B4337, inclusive, respectively. Decided June 4
1943.
Loftin, Calkins, Anderson, Scott c Preston, by Mr. Alfred L.
McCarthy, of Miami, Fla., for the Company.
Mr. Fred B. Jackson, of Kendall, Fla., for the Union.
Mrs. Augusta Spaulding, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
, Upon separate petitions duly filed by Palm City Lodge #745,
International Association of Machinists, herein called the Union, each
alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the
representation of employees of Intercontinent Aircraft Corporation,
Miami Springs, Florida, herein called the Company, the National La-
bor Relations Board provided for an appropriate consolidated hearing
upon due notice before Erwin C. Catts, Trial Examiner.' Said hearing
was held at Miami, Florida, on May 7, 1943. The Company and the
3 On April 21 , 1943 , the Union filed four petitions , each requesting certification of the
Union as bargaining agent of the Company 's employees in an alleged appropriate bargain-
ing unit. The petitions covered, respectively , employees in the following groups : ( 1) em-
ployees in production release, production planning and change group, and material plan-
ning departments ; ( 2) timekeepers ; ( 3) guards; and (4) office and clerical employees.
On May 4, 1943 , the Board issued an order consolidating these cases . During the course
of the consolidated hearing on these four petitions , the-Company and the Union , with the
approval of the Trial Examiner , entered into a consent election agreement with respect
to the employees in group ( 1), above. The consent election agreement was marked as
Board's Exhibit 5, and received into evidence at the hearing. Subsequent to the hearing,
the Board , having considered the matter , approved the consent election agreement and,
pursuant thereto, on May 20, 1942, issued an order severing the petition concerning em-
ployees in group ( 1) from the three petitions , concerning which the instant consolidated
proceedings are now concerned.
50 N. L. R. B., No. 23.
99
r
100 DEOLSIIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Union appeared and participated. -During the course of the hearing,
the Company filed separate motions requesting that each of the peti-
tions in these consolidated proceedings be dismissed. The Union op-
posed the granting of these motions. The Trial Examiner did not rule
thereon. For reasons which appear in Section IV, below, the motions
are denied. All parties were offered full opportunity to be heard, to
examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce, evidence bear-
ing on the issues. The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hearing
are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Intercontinent Aircraft Corporation is engaged in the manufacture
of aircraft parts at Miami Springs, Florida. During the year end-
ing 1942, the Company fabricated and assembled raw materials, valued
in excess of $100,000, consisting of steel, aluminum, and other alloy
metals, approximately 95 percent of which was shipped to its plant
from points outside Florida. During the same period the Company
sold finished products, valued in excess of $500,000, all of which was
shipped to points. outside Florida.
The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
Palm City Lodge #745, International Association of Machinists, is
a labor organization affiliated with the American Federation of Labor,
admitting to membership employees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTIONS CONCERNING? REPRESENTATION
On April 15, 1943, the Union asked the Company to recognize it as
sole bargaining agent of timekeepers, plant-protection employees, and
typists, clerks, and stenographers in the Company's factory offices,
-respectively. The Company refused to bargain on the ground that
The Union had presented the questions concerning the representation .
of these employees to the Board and the Company would not recognize
the Union until the Board had reached its decision on the several peti-
tions filed herein.
A statement prepared by a Field Examiner and admitted into evi-
dence ' at the hearing indicates that the Union represents a substan-,
INTE'RCONTINENT AIRCRAFT CORPORATION 101
tial number of employees in each of the units herein found appropriate
for bargaining.2
We find that questions affecting- commerce have 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 UNITS
The Union contends that all factory timekeepers excluding the
supervisor, assistant supervisor, and chief timekeeper, all plant guards
excluding the chief guard, sergeants, and first sergeants, and all ste-
nographers, typists, and clerks in the Company's factory offices, who
are not included in the existing contract between the Company and
the Union, constitute respectively separate appropriate bargaining
units.
Timekeepers: Plant employees punch the clock when they enter and
leave the plant. Timekeepers keep a daily time sheet for each em-
ployee, on which they record the work time of the employee to, be
charged against a given production job. The time sheet records idle
time as well as working time, and shows the work assignments of
each employee at specific hours during the day. Employees are paid
for idle time. The time records thus made are used in figuring labor
costs in connection with billing cost-plus contracts to contractors with
which the Company does business. Timekeepers do not assign or
direct the work of production employees. Timekeepers work under
the general supervision of the accounting department.
Guards: Guards are armed, plant-protection employees. They
guard the Company's property and products against espionage, theft,
trespass, and fire and accident hazards. They are provided with mas-
ter keys to the plant. They investigate and report to military author-
ities any occurrences which arouse their suspicion. They prevent the
entrance of unauthorized persons into the plant and restrict the move-
ments of all persons within the plant to specific departments where
their work is to be performed. Guards constitute a highly selective
group of huen. Higher standards are required for. their employment
than that of the ordinary production employees. They are part of the
- ] In support of its claim to represent the Company 's timekeepers, the Union submitted
9 authorization cards, which appear to bear genuine signatures of timekeepers on the
Company's pay roll of April 10 , 1943. There are approximately 27 employees in the unit
appropriate for timekeepers.
In support of its claim to represent the Company 's guards, the Union submitted 10
authorization cards, which appear to bear genuine signatures of guards on the Company's
pay roll of April 10, 1943 . There are approximately 34 employees in the unit appropriate
for guards.
In support of its claim to represent the Company 's stenographers , typists , and, clerks
in the factory offices, the Union submitted 21 cards, which appear to bear genuine signa-
tures , of such employees on the Company ' s pay roll 'of• April 10, 1943. There are approxi-
mately 27 employees in the unit appropriate for such employees.
536105-44-vol.50 8
102 DEOSSIONS OF NATIONAL IAABOnR RELATIONS BOARD
auxiliary military police. They are listed on the Company's pay roll
as employees, subject to the usual- employment relations with the
Company.
Stenographers, typists, and, clerks: Stenographers, typists, and
clerks who are included in the proposed clerical unit perform their
work in the Company's offices. There are approximately 12 ste-
nographers, 10 typists, and 8 clerks in this group. These employees
are clearly distinguishable from foremen's clerks and from plant
clerks who perform their work on. the factory floor among the pro-
duction employees and who, as noted below, are presently included in
the same bargaining unit with production employees.- Employees
within the proposed unit care for the Company's file and records, some
of which contain confidential matters and information properly acces-
sible to office clerks and departmental heads, but not accessible to em-
ployees generally.' Certain employees in this group are secretaries
to departmental heads. Neither the Union nor the Company seeks
their segregation from other employees in this general office group by
virtue of this work.
The Company contends that because the employees in the three
groups above described are employees on whose efficiency and integrity
the Company depends for the accuracy and safekeeping of its em-
ployment and contract records and for the protection of its plant,
these employees constitute "instruments of management" and are
therefore precluded from collective bargaining with management with
respect to their wages, hours of employment, and other conditions of
employment. We find no merit in this contention. So far as the
record discloses the employees herein concerned are not charged with
administrative discretion nor is any degree of managerial authority
delegated to them. They perform their respective tasks under admin-
istrative supervision according to precise instructions. Timekeepers
who record time allocations, guards who'are charged with faithful
performance of protecting vital war materials, and office employees
who perform their clerical work in proximity to, or in connection with,
the limited use of confidential papers may not be immune from oppor-
tunities to betray information which they may acquire. We perceive
no necessary conflict, however, between self-organization and collec-
tive bargaining and the faithful performance of duty.3 There is noth-
ing in the record to indicate that any duty assigned to these employees
affects the normal relation of employees to employer or from which
we may .conclude that they are not entitled to collective bargaining
with their employer if they so desire. While we have frequently held
that employees within each of the three proposed units, respectively,
a Matter of Campbell Soup Company ( Camden, New Jersey, Plant ) and United Cannery,
Agricultural, Packing & Allied Workers, Local 80, C. I . 0., 45 N. L. R. B. 6, and cases
cited therein.
INTE'RCONTINENT AIRCRAFT CORPORATION 103
are generally more appropriately segregated into separate units than
included in large industrial units with production and maintenance
employees, we find frequently that they constitute separate bargain-
ing units apart from such employees.4
On September 4, 1942, the Company and the Union entered into
an exclusive bargaining contract covering all employees at the plant
with certain specified exceptions. Timekeepers, guards, and office
clerical employees were expressly named among these exceptions and
thus excluded from coverage under the contract. The contract pro-
vides that it be effective from August 1, 1942, until August 1, 1943, and
thereafter renewable from year to year unless terminated by 30 days'
previous written notice and that it shall constitute the "sole agree-
ment" between the parties. The Company contends that by the ex-
press provision of the contract the.Union is precluded from seeking
to bargain for the employees, in the proposed units, noted above, and
that to bargain for these employees by separate agreements in sepa-
rate units is merely an evasion of a prohibition recited in the contract
between the Company and the Union. We find no merit in this con-
tention. While timekeepers, guards, and office and clerical employees,
with certain plant clerk exceptions, are expressly excluded from cover-
age in the present contract, such exclusion per se cannot preclude the
Union from representing these employees as bargaining agent. While
the present contract provides that it is the "sole" agreement between
the parties, this provision fairly relates to sanctions concerning the
working conditions of employees subject to the contract. We cannot
construe this provision to bar other employees of the Company from
the right to bargain collectively in appropriate units with their em-
ployer through any bargaining agent whom they may desire to rep-
resent them.5
Under these circumstances, and on the basis of the whole record,
we find that separate bargaining units restricted, respectively, to
timekeepers, guards, and stenographers, typists, and clerks in the
Company's offices constitute appropriate separate bargaining units.
The Union desires, and we will exclude, supervisory employees there-
from. The record does not specifically disclose that, employees with
supervisory authority are included among the stenographers, typists,
and clerks included in the=proposed unit, but rather indicates that
* Matter of Bethlehem Steel Company , Staten Island Yard and Industrial Unit of Marine
and Shipbuilding Workers o f America, Local 12, C. 1. 0., 46 N. L R. B. 1166; Matter
of Julius Peterson, an individual , and Metal Marine Metal Trades Council of the Port of
New York and vicinity and International Brotherhood of Boilermakers , Iron Shipbuilders
and Helpers - of America, A. F. L., 46 N. L. R. B . 1049 ; Matter of Virginia Electric and
Power Company and International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, A. F. of L., Local
B-980 and Local B-1064, 49 N . L. R. B. 1095.
5Matter of Chrysler Corporation , Highland Park Plant and Local 114, United Automo-
bile, Aircraft and, Agricultural Implement Workers of America, affiliated with. the 'C. I. 0.,
44 N. L. R. B.881.
104 DECISIONS 3 OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
administrative officers and departmental heads direct and supervise
the work of these employees.- We intend, however, to exclude from
the bargaining unit for office employees any employees in the named
categories who have the authority to hire or discharge or to recom-
mend the hire or discharge of employees with whom they work.
We find that all factory timekeepers employed by the Company,
excluding the supervisor, assistant supervisor, and chief timekeeper,
-constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining,
within the meaning of Section 9- (b) of the Act. We further find
that all guards of the Company,' excluding the chief guard, sergeants,
and first sergeants, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes
of collective bargaining, within'the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the
Act. We further find that all stenographers, typists, and clerks in
the factory offices of the Company not included under the present
bargaining contract between the Company and the Union, but ex-
cluding supervisory employees, constitute a unit appropriate for the
.purposes of collective bargaining, within the meaning of Section 9 (b)
of the Act.
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVESI
We shall direct that the questions concerning representation which
have arisen be resolved by separate elections by secret ballot among
employees of the Company within the respective units found ap-
propriat'e in Section IV, above, who were employed during the pay-
roll period immediately, preceding the date of the Direction of Elec-
tions herein, subject to the limitations and additions set forth in the
Direction.
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
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 Relations
Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Intercontinent
Aircraft Corporation, Miami Springs, Florida, separate elections 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 supervision of the Regional Director for the Tenth Region, acting
in this matter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board and
subject to Article III, Section 10,-of said Rules and' Regulations,
among all employees of the Company'-within the respective units
found appropriate in Section IV, above, who were ' employed during
,the pay-roll' period immediately, preceding' the date' of this Direc-
INTE'RCONTINENT AIRCRAFT CORPORATION 105
tion, 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 ` em-
ployees who have since quit or been discharged for cause, to determine
whether or not they desire to be represented by Palm City Lodge $k745,
International Association of Machinists, for the,purposes of collective
bargaining.
4
1