Piper Aircraft Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 16, 1947

73 N.L.R.B. 427 (N.L.R.B. 1947)

In the Matter Of PIPER AIRCRAFT CORPORATION, EMPLOYER and
AIRCRAFT WORKERS UNION (A. F. L.), PETITIONER
Case No. 16-1?-1,971.-Decided April 16, 19417
Messrs. Felix Duval and A. Hans f ord Eckman, of Ponca City,
Okla., for the Employer.
Mr. Dean Baugh, of Oklahoma City, Okla., for the Petitioner.
Mr. M. R. Lee, of Wichita, Kans., for the Intervenor.
Mr. Thomas B. Sweeney, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon an amended petition duly filed, hearing in this case was
held at Ponca City, Oklahoma, on January 8, 1947, before V. Lee
McMahon, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the
hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations
Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
Piper Aircraft Corporation, a Pennsylvania corporation having
its principal office and factory in Lock Haven, Pennsylvania, and a
branch factory at Ponca City, Oklahoma, is engaged in manufactur-
ing and distributing airplanes. This proceeding is concerned only
with the Ponca City plant. During the month of July 1946, the first
month of operations, the Employer purchased $60,000 worth of ma-
terials for use at the Ponca City plant, 80 percent of which was
shipped to this plant from points outside the State of Oklahoma.
During the same month, it sold airplanes produced at the Ponca City
plant valued in excess of $10,000, approximately 85 percent of which
was shipped to points outside the State.
The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
73 N. L. it. B., No. 84. 427
428 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
H. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
The Petitioner is a labor organization claiming to represent em-
ployees of the Employer.2
International Union, United Automobile, Aircraft & Agricultural
Implement Workers, herein called the Intervenor, is a labor organi-
zation affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, claim-
ing to represent employees of the Employer.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Employer refuses to recognize the Petitioner as the exclusive
bargaining representative of employees of the Employer until the
Petitioner has been certified by the Board in an appropriate unit.
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the
representation of employees of the Employer, within the meaning of
Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The parties agree that the unit should include all production and
maintenance employees and storeroom men but should exclude all
supervisory employees, foremen, leadmen, timekeepers, _ guards, and
clerical employees. The only disagreement concerns inspectors : the
Petitioner and the Intervenor would include them; the Employer
would exclude them.
The record discloses that the inspectors perform the tasks of ascer-
taining whether the manufactured parts conform to the drawings and
specifications and of preparing the inspection reports. They may
reject work but as the production employees are not working on a
piece-rate basis the rejections do not affect the earnings of the latter.
The pay of the inspectors varies from 82 cents per hour to $1.02 per
hour depending upon the importance of the work assigned. Their
remuneration exceeds that of the employees whose work they inspect
by about 15 percent. The Employer does not contend that they are
2 The Employer contends that the Petitioner is not a labor organization within the
meaning of the Act The evidence discloses that 145 of the Employer ' s employees have
banded together under the leadership of the Secretary of the Ponca City Trades and Labor
Council for the purpose of bargaining collectively with the Employer with respect to
working conditions and rates of pay. It is clear that the Act prescribes no special form
of internal organization as a prerequisite for recognition as a labor organization . Section
2 (5) thereof defines a "labor organization " in the broadest terms , declaring that "The
term `labor organization ' means any organization of any kind , or any agency or employee
representation committee or plan, in which employees participate and which exists for the
purpose, in whole or in part , of dealing with employers concerning grievances , labor dis-
putes, wages, rates of pay , hours of employment , or conditions of work " The Petitioner
meets the test of a " labor organization" as defined in the - statute Accordingly, we find
that Petitioner is a labor organization within the meaning of the Act See Matter of The
Regina Corporation , 57 N. L R. B. 4, N L R. B v .'American Furnace Company, 158
F. (2d) 376 (C. C A. 7).
PIPER AIRCRAFT CORPORATION 429
supervisory employees but desires to exclude them because, in the
Employer's opinion, the quality of the workmanship would be better
controlled if they were excluded from the production and maintenance
unit. We have frequently included inspectors whose duties were simi-
lar to those of the inspectors here involved, in units of production and
maintenance workers. Since no substantial reason appears for de-
parting from our usual custom, we shall include them in the present
unit.3
We find that all production and maintenance employees of the
Employer at its Ponca City plant, including storeroom men and in-
spectors, but excluding leadmen, timekeepers, guards, clerical em-
ployees, foremen, and all other supervisory employees with authority
to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in
the status of employees, or effectively recommend such action, con-
stitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining
within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
The Employer contends that no election should be held at the pres-
ent time because of a contemplated expansion in its operations. In
view of the following facts we find that the Employer's contention is
without merit : At the time of the hearing, the Employer employed
290 persons, 220 of whom are in the unit hereinbefore found appro-
priate. The Employer estimates that it will reach its full comple-
ment of 800 employees in September or October 1947. The record
reveals that the contemplated increase of personnel at its Ponca City,
Oklahoma, plant, is dependent upon many factors, including the low-
ering of production costs, the acquiring of title to the plant from the
United States Government, and an increase in the, volume of its sales.
In view bf the indefiniteness of the plans for, and the time at which,
the anticipated increase in personnel will take place, together with the
fact that the present complement is engaged in producing a finished
product and is representative of the group which will eventually be
employed, we shall adhere to our usual policy in such circumstances
and direct an immediate election.4
We shall, however, entertain a new petition for investigation and
certification of representatives covering the employees involved herein
within less than a year, but not before the expiration of 6 months from
the date of any certification we may issue in the instant proceeding,
upon proof (1) that the number of employees in the appropriate unit
8 See Matter of Russell Electric Company, 72 N L R B . 278; Matter of Duramold Dive-
sion of faire/ald Eugene & Airplane Corporation , 72 N L R B 1113
" Hatter of Tuttle Silver Company , Inc, 66 N L R B. 238 ; Matter of Adler Metal
Products Corp, 67 N L R B 328 , Matter of Firestone Tire & Rubber ' Company, 69
N. L R B 634.
430 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
is more than double the number eligible to vote in,the election herein-
after directed, and (2) that the Petitioner represents a substantial
number of employees in the expanded appropriate unit.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION 5
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the
purposes of collective bargaining with Piper Aircraft Corporation,
Ponca City, Oklahoma, 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 supervision of the Regional
Director for the Sixteenth Region, acting in this matter as agent for
the National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series
4, among the 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
Aircraft Workers Union (A. F. L.), or by International Union,
United Automobile, Aircraft S-, Agricultural Implement Workers of
America (CIO), for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by
neither.
MR. JOHN M. HOUSTON took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Direction of Election.
5 Any participant in the- election herein may upon its prompt request to, and approval
thereof by, the Regional Director have its name removed from the ballot. °