009 NLRB 1060
Postal Telegraph-Cable Corp. of New York
In the Matter Of POSTAL TELEGRAPH- CABLE CORPORATION OF NEW YORK,
POSTAL TELEGRAPH -CABLE COMPANY (LAND LINE
SYSTEM), POSTAL
TELEGRAPH-CABLE COMPANY (DELAWARE), THE POSTAL TELEGRAPH-
CABLE COMPANY OF INDIANA, POSTAL TELEGRAPH-CABLE COMPANY OF
MISSOURI, THE OHIO POSTAL TELEGRAPH -CABLE COMPANY POSTAL
TELEGRAPH -CABLE COMPANY (TEXAS), THE COLORADO POSTAL TELE-
GRAPH-CABLE COMPANY, POSTAL TELEGRAPH - CABLE COMPANY (OKLA-
HOMA), THE KANSAS POSTAL TELEGRAPH -CABLE COMPANY, POSTAL
TELEGRAPH-CABLE COMPANY KENTUCKY), POSTAL TELEGRAPH-CABLE
COMPANY OF MASSACHUSETTS, POSTAL TELEGRAPH-CABLE COMPANY
(MICHIGAN ) and COMMERCIAL TELEGRAPHERS' UNION
In the Matter of THE POSTAL TELEGRAPH -CABLE COMPANY (LAND LINE
SYSTEM ),
POSTAL TELEGRAPH -CABLE COMPANY (ARIZONA ) ,
POSTAL
TELEGRAPH-CABLE COMPANY (ARKANSAS) j POSTAL TELEGRAPH-CABLE
COMPANY (CALIFORNIA) , THE COLORADO POSTAL TELEGRAPH-CABLE
CCOMPANY^ POSTAL TELEGRAPH -CABLE COMPANY (CONNECTICUT),
POSTAL TELEGRAPH-CABLE COMPANY
( DELAWARE), POSTAL TELE-
GRAPH-CABLE COMPANY OF IDAHO, POSTAL TELEGRAPH -CABLE COM-
PANY OF ILLINOIS, THE POSTAL TELEGRAPH - CABLE COMPANY OF IN-
DIANA POSTAL TELEGRAPH -CABLE COMPANY OF IOWA, THE KANSAS
POSTAL TELEGRAPH -CABLE COMPANY, POSTAL TELEGRAPH -CABLE COM-
PANY (KENTUCKY), POSTAL TELEGRAPH -CABLE COMPANY (LOUIsI-
ANA) POSTAL TELEGRAPH-CABLE COMPANY OF MASSACHUSETTS, POST-
AL TELEGRAPH COMPANY (MICHIGAN), POSTAL TELEGRAPH-CABLE
COMPANY (MINNESOTA), POSTAL TELEGRAPH-CABLE COMPANY OF
MISSOURI, POSTAL TELEGRAPH - CABLE COMPANY OF MONTANA, POSTAL
TELEGRAPH -CABLE COMPANY OF NEBRASKA , POSTAL TELEGRAPH-CABLE
'COMPANY (NEVADA), POSTAL TELEGRAPH -CABLE COMPANY OF NEW
JERSEY, POSTAL TELEGRAPH-CABLE COMPANY ( NEW MEXICO) , POSTAL
TELEGRAPH-CABLE COMPANY (NEW YORK), THE OHIO POSTAL TELE-
GRAPH-CABLE COMPANY POSTAL TELEGRAPH -CABLE COMPANY (OKLA-
HOMA), POSTAL TELEGRAPH-CABLE COMPANY (OREGON), POSTAL
TELEGRAPH-CABLE COMPANY
( PENNSYLVANIA), POSTAL TELEGRAPH
AND CABLE COMPANY
( RHODE ISLAND), POSTAL TELEGRAPH-CABLE
'COMPANY OF TENNESSEE,
POSTAL
TELEGRAPH-CABLE
COMPANY
(TEXAS), POSTAL TELEGRAPH -CABLE COMPANY OF UTAH, POSTAL
TELEGRAPH-CABLE COMPANY OF WASHINGTON, POSTAL TELEGRAPH-
'CABLE COMPANY OF WEST VIRGINIA POSTAL TELEGRAPH -CABLE COM-
PANY (WISCONSIN), POSTAL TELEGRAPH-CABLE COMPANY OF WYO-
MING and AMERICAN COMMUNICATIONS ASSOCIATION
-9 N. L. R. B., No 98.
1060
DECISIONS AND ORDERS
1061
Cases Nos. R-6441 and R-997, respectively.Decided November -92,
1938
Communications
Industry-Investigation
of
Representatives:
controversy
concerning representation of employees : rival organizations ; extension of exist-
ing master contracts dependent upon a determination of majority representation
by Board; controversy concerning appropriate
unit-Contracts:
no bar to
investigation : where contracting union petitions Board to investigate represen-
tatives ;
where initial term of agreement ends shortly ;
where petition filed
prior to date for renewal ; where subject to action by Board , by its terms-
Untt Appropriate for Collective Bargaining: all employees of the system, exclud-
ing executives , general managers,
attorneys , confidential secretaries ,
general
wire and traffic chiefs, and supervisory employees who have the right to hire
and discharge, and excluding employees located in Washington, Oregon, North-
ern Idaho, and Montana, and excluding also the line gang engaged in construc-
tion work on lines of the Company on the Illinois Central Railroad south of
the Ohio River ; organization of business ; nation-wide ; functional coherence-
Election Ordered
Mr. John H. Dorsey, and Mr. Jacob Blum, for the Board.
Mr. James C. Phelps, of New York City, for the Company.
Boudin, Cohn & Glickstein, by Mr. Sidney Elliott Cohn, of New
York City, and Mrs. Mervyn Rathborne, of New York City, for the
A. C. A.
Mr. Patrick J. Taft, and Mr. Frank B. Powers, of Washington,
D. C., for the C. T. U.
Mr. William F. Steinmiller, of New York City, for the I. B. E. W.
Miss Margaret M. Farmer, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On March 31, 1938, Commercial Telegraphers' Union, herein called
the C. T. U., filed a petition, and on June 9, 1938, an amended peti-
tion with the National Labor Relations Board at Washington, D. C.,
as authorized by said Board under Article III, Section 10 (a), of
National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 1, as
amended, alleging that a question ' affecting commerce had arisen con-
cerning the representation of employees of the following named cor-
porations : Postal-Telegraph Cable Corporation of New York; Postal
Telegraph-Cable Company (Land Line System) ; Postal Telegraph-
-Cable Company (Delaware) ; The Postal Telegraph-Cable Company
of Indiana; Postal Telegraph-Cable Company of Missouri; The
,Ohio
Postal Telegraph-Cable
Company ; Postal Telegraph-Cable
,Company (Texas) ; The Colorado Postal Telegraph-Cable Company;
-Postal Telegraph-Cable Company (Oklahoma) ; The Kansas Postal
1062
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Telegraph-Cable Company; Postal Telegraph-Cable Company (Ken-
tucky) ; Postal Telegraph-Cable Company of Massachusetts; and
Postal Telegraph-Cable Company (Michigan).
The petition re-
quested an investigation and certification of representatives pursuant
to Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449,
herein called the Act.
The Board, in accordance with Section 9 (c)
of the Act, and Article III, Section 3,.of the Rules and Regulations-
Series 1, as amended, ordered an investigation.
On June 9, 1938, the
Board issued a notice of hearing, copies of which were duly served
upon the Company, upon the C. T. U., upon American Communica-
tions Association, herein called the A. C. A., a labor organization
claiming to represent employees directly affected by the investiga-
tion and upon International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers,
herein called the I. B. E. W., a labor organization claiming to repre-
sent employees of the Company within a certain area.
Pursuant to the notice, a hearing was held on July 14 and 15, 1938,
before Tilford E. Dudley, the Trial Examiner duly designated by the
Board, at Washington, D. C. The Board, the Company, the A. C. A.
and the C. T. U. were represented by counsel and participated in the
hearing.
The I. B. E. W."did "not appear. Full opportunity to be
heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evi-
dence bearing on the issues was afforded all parties.
During the
course of the hearing the Trial Examiner made several rulings on
motions and on objections to the admission of evidence.
The Board
has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner and finds that no
prejudicial errors were committed.
The rulings are hereby affirmed.
On September 8, 1938, the A. C. A. filed a petition with the Board
at Washington, D. C., as authorized by said Board under Article
III, Section 10 (a), of National Labor Relations Board Rules and
Regulations-Series 1, as amended, alleging that a question affect-
ing commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees
of the following named corporations : The Postal Telegraph-Cable
Company (Land Line Systems) ; Postal Telegraph-Cable Company
(Arizona) ; Postal Telegraph-Cable Company (Arkansas) ; Postal
Telegraph-Cable Company (California) ; The Colorado Postal Tele-
graph-Cable Company;
Postal Telegraph-Cable Company (Con-
necticut) ; Postal Telegraph-Cable Company (Delaware) ; Postal Tel-
egraph-Cable Company of Idaho; Postal Telegraph-Cable Company
of Illinois; The Postal Telegraph-Cable Company of Indiana; Postal
Telegraph-Cable Company of Iowa; The Kansas Postal Telegraph-
Cable Company; Postal Telegraph-Cable Company (Kentucky) ;
Postal Telegraph-Cable Company (Louisiana) ; Postal Telegraph-
Cable Company of Massachusetts ; Postal Telegraph-Cable Company
(Michigan) ; Postal Telegraph-Cable Company (Minnesota) ; Postal
Telegraph-Cable
Company of Missouri; Postal Telegraph-Cable-
DECISIONS AND ORDERS
1063
Company of Montana; Postal Telegraph-Cable Company of Ne-
braska; Postal Telegraph-Cable Company (Nevada) ; Postal Tele-
graph-Cable Company of New Jersey; Postal Telegraph-Cable Com-
pany (New Mexico) ; Postal Telegraph-Cable Company (New
York); The Ohio Postal Telegraph-Cable Company; Postal Tele-
graph-Cable Company (Oklahoma) ; Postal Telegraph Company
(Oregon) ; Postal Telegraph-Cable Company (Pennsylvania) ; Postal
Telegraph and Cable Company (Rhode Island) ; Postal Telegraph-
Cable Company of Tennessee; Postal Telegraph-Cable Company
(Texas) ; Postal Telegraph-Cable Company of Utah; Postal Tele-
graph-Cable Company of Washington; Postal Telegraph-Cable Com-
pany of West Virginia; Postal Telegraph-Cable Company (Wiscon-
sin) ; and Postal Telegraph-Cable Company of Wyoming. The peti-
tion requested an investigation and certification of representatives
pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the Act.
The Board, in accordance with Section 9 (c) of the Act and Article
III of the Rules and Regulations-Series 1, as amended, ordered an
investigation, and in accordance with Article III, Section 10 (c) (2),
of said Rules and Regulations, ordered that the two cases be consoli-
dated for all purposes.
On September 20, 1938, the Board issued a
notice of hearing, copies of which were duly served upon the Com-
pany, the A. C. A., the C. T. U., and the I. B. E. W. Pursuant to
the notice, a hearing was held on October 6, 1938, in New York City
before Charles A. Wood, the Trial Examiner duly designated by the
Board.
The Board, the Company, the A. C. A., the C. T. U., and the
I. B. E. W. were represented by counsel and participated in the
hearing.
Full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-exam-
ine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues was
afforded all parties.
During the course of the hearing the Trial
Examiner made several rulings on motions and on objections to the
admission of evidence.
The Board has reviewed the rulings of the
Trial Examiner and finds that no prejudicial errors were committed.
The rulings are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in both cases, the' Board makes the fol-
lowing :
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY 1
Postal Telegraph and Cable Corporation is a holding company or-
ganized under and existing by virtue of the laws of the State of
Maryland.
This corporation controls the Mackay Companies (more
I The facts set forth In this section are derived from a stipulation signed by a repre-
sentative of the Company and counsel for the Board and introduced in evidence at the
first hearing.
At the second hearing, it was stipulated by and between all parties that
the stipulation should be considered to all intents and purposes in the case as if filed as
an exhibit.
1064
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
recently known as the Associated Companies and now under 77B of
the Bankruptcy Act), a Massachusetts trust, which in turn controls
the 35 Postal Telegraph-Cable Companies that have been made parties
to this proceeding.
Each of these companies is a corporation incor-
porated under the laws of the States indicated in their respective
corporate names.
The Postal Telegraph and Cable Corporation, through its operat-
ing subsidiaries, provides a closely coordinated system of communica-
tions comprising land-line telegraph, cables, and domestic and foreign
radio telegraph, through which messages may be forwarded directly
or via connections to any part of the world.
Land-line telegraph
operations are carried on throughout the United States by the 35
Postal Telegraph-Cable Companies.
These land lines extend into
every State in the United States and telegraph service is provided
through more than 2,000 main and branch offices and approximately
2,800 agency and connecting line offices.
Gross telegraph revenue
from the operations of the land-line system for the year 1937
amounted to the sum of $21,791,050.29.
To facilitate the operations of the land-line system 2 (hereinafter
referred to as the System), a written agreement was entered into
by and between the 35 Postal Telegraph-Cable Companies in the
nature of a general power of attorney delegating to the Postal Tele-
graph-Cable Company of New York full power and authority in
the name of the New York Company :
(a) To keep books (hereinafter referred to as "System books")
which shall reflect the operations of all of the parties as if to-
gether they constituted a-single business entity;
(b) To apportion among all of the parties the common ex-
penses described in Paragraph 9 of the agreement and to bill and
collect from each party at such times as it shall deem advisable
the proportionate share of such party;
(c) To prepare and file with the Interstate Commerce Com-
mission and/or with such other Governmental agencies as may
lawfully require the same, reports containing summaries or ab-
stracts from the System books;
(d) To make and execute any and all contracts concerning
or in any wise pertaining to the business transacted or to be
transacted by any party or by all of the parties;
(e) To do all and everything necessary and proper for the
accomplishment of the foregoing enumerated purposes or any
of them or necessary or advisable to the attainment of the ob-
jects of the agreement.
2 The issues raised herein concern only the employees of the land lines system.
The
Company employed approximately 15,650 such employees as of October 1, 1938.
DECISIONS AND ORDERS
1065
The executive office of the System is located in New York City.
Active management and control of its operations as a single unit is
vested in its operating vice president of the New York Company
assisted by vice presidents who are in turn officials of each of the 35
companies comprising the System. The System is divided into seven
geographical divisions covering the whole United States.
Divisional
General Managers are at the head of each division, who are directly
responsible to the officials of the New York Company. The divisions
are in turn subdivided into districts under the jurisdiction of the
District Superintendents.
Divisional bank accounts are maintained
in each Division, from which salary disbursements are made to the
employees within the Division.
H. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
C. T. U. is a labor organization affiliated with the American Feder-
ation of Labor, apparently admitting to its membership all em-
ployees of the System except executives, general managers, confiden-
tial secretaries, general wire and traffic chiefs, and those employees
who have the right to hire and discharge.
A. C. A. is a labor organization affiliated with the Committee for
Industrial Organization, apparently admitting to its membership all
employees of the System except executives, managers, attorneys, con-
fidential secretaries, general wire and traffic chiefs, and those em-
ployees who have the right to hire and discharge.
I. B. E. W. is a labor organization affiliated with the American
Federation of Labor. Its membership requirements are not disclosed
by the record.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On December 10, 1937, the American Radio Telegraphists Asso-
ciation 3 filed a petition and amended petition with the Board alleg-
ing that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the rep-
resentation of employees of the 35 companies involved in the present
proceeding.
On the salve date, the C. T. U. filed a petition with the
Board alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen con-
cerning the representation of employees of three of said companies.
Each petition asked for an investigation and certification of repre-
sentatives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the Act.
After an investi-
gation and hearing with respect to the petitions, the Board on Feb-
ruary 12, 1938, issued a decision in which it found that all the
employees of the System, with specified exceptions, constituted an
appropriate bargaining unit and directed the holding of an election
$ Subsequently the American Radio Telegraphists Association by referendum vote of its
membership changed its name to American Communications
Association ,
heiem called
the A. C. A.
1066
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
by secret ballot among such employees.
On March 1, 1938, the Board
withdrew the said decision and direction of election and dismissed
the petition for an investigation and hearing filed by the A. C. A.
Prior to the issuance by the Board of the aforesaid decision and
direction of election, the Company and the A. C. A. entered into an
agreement dated December 18, 1937, whereby the A. C. A. was recog-
nized as exclusive bargaining representative of employees of the Coin-
pany in 19 cities and areas throughout the United States. Following
the Board's withdrawal of its decision and direction of election, the
agreement was extended to cover employees of the Company in 30
additional cities.
The agreement was extended to employees of a
majority of the cities only after a check of membership or authoriza-
tion cards, made through one of the regional offices of the Board,
showed that a majority of such employees desired representation by
the A. C. A.
On January 12, 1938, a date also prior to the issuance by the Board
of its decision and direction of election, the Company and the C. T. U.
entered into an agreement whereby existing contracts recognizing the
C. T. U. as exclusive bargaining representative of employees of the
Company in Indianapolis, Indiana, Jacksonville, Florida, and Kansas
City, Missouri, were consolidated and extended to cover employees in
Louisville, Kentucky.
The agreement provides that it shall remain
in effect until December 31, 1938, and thereafter from year to year
as of November 30 in each year, unless notice in writing shall be given
by either party to the other of its termination or of any changes de-
sired at least 60 days prior to the end of the then current term.
Sub-
sequently, the agreement was extended to cover also employees of the
Company in Lexington and Paducah, Kentucky. The extension of
the agreement to the latter two cities took place after a check of mem-
bership or authorization cards, made through one of the regional
offices of the Board, showed that a majority of such employees
desired representation by the C. T. U.
The Company has by an agreement dated September 1, 1937, recog-
nized the I. B. E. W. as bargaining representative of its employees in
Washington, Oregon, Northern Idaho, and Montana.
This agree-
ment provides that it shall remain in effect until September 1, 1938,
and thereafter from year to year subject to 30 days' written notice
given by either party prior to September of any year.
Testimony
was also offered that the I. B. E. W. has been recognized as represent-
ative of the linesmen engaged in construction work on Company
lines on the Central Railroad of Illinois south of the Ohio River and
that a contract covering such employees was being negotiated.
The A. C. A. now seeks certification by the Board as bargaining
representative of all the employees of the System, excluding certain
supervisory and confidential employees.
The Company has refused to
DECISIONS AND ORDERS
1067
grant the A. C. A. recognition as bargaining representative of such
employees in the absence of certification by the Board.
The C. T. U.
seeks certification as bargaining representative of employees of the
System in 45 cities, including employees in the six cities named in its-
agreement with the Company.
The agreements which the Company has entered into, as aforesaid,
with the A. C. A. and the C. T. U., respectively, constitute no bar to
an investigation or a certification of representatives by the Board.3a-
Furthermore, the initial period of the agreement between the A. C. A.
and the Company ends on December 31, 1938. The petition of the-
A. C. A. asking for an investigation and certification of employees
throughout the System was filed with the Board prior to the date on
which the agreement would become effective for an additional period
in the absence of written notice. Since the A. C. A. has petitioned
the Board to investigate and certify representatives on a nation-wide
basis, it clearly does not claim that its agreement with the Company
constitutes such a bar.
The C. T. U., by its petition for investiga-
tion and certification of representatives for employees in 45 cities,
inclusive of employees in each city covered by its agreement with the
Company, would appear to have wi ived any claim that its agreement
constitutes a bar. It is not, however, necessary to make any decision
as to a waiver since the initial term of the agreement ends shortly,
namely, on December 31, 1938; since the petition of the C. T. U. was
filed with the Board prior to the date on which the agreement would
automatically be extended for an additional period in the absence of
written notice; and since the agreement by its terms clearly indicates
that the parties intended that it should be subject to action by the
Board with respect to the designation or bargaining representatives.
In Section 1 of the agreement, the Company recognizes the C. T. U.
as bargaining representative "during the life of this contract or until
another collective bargaining representative is designated in accord-
ance with the law." The Company does not assert that any of the
agreements constitute a bar to an investigation and certification by
the Board.
We find that a question has arisen concerning the representation
of employees of the Company.
IV. THE EFFECT OF THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION UPON
COA13YERCE
We find that the question concerning representation which has
arisen, occurring in connection with the operations of the System
described in Section I above, has a close, intimate, and substantial
81 In view of the conclusions reached in Section V below, it is not necessary here to con-
sider the Company's agreement with the I. B. E. W.
1068
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
relation to trade, traffic, and commerce among the several States, and
tends to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce
and the free flow of commerce.
V. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
In its petition the A. C. A. claims that all the employees of the
System, except executives, general managers, confidential secretaries,
general wire and traffic chiefs, and supervisory employees who have
the right to hire and discharge, constitute an appropriate bargaining
unit.4
The C. T. U. contends that the employees of the System,
except executives, attorneys and supervisory employees who have the
right to hire and discharge's in each of 45 specified cities appropri-
ately constitute separate bargaining units.
The record shows that under the operating agreement set forth
in Section I above, the 35 companies composing the System are oper-
ated as 1 company. This is due to the very nature of its business of
telegraphic communications on a national scale.
Each division and
subdivision within the System is inseparably linked and a necessary
part of the proper function of every other part of the System. In
the event of labor disturbances at one or more of the principal ter-
minal points in congested areas, the whole System would be to a great
extent disrupted.
An employee engaged in sending a telegraph mes-
sage in New York and another receiving the message in San Fran-
cisco thus occupy much the same relation as employees working side
by side in a mass-production industry.
Each has a duty to perform
that is dependent on the other to insure the uninterrupted conveyance
of the communication from the sender to the receiver.
Under the operating agreement employees of the System are under
one employer," and are transferred from one place to another through-
out the United States. System seniority is maintained, and in the
event of a transfer of an employee to another locality in a different
district, seniority rights are retained.
A national policy as to pen-
sions and disability payments is in operation.
Mr. Logue, one of the vice presidents connected with the New York
office, in charge of operations of the System, testified that decisions
on matters of policy affecting employees throughout the System are
4 The agreement of January 12, 1938, between the A . C. A. and the Company includes
attorneys among the employees declared to be ineligible to membership in the A. C. A and
without the scope of the agreement.
It would appear, therefore, that the A. C. A. desires
also to exclude attorneys from the unit.
6 The general agreement between the C. T. U. and the Company names as ineligible to
membership in the C T. U. general traffic chiefs, general wire chiefs, executives , attorneys,
confidential secretaries and their supeilors , city and branch managers with six or more
operators including the supervisor constituting the day force .
It would appear , therefore,
that the C. T . U. desires all such employees excluded from the units
See Matter of Cosmopolitan Shipping Company , Inc. and National Marine Engineers'
Iienefcial Association, Local No 33, 2 N L. R B. 759.
DECISIONS AND ORDERS
1069
vested solely in the New York officials; that no final agreement con-
cerning wages, hours, and working conditions of employees through-
out the System could be made by any manager or other official in a
particular locality.
Although the C. T. U. is at present seeking the establishment of 45
separate bargaining units, it did not deny the statement of Mr. Logue
at the second hearing that it had, prior to the filing of its petition,
demanded recognition as collective bargaining agent on a nation-wide
basis.
Furthermore Frank E. Powers, president of the C. T. U., ad-
mitted that the situation of an employee in one part of the country
was in general the same as that of an employee in another part of
the country and that the sole reason for seeking separate bargaining
units was that the local and national officers desired such units.?
We think the evidence is convincing that effective collective bar-
gaining can best be accomplished by negotiations with the New York
officials because the employees throughout the System are, in effect,
under one employer, with authority vested only in that employer to
make any final agreement concerning wages, hours and working con-
ditions of employees.
We think it is equally true that in the main
this can best be accomplished, in the interest of both the employer
and the employees, upon the basis of a single bargaining unit through-
out the System."
Employees throughout the System are closely inter-
related, subject to the same general policies, engaged in the same type
of work, under the same classifications, and in general, have the same
problems concerning wages, hours and working conditions.
The
general agreements which the Company has entered into with the
A. C. A. and the C. T. U. covering employees in widely separated
7 The C. T. U. cited in support of its contention the decision of the Board in matter of
Postal
Telegraph-Cable
Company of Massachusetts
and
American Radio Telegraphists
Association, 7 N. L. R. B. 444, where the Board found that employees of the Company
under the jurisdiction of the city superintendent of Boston constituted an appropriate bar-
gaining unit.
The Board, however, expressly pointed out that the ultimate goal of the
A. C. A. and possibly of the C. T. U. was to organize the employees of the System on the
basis of a nation-wide bargaining unit and stated the employees In Boston "should not be
denied the benefits of the Act pending more complete organization of all the employees
throughout the country." In that case, unlike the instant case, no labor organization
asked for a nation-wide bargaining unit. See in this connection Matter of R. C A. Commu-
nications, Inc
and Independent Employees Association of it. C. A -C, 9 N. L. R. B 915.
8 The Board has in many decisions involving the communications Industry found a
nation-wide bargaining unit appropriate
See Matter of R C A Communications, Inc
and American Radio Telegraphists' Association, 2 N. L. R. B. 1109 ; Matter of Mackay
Itadso Corporation of Delaware, Inc. and Mackay Radio it Telegraph Company, a corpora-
tion and American Radio Telegraphists' Association, 5 N. L
R. B. 657; Matter of Colum-
bia Broadcasting System, Inc. and American Radio Telegraphists Association, 6 N
L R. B.
166;
Matter of Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc
and
American Communications
Association (formerly American Radio Telegraphists' Association),
8
N. L R. B 508;
Matter of R. C. A Communications, Inc
and Independent Employees Association of
R C. A -C., 9 N. L. R. B 915. The increasing number of successful agreements on a
nation-wide basis between unions and individual railroad companies is indicative of the
appropriateness of a nation-wide bargaining unit in industries where the proper function-
ing of the entire system is dependent upon the functioning of each part of the system.
See
Third Annual Report of National Mediation Board, including the Report of the National
Railroad Adjustment Board, pp 2-3.
1070
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
localities throughout the country clearly indicate the feasibility of
inclusion in a single -unit of employees throughout the System.
It appears from the record, as stated above, that the I. B. E. W.
has exclusive bargaining contracts with the Company covering em-
ployees in Washington, Oregon, Northern Idaho, and Montana. Pre-
sumably these contracts are based upon majority representation by the
I. B. E. W. of the employees covered thereby. It appears from the
record also that the Company has recognized the I. B. E. W. as exclu-
sive bargaining representative for the line gang engaged in construc-
tion work on lines of the Company on the Illinois Central Railroad
south of the Ohio River, and that a contract covering such employees
is being negotiated. The A. C. A. stated at the hearing that it had no
objection to exclusion from the unit at this time of all the aforesaid
employees.
The C. T. U. and the Company raised no objection to
such exclusion.
In view of these facts, we shall omit the aforesaid
employees from the national unit at the present time.
We find that all the employees of the System, excluding executives,
general managers, attorneys, confidential secretaries, general wire and
traffic chiefs, and supervisory employees who have the right to hire
and discharge, excluding also the employees in Washington, Oregon,
Northern Idaho, and Montana, and excluding further the line gang
engaged in construction work on lines of the Company on the Illinois
Central Railroad south of the Ohio River, constitute a unit appro-
priate for the purposes of collective bargaining, and that said unit
will insure to employees of the Company the full benefit of their
right to self-organization and to collective bargaining and otherwise
effectuate the policies of the Act.
VI. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
At the hearing, a company representative testified that as of Octo-
ber 1, 1938, approximately 15,650 persons were employed throughout
the System.
The A. C. A. claimed to represent 10,000 of these
employees, but submitted in evidence only comparatively few mem-
bership authorization cards.
There is testimony that 8,885 employees
of the System were covered by the agreement between the A. C. A.
and the Company and that 3,100 of this number were employed in
those cities in which a check of membership cards by representatives
of the Board showed that the A. C. A. represented a majority.
The C. T. U. offered in evidence approximately 680 membership
cards of employees in the 45 localities named in this petition and
two papers designating the C. T. U. as bargaining representative,
one signed by 13 employees and the other by 7 employees. There is
testimony that as of October 1, 1938, 522 employees were covered by
the agreement between the C. T. U. and the Company.
DECISIONS AND ORDERS
1071
We find that the question which has arisen concerning the repre-
sentation of the employees of the System can best be resolved by the
holding of an election by secret ballot.
We shall, therefore, direct
that such election be held to determine whether the employees in the
appropriate unit desire to be represented by the C. T. U. or the
A. C. A., or by neither.
The I. B. E. W. offered no evidence as to membership on a national
basis and did not indicate a desire that its name appear on the ballot.
Its name will, therefore, not be included.
It was stipulated by counsel for -all parties that if the Board
directed the holding of an election, eligibility to vote in the election
might appropriately be based upon the employees whose names
appear on the pay roll of the Company for October 1, 1938. In view
,of the stipulation, we shall direct that the election be held among
the employees of the System within the appropriate unit whose
names appear on the pay roll of the Company for October 1, 1938,
excluding those who have since quit or been discharged for cause.
On the basis of the above findings of fact and upon the entire
record in the case, the Board makes the following :
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. A question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the repre-
sentation of employees of the System within the meaning of Section
9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations
Act.
2. All employees of the System, excluding executives, general man-
agers, attorneys, confidential secretaries, general wire and traffic
-chiefs, and supervisory employees who have the right to hire and dis-
charge, and excluding employees located in Washington, Oregon,
Northern Idaho, and Montana, and excluding also the line gang
engaged in construction work on lines of the Company on the Illinois
Central Railroad south of the Ohio River, constitute a unit appro-
priate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning
of Section 9 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
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 8, of National
Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 1, as amended,
it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation authorized by the Board
-to ascertain representatives for collective bargaining with the System,
.an election by secret ballot shall be conducted as soon as convenient
1072
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
and beginning as promptly as is practicable after the date of this
Direction, under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director
for the Second Region, acting in the matter as agent for the National
Labor Relations Board, and subject to Article III, Section 9, of said
Rules and Regulations, among all the employees of the System who
were on the pay rolls of the Company on October 1, 1938, excluding
executives, general managers, attorneys, confidential secretaries, gen-
eral wire and traffic chiefs, and supervisory employees who have the
right to hire and discharge, excluding employees who have since quit
or been discharged for cause, excluding employees located in Wash-
ington, Oregon, Montana, and Northern Idaho, and excluding also
the line gang engaged in construction work on lines of the Com-
pany on the Illinois Central Railroad south of the Ohio River, to
determine whether they desire to be represented by Commercial Teleg-
raphers' Union, affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, or
by American Communications Association affiliated with the Com-
mittee for Industrial Organization, for the purposes of collective
bargaining, or by neither.