Boeing Airplane Co.

BOEING AIRPLANE COMPANY, SEATTLE DIVISION 689 2. By forming, dominating, and interfering with the administration of the Inde- pendent and by contributing support to it, the Association and its drugstore employer- members have engaged in and are engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8 (a)(2) of the Act. 3. By entering into and giving effect to the contract effective July 2, 1957, with the Independent , which contract was executed in violation of the Act, the Association and its drugstore employer-members have engaged in and are engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8(a)(1) of the Act. 4. By discriminatorily locking out certain employees on November 20, 1957, thereby discouraging membership in the Union , the Association's drugstore employer- members have engaged in and are engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8(a)(3) of the Act. 5. By interfering with, restraining , and coercing the employees here involved in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act, the Association and its drugstore employer-members have engaged in, and are engaging in, unfair labor prac- tices within the meaning of Section 8(a)( I) of the Act. 6. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair labor practices within the mean- ing of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act. [Recommendations omitted from publication.] Boeing Airplane Company, Seattle Division and National Union, United Welders of America, Independent, Petitioner. Case No. 19-RC-92194. August p21, 1959 SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND CLARIFICATION OF UNIT On February 20, 1959, following a Decision and Direction of Elec- tion 1 and an election held pursuant thereto, the Board issued a Cer- tification of Representatives in the above-entitled proceeding in which National Union, United Welders of America, Independent, was certi- fied as the exclusive bargaining representative in an appropriate craft unit of welding employees. Thereafter, on April 16, 1959, Aeronau- tical Industrial District Lodge No. 751, International Association of Machinists, AFL-CIO, the Intervenor and bargaining representa- tive of the Employer's production and maintenance employees, filed a motion in which it requested the Board to clarify the welding unit to determine whether employees classified as automatic fusion welding machine operator and sheet metal worker and welder maintenance C should be included. The Petitioner filed a reply, and on April 28, 1959, the Board ordered a hearing for the purpose of receiving evi- dence relating to the unit placement of the aforementioned classifica- tions. Accordingly, on June 18 and 19, a hearing was held before Hearing Officer Robert E. Tillman and, thereafter, the Petitioner and the Employer filed briefs. The rulings of the hearing officer made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed 2 'Boeing Airplane Company, Seattle Division, Case No, 19-RC-2194 (issued on Janu- ary 13, 1959 , unpublished). 2 The requests of the Intervenor and the Employer for oral argument are denied, as the record, including the briefs, adequately presents the issues and the positions of the parties. 124 NLRB No. 83. 525543-60-vol. 124 45 690 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 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 Leedom and Members Rodgers and Jenkins]. The 12 automatic fusion welding machine operators operate auto- matic welding machines which seam weld fuel tanks for Bomare pilotless aircraft. The machines are automatic and after 10 days to 2 weeks instruction , operators, with no prior welding experience, are able to turn out acceptable welds. Controls of the machine are preset by the operator in accordance with certain prearranged settings worked out by research welders. Once set, they govern the speed of the weld, the voltage, the amperage, the wire feed , and the height of the welding head. As the operators of these machines take no mili- tary tests and receive no military certifications , and as they are not otherwise required to possess or exercise the complex of welding skills utilized by other aircraft welders, we find that they are not properly included in the unit . See Lockheed Aircraft Corporation, 121 NLRB 1541. While the welding machines were being phased into the production process, they were operated by more highly paid production and high strength welders called automatic fusion welding machine operators- special. As the Employer does not contemplate using welders to operate these machines in the future, we find it unnecessary to resolve unit placement as to this classification. The welding unit found appropriate and certified by the Board con- tained no express reference to the classification of sheet metal worker and welder maintenance C, as no evidence had originally been taken on that classification . On the day of the election, pursuant to the Board's instructions in the aforementioned Decision and Direction of Election, employees in this classification were permitted to vote sub- ject to challenge . Since their ballots were not decisive of the outcome of the election, they were not counted . On the basis of the evidence adduced at the supplemental hearing, we now note that these em- ployees, who work with sheet metal workers, spend only 5 percent of their time in welding. In these circumstances, they may hardly be deemed to be "primarily engaged" in craft work within the require- ment of American Potash.' Accordingly, they are not properly a part of the welding Unit .4 [The Board amended the Certification of Representatives issued to the National Union, United Welders of America, Independent, in Case No. 19-RC-2194 to exclude from the certified unit the automatic fusion welding machine operators and sheet metal worker and welder maintenance C employees.] 3 American Potash & Chemical Corporation, 107 NLRB 1418. 4 Arrowhead Products Division of Mogul Bower Bearings, Inc., Long Beach Plant, 120 NLRB 675, 676.