Consolidated Vultee Aircraft Corp.

CONSOLIDATED VULTEE AIRCRAFT CORPORATION 159 at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds: The Employer is a New Jersey enterprise comprised of a partnership doing business as Mach Lumber Company, Capitol Wholesale Supply Company, a corporation, and Philyet Cor- poration . Capitol is engaged in the purchase and sale of roofing and other materials and is located on the same premises as Mach. Most of Capitol ' s sales are to Mach and all of its business is transacted within the State. Mach is itself engaged in the sale of lumber and other building materials . Philyet was organized a number of years ago to construct houses but has transacted no business in the past 3 or 4 years. The employees in issue are on Mach ' s payroll . The gross annual sales of Mach for the year ending July 31 , 1953, were approximately $ 1,127,000. Of this amount , $ 5,000 represented out-of-State sales, and between $5 , 000 and $10 , 000 represented sales to a military installation within the State. The remainder consisted of sales made locally to farmers , builders , and homeowners . During the same period , Mach made direct out-of-State purchases valued at approximately $ 51,000 and indirect out-of-State purchases valued at $ 500,000. We believe that the Employer ' s sales to the military installa- tion within the State did not have a sufficient effect upon the national defense to warrant our asserting jurisdiction for that reason.2 As the remaining sales and purchases do not satisfy any other of the Board's jurisdictional standards, we find that it will not effectuate the policies of the Act to assert jurisdiction in this case. [The Board dismissed the petition .] Members Murdock and Beeson took no part in the consider- ation of the above Decision and Order. 2 Alpine Mill & Lumber Co., 107 NLRB 915. CONSOLIDATED VULTEE AIRCRAFT CORPORATION, POMONA DIVISION and INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPER- ATING ENGINEERS, LOCAL NO. 501, A.F.L., Petitioner. Case No. 21-RC-3388. April 5, 1954 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 Herbert C. Bumgarner , hearing officer . The hearing officer ' s rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. 108 NLRB No. 33. 160 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 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 cer- tain employees of the Employer. 1 3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representation of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) (7) of the Act. 4. The Employer is engaged in the manufacture of aircraft and currently recognizes the Intervenor as the bargaining representative of all production and maintenance employees in its Pomona Division plant . The Petitioner seeks to sever from this broad unit a unit of high pressure A and low pressure A stationary engineers . These employees are engaged in operating high and low pressure boilers and compressors . The high pressure boilers supply steam for use in certain production processes , such as aircraft plating, operations . The high pressure York compressors supply coolants for cooling the plant, while other high pressure compressors are used, for example, with testing equipment in the production of missiles or airframes . This high pressure equipment is operated by the high pressure A stationary engineers , with the low pressure engineers acting as part-time helpers , or by low pressure engineers , if chosen for upgrading to the highpressure classi- fication . The high pressure engineers operate both boilers and compressors in the course of their employment . The low pressure boilers are used for heating the plant, while the low pressure compressors supply compressed air for machinery such as rivet guns and punching presses. This low p ressure equipment is operated by the low pressure engineers , though on occasion the high pressure engineers may perform such work. Both the Employer and the Intervenor contendthat severance here should be denied for a number of reasons: a. It is argued that severance is not appropriate in view of the highly integrated nature of the plant operations and in view of the industrial pattern of bargaining prevailing not only in the Employer' s plant but in the whole aircraft industry of which it is a part . However, the Board has recently held that such reasons will not preclude severance of a group otherwise entitled to separate representation.2 b. It is further contended by the Employer and Intervenor that the unit is not appropriate in that it does not include all employees doing the same or substantially ' the same kind of work . There is however, no showing --and, in fact , it is not even alleged --that the requested unit does not include all employees who operate high and low pressure boilers and com- pressors . In fact, the record affirmatively shows that only those employees inthe requested classifications regularly oper- iThe International Association of Machinists , Lodge No. 1254, intervened at the hearing. 2 American Potash & Chemical Corporation, 107 NLRB 1418 , at page 5. CONSOLIDATED VULTEE AIRCRAFT CORPORATION 161 ate such equipment. Accordingly, we find no merit in this contention of the Employer and Intervenor. c. Finally the Employer and Intervenor contend that sever- ance should be denied as, under Board rulings, the high pressure A stationary engineers are not craftsmen constituting a craft nucleus warranting severance of the requested unit. However, the alleged lack of craft status is not determinative of this issue. These engineers work for the most part in buildings which house the boilers and compressors and which are separate from other working areas. No other employees regularly work in these buildings. There is no interchange between the engineers and employees in other classifications. hi view of the type of work performed by these engineers, and in view of the fact that they constitute a functionally distinct and separate grouping, we find that they constitute an appropriate powerhouse unit, such as the Board has found to be entitled to separate repre- sentation.' As the union requesting the stationary engineers has historically and traditionally represented such engineers in powerhouse units, we find that the high pressure A and the low pressure A stationary engineers may constitute a separate appropriate unit if they so desire. 4 Accordingly, we shall direct an election in the following voting group: All high pressure A stationary engineers and all low pressure A stationary engineers at,the Employer's Pomona, California, plant, excluding all other employees and supervisors as defined in the Act. However, we shall make no final unit determination at this time, but shall first ascertainthe desires of these employees as expressed in the election hereinafter directed. If a majority vote for the Petitioner, they will be taken to have indicated that they desire to constitute a separate appropriate unit, and the Regional Director conducting the election directed herein is instructed to issue a certification of representatives to the Petitioner for the unit described above, which the Board, under such circumstances, finds to be appropriate for purposes of collective bargaining. In the event that a majority vote for the Intervenor, they may continue to be represented as a part of the existing production and maintenance unit and the Regional Director will issue a certification of results of election to such effect. 5 [Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.] Member Beeson took no part in the consideration of the above Decision and Direction of Election. iSee American Potash & Chemical Corporation, supra at page 11, and cases cited at footnote 9. 4American Potash & Chemical Corporation, supra, at page 11; Chrysler Corporation, 98 NLRB 1105, at 1108-1109. 5 In view of our disposition of this case, the Intervenor's motion to dismiss the petition is hereby dented. 339676 0 - 55 - 12