Hayes Aircraft Corp.

362 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD HAYES AIRCRAFT CORPORATION and INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS, A. F. OF L., PETITIONER HAYES AIRCRAFT CORPORATION and INTERNATIONAL UNION, UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AIRCRAFT AND AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA, C. I. 0., PETITIONER. Cases Nos. 10-RC-1670 and 10-RC- 1671. February 27, 1952 Decision and Direction of Elections Upon separate petitions duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the Na- tional Labor Relations Act, a consolidated hearing was held before Jerold B. Sindler, 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 Murdock and Styles]. 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 certain em- ployees of the Employer. 3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa- tion of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. 4. United States Air Force operates an aircraft modification center at Birmingham, Alabama, and aircraft storage facilities at Pyote, Texas. The Employer, under contracts with the Air Force, main- tains the modification center buildings at Birmingham; repairs and maintains aircraft within the center; and removes from storage and prepares for flight aircraft stored at Pyote, Texas. International Association of Machinists, A. F. of L., herein called the IAM, and International Union, United Automobile, Aircraft and Agricultural Implement Workers of America, CIO, herein called the UAW-CIO, each seek to represent employees at the Employer's Bir- mingham and Pyote operations in a single unit of building mainte- nance and aircraft production and maintenance employees, excluding office clerical employees, administrative employees, professional em- ployees, guards, watchmen, and supervisors. Jefferson County Ala- bama and Vicinity Carpenter's District Council, the Intervenor, 1 The Petitioners challenged the intervention of Jefferson County Alabama and vicinity Carpenters District Council, the Intervenor herein, on the ground that the Intervenor did not make a proper showing of interest we find no merit in this contention . As we have repeatedly stated, a showing of interest is a question for administrative determination, not subject to dirc et or collateral attack. Stokely Foods, Inc., 78 NLRB 842, and cases cited therein. 98 NLRB No. 57. HAYES AIRCRAFT. CORPORATION 363 herein called the Council, seeks a separate unit of carpenters, cabinet- makers, and maintenance mechanics engaged in building maintenance and aircraft work for the Employer at Birmingham and Pyote. The Employer, though generally agreeing with the IAM and the UAW- CIO that its employees should be placed in a general miscellaneous unit rather than by craft lines, contends that employees engaged in the building maintenance work should be excluded from the unit of production and maintenance employees engaged in aircraft work. The Employer's Operations As noted above, the Employer is generally engaged in two types of work for the Air Force : (1) Maintenance of the buildings that com- prise the modification center, and (2) repair and maintenance of air- craft at the modification center in Birmingham and at the storage location at Pyote, Texas. The Employer performs this work for the Air Force under two separate contracts; one covering building main- tenance, and the other covering aircraft work. Its employees engaged in this work include carpenters, mechanics, painters, plumbers, steam- fitters, furnace firemen, laborers, electricians, truck drivers, auto. mechanics, and janitors, each performing work usually assigned to. persons of their several job categories. At the present time, such workmen may be assigned to building maintenance or aircraft work as the Employer's needs may require. The Employer intends, how- ever, to make specific work assignments covering these two general types of work to specific employees and does not contemplate there- after temporary assignments or interchange of employees between the building maintenance and aircraft work performed under its separate contracts with the Air Force. So far as the record discloses, there is no difference with respect to the skills required for the two types of work. The Employer contends, however, that because it performs its work for the Air Force under two separate contracts for building and maintenance and aircraft maintenance and repair, its employees per- forming.such work shoulr be segregated into corresponding bargain- ing units, or specifically that employees, who work or will be assigned to work under the Air Force building maintenance contract should be presently excluded from the unit of employees to be assigned to work on aircraft. In view of the similar skills, close relationship, and more or less necessary integration between the work of the building maintenance employees and that of the aircraft repair and maintenance employees within the same area, and in the absence of any past bargaining history with a labor organization, or more cogent reason for their separation, we shall include in the same unit building maintenance employees with 364 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD aircraft maintenance and repair employees, as urged by the labor organizations herein? The Proposed Carpenters' Unit Among the varieties of skilled workmen employed in its building maintenance and aircraft maintenance and repair, the Employer has approximately 22 carpenters engaged in production and repair work. At the time of the hearing, all carpenters were engaged in building shipping crates and tearing down partitions. Approximately 10 carpenters will be assigned to so-called production work such as building benches, floors, and temporary stands for aircraft. Ap- proximately 12 carpenters will be assigned to do maintenance and repair work on buildings throughout the modification center. As skilled workers, they will be expected to repair and construct all types of wood structures and equipment, such as rough forms, platforms, flooring, workbenches, storage bins, and office partitions. Carpenters, rated A, B, and C, according to their experience, work exclusively with wood, and their work requires them to use the usual carpenters' tools and equipment, including hand tools, ladders, slings, and scaffolding. Although the Employer did not at the time of the hearing have any cabinetmakers on its payroll, it contemplates the employment of two cabinetmakers whenever the need for them arises under its building maintenance contract with the Air Force. Cabinetmakers will also be rated A, B, and C, depending on their experience. The Employer has on its payroll seven maintenance S mechanics who service, dismantle, and maintain the operating condition of various machines in the plant. They locate the cause of breakdowns of machines and equipment; determine the method of dismantling and repair; replace worn or broken parts; and make necessary installa- tions. They use lathes, drill presses, grinders, and all types of me- chanics hand tools, working to close tolerances according to job requirements. Rated as A, B, and C mechanics, depending upon their experience, they work with wood, brass, copper, babbit, steel, and all types of machine parts to replace worn out or broken parts. They work under the plant engineering department which also supervises plumbers, electricians, and other maintenance employees. The Em- ployer contemplates the assignment of three mechanics to maintenance work for the modification center buildings. Their work will embrace the maintenance of machinery,' such as the heating and plumbing system for the entire center. The Council urges that maintenance ' Viner Brothers, Inc., 80 NLRB 992. a Skilled mechanics who work on machines are thus - distinguished from the lesser skilled auto mechanics. HAYES AIRCRAFT CORPORATION 365 mechanics should be included with carpenters and cabinetmakers in a single unit or, in the alternative, that carpenters and cabinetmakers should be placed in one separate unit and that maintenance mechanics should be placed in another separate unit. It is evident that carpenters, cabinetmakers, and maintenance mechanics are a heterogenous group having no common supervision or place of work and performing generally unrelated work. We be- lieve, therefore, that employees in these three categories lack a suffi- cient community of interest to warrant their placement together in a single bargaining unit apart from all other employees in the plant.4 However, carpenters and cabinetmakers do perform a functionally distinct aspect of maintenance work and together compose a tradi- tional craft group of the type to which the Board has frequently granted separate representation.,' We therefore believe that carpen- ters and cabinetmakers may, if they so desire, constitute a separate bargaining unit apart from all other employees. It is also clear that the mechanics comprise a distinct craft group, such as we have often recognized may be bargained for separately,6 and we believe that they also may, if they so desire, constitute a separate bargaining unit. We shall make no present unit determinations for the employees concerned herein. We shall establish separate voting groups (1) for carpenters and cabinetmakers and (2) for mechanics, and shall place on the ballot for each voting group the names of the IAM, the UAW, and the Council. We shall conduct a separate election among other employees, excluding, inter alia, carpenters, cabinetmakers, and me- chanics, placing the names of the IAM and the UAW-CIO on the ballot. The separate voting groups shall be as follows : (1) All carpenters and cabinetmakers, excluding supervisors. (2) All maintenance mechanics, excluding supervisors. (3) All production and maintenance employees including inspec- tors and timekeepers who work on the production floor of the plant and other plant clerical employees and janitors,' but excluding em- ployees in groups (1) and (2), office clerical employees, administrative employees, professional employees, guards and firemen," and super- visors. Coosa-River Newsprint Company, 90 NLRB 1514 ; International Paper Company, South- ern Kraft Division (Rayon Plant ), 94 NLRB 500. 6 International Paper Company, Southern Kraft Division ( Rayon Plant ), supra; Bell Telephone Laboratories, Inc, 94 NLRB 1559. 6 National Biscuit Company, 88 NLRB 313 ; cf Glass Fibers, Inc, 93 NLRB 1289. ' We find no merit in the Employer' s contention that office janitors should be excluded from the residual unit. The William Schluderberg-T. J. Kurdle Co , 93 NLRB 1572. 8 Guards and firemen work in one department under the supervision of the chief of police and the fire department. Firemen handle fire apparatus and act as guards in enforcing fire rules As guards, we shall exclude firemen and guards from the residual unit. 366 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD If a majority of the employees in voting groups (1) or (2) select a labor organization other than that selected by a majority of the employees in voting group 3, those employees will be taken to have indi- cated their desire to constitute a separate bargaining unit and the Regional Director conducting the election herein is instructed to issue a certification of representatives to the labor organization selected by the employees in each group for such unit or units, which the Board, in such circumstances, finds to be appropriate for the purposes of col- lective bargaining. [Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication in this volume.] DETROIT HARDWARE MANUFACTURING COMPANY a/nd METAL POLISHERS, BUFFERS, PLATERS & HELPERS INTERNATIONAL UNION #1, A . F. of L., PETITIONER.' Case No. 7 RC-1595. February 27, 195? Decision and Direction of Election Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Herman Corenman, 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 [Members Houston, Murdock, and Styles]. 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 organization involved claims to represent certain em- ployees of the Employer. 3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa- tion of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. 4. The Petitioner seeks a unit 2 of all polishers, buffers,' platers, and their apprentices at the Employer's Detroit, Michigan, plant, in- cluding the cleaner-grinder-apprentice polisher and the alumilator, and excluding all other employees. The Employer moves that the petition be dismissed on the ground that the employees in the pro- posed unit have, with the exception of pay rates, the same conditions of employment as other employees, perform routine and repetitive The name of the Petitioner appears as used at the hearing. s The description of the unit sought by the Petitioner appears as amended at the hearing. The terms polishers and buffers are often used interchangeably. 98 NLRB No. 61.