The Bendix Corp.

430 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD The Bendix Corporation , Launch Support Division and International Union , United Automobile , Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW),' Petitioner and International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO, and its Mila Lodge No. 690 ,2 Petitioner . Cases 12-RC-3383 and 12-UC-12 , May 14, 1970 DECISION, ORDER, AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION By CHAIRMAN MCCULLOCH AND MEMBERS FANNING AND BROWN Upon separate petitions duly filed under Section 9(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended , consol- idated hearings were held before Hearing Officer Mary Lee Meder . Thereafter , the Employer and International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO, and its Mila Lodge No . 690, filed briefs. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended , the National Labor Relations Board has delegated its powers in con- nection with these cases to a three -member panel. The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Hearing Officer made at the hearing and finds that they are free from prejudicial error . They are hereby affirmed. Upon the entire record in these cases, including the briefs of the Employer and IAM , the Board finds: 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act and it will effectuate the purposes of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein ., , ; :, , IP ill 2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent certain employees of the Employer .., ; %,-E„t , 3. The Employer , since 1964 , has been engaged in providing direct support for launching spacecraft at Ken- nedy Space Center at Merritt Island and Cape Kennedy, Florida. Such support includes the operation , mainte- nance, and management of launch complexes, test facili- ties, and ground support equipment . Additionally the Employer requisitions and disburses propellants and gas- es, stores and disburses ordnance , and is responsible for operation of support shops and specialized laborator- ies. Its responsibilities encompass the operation of vari- ous ground systems which directly support the National Aeronautics and Space Administration ' s program for launching various missiles. The Employer ' s nonadministrative work force at the space center consists of about 640 hourly rated produc- tion and maintenance workers and a complement of about 360 nonadministrative salaried employees various- ly classified as technicians and logistics employees. On March 12, 1965, the IAM, petitioner in the instant Case 12-UC-12, was certified , as the exclusive collective- bargaining representative of all hourly production and maintenance workers employed under the Employer's Hereinafter also referred to as UAW z Hereinafter also referred to as IAM contract with NASA at Cape Kennedy.3 The nonadminis- trative salaried employees were not sought by the IAM in that proceeding and have been unrepresented histori- cally. On August 5, 1965, and by subsequent agreement of March 1, 1968, effective through March 1, 1971, the IAM and Employer have had collective-bargaining agreements covering the production and maintenance unit specified in the Board's certification. In 1967, Teamsters Local Union No. 769, affiliated with the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chau- ffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers of America filed a petition (Case 12-RC-2720) for a unit of Employer's salaried logistics employees; UAW filed a petition (Case 12-RC-2734) seeking a unit of Employer's operating salaried employees in work areas 4 and 6 of the NASA facility at Cape Kennedy, Florida, including technicians and rescue specialists, but excluding certain other employees, and the IAM filed a unit clarification petition (Case 12-UC-5) in which it asserted that most if not all of the employees sought in the petitions of Teamsters and UAW were production and maintenance employees for whom IAM was certified and hence should be added to the existing unit without an election. The cases were consolidated for hearing and decision and the Board in its Decision, Order, and Direction of Election4 dis- missed the IAM's petition for unit clarification. The Board further stated in that decision that, as the salaried employees sought encompassed all unrepresented nonad- ministrative employees of the Employer at this location, they constitute a residual unit which might be appropriate for separate representation and found that a question concerning representation had been raised as 'to--them.3- A Globe type election was directed , which provided that -if a majority of the employees' in the voting group' voted for the IAM they would be included in the existing production and maintenance unit currently, represented by, the IAM. No union was certified pursuant to, the, Board-conducted election. The instant proceeding involves the claims of IAM and UAW affecting the unrepresented nonexempt sala- ried employees involved in the earlier proceeding (168 NLRB 371). There is no bargaining history for the employees sought. Thus, in Case 12-RC-3383, UAW seeks to represent separately all unrepresented nonadministrative salaried employees comprised of technicians, propellant sam- plers, and logistics employees. On the other hand, the IAM opposes an election, contending that certain classi- 9 The unit certified (Case l2-RC-2092, not printed in NLRB volumes) was as follows All production and maintenance employees of the Employer employed at the John F Kennedy Space Center in the separate administrative division responsible for Contract NAS-100-1600, but excluding all other employees including office clerical employees, technical and professional employees, executive and management employees, analysts, co-ordinators, planners, schedulers , statisti- cians, hason men, accountants, estimators, time-keepers, buyers, administrators, laboratory and test employees, guards and supervi- sors as defined in the Act 168 NLRB 371 In a supplemental decision the Board, Member Brown dissenting amended its decision and permitted the JAM to seek separate representa- tion of the residual unit (not printed in NLRB volumes) 182 NLRB No. 61 THE BENDIX CORPORATION 431 fications sought by UAW constitute an accretion to the existing production unit represented by it, and that its subsisting contract covers these classifications and hence bars a present election with respect to them Accordingly , IAM in Case 12-UC-12 urges the Board to clarify its certification expressly to include about 80 employees classified as electrical instrumentation tech- nician , mechanical technician , and calibration technician located in the technical operations branch and the propel- lant, life support , and ordance branch and to dismiss the RC petition of UAW The IAM claims these classifications as an accretion to the production and maintenance unit despite the Board's earlier dismissal of its UC petition seeking all unrepresented nonadministrative salaried employees In that case, the Board dismissed said petition, finding that the salaried classifications, though in existence at the time of IAM's certification for the production and maintenance unit, were excluded from that election as well as the ensuing collective-bargaining agreement nego- tiated between the Employer and the IAM In connection with its present UC petition, the IAM does not deny that the classifications sought to be accreted herein were covered by the earlier petition Instead, the IAM argues that organizational changes have occurred since the earlier proceeding which now makes it appropriate to add these classifications to the certified unit without need for an election Thus the IAM contends that, as a result of a decline in employment and reorganization, some functions have been reassigned, that the positions have been substantial- ly reduced in skill requirements and are now interchange- able with classifications represented by it Also, changes in the Employer's organizational structure and mode of operation have merged previously separate divisions The Employer, however, states that since the close of the hearing in July 1967, and before the UAW's instant petition was filed in August 1969, the Employer made two administrative changes noted below One dealt with changes in job titles, not relevant to IAM's argu- ment, and the other with departmental reorganization The substance of the organizational change resulted in the abolishment of the "work area" concept with the principal functioning division being on a department level composed of operating sections Accordingly, what was formerly known as work area 6 is now known as the industrial operations department and reports on the same level as departments which include hourly rated employees Former work area 5 was abolished with the former mobile gases groups now operating as mobile gas section under the propellant life support and ordance department (formerly designated as work area 7) and the special pneumatics group now operating as pneumatics section under the CX-39 department (for- merly called work area 1) Other changes since 1967 were limited to (1) the decrease in overall employment, (2) changes in work load resulting in reducing the amount of modification work done by salaried technicians and an increase of such work for hourly employees in the technical shop department, and (3) the reduction in skill requirements of technical jobs as a result of more refined working procedures In our opinion, the changes in circumstances alleged by IAM in support of its petition furnish insufficient bases for presently viewing the named salaried employ- ees as an accretion to the certified production and mainte- nance unit The changes, though perhaps strengthening the community of interest between the unrepresented classifications sought by the IAM and production and maintenance workers, do not involve structural changes in job content to a degree sufficient to treat them differ- ently from other salaried classifications that historically have been unrepresented In these circumstances, the instant record furnishes no basis for distinguishing the earlier case, and we therefore find that it is inappropriate to add the salaried classifications to the IAM's unit on petition for clarification Accordingly, we shall dismiss that petition 4 As indicated, UAW seeks a unit of all technicians, propellant samplers, and logistics employees occupying salaried classifications at the Employer's Cape Kennedy, Merritt Island, and Titusville, Florida, operations This unit is identical to that found appropriate in the prior case,6 and the parties apparently agree that it is appropriate in scope The Employer however contends that, since about 20 gas analysis technicians and liquid analysis technicians requested by UAW are "technical" employees, they should be excluded from the residual unit The IAM takes no position as to these analysis technicians The salaried nonexempt gas and liquid analysis techni- cians, herein also called analysts, are in the chemical analysis section of the propellant systems component laboratory department of the support services branch While there are no hourly rated employees in the chemi- cal analysis section, there are about 26 propellant sam- plers and 3 support engineering technicians In the physi- cal testing section of the propellant systems department there are 6 nondestruction technicians and 11 leak detec- tion technicians All the foregoing technicians are sought in UAW's petition, and the Employer does not raise any issue as to the appropriateness of their inclusion The analysts' education ranges from high school diplo mas to college degrees, and their work experience is in analytical laboratory work The gas analyzers utilize infrared spectrophotometers, gas chromatographs, mois- ture monitors, hydrocarbon analyzers, oxygen analyzers, and mass spectrophometers The liquid analysis techni cians regularly employ gas chromatographs, automatic tirimeters, atomic absorption units, analytical balances, viscosity flash point, poor point, and apparatus for deter- mining the characteristics of liquid The analysts work principally in the laboratory but have worked outside the laboratory in connection with the launching of Saturn V Both analysts groups report to a nonsupervisory lead chemist rather than to a regular foreman and are located in the same building with about 70 hourly rated employees of the precision cleaning section About 10 percent of the analysts are cross-trained between gas ' 168 NLRB 371 432 DECISIONS OF NATIONAI LABOR RELATIONS BOARD and liquid laboratory work The reports submitted are prepared by each of the groups and their chemists in conjunction with the samplers The analysts are required to some degree, to interpret data as well as make readings Quality assurance technicians monitor the work of analysts in the laboratory The analysts perform about 95 percent of their own maintenance work Analysts have daily contact with propellant samplers and quality assurance technicians, share the same build- ing with hourly rated precision cleaners, and have the same supervision as propellant samplers While analysts are administratively designated as in a different section from the physical testing section and precision cleaning section, both of which are included in the residual unit, they share the same next higher level of supervision with them They have the same fringe benefits as other technicians Neither UAW nor IAM seeks to represent analysts separately The Board has heretofore included them in the unit with other nonadministrative salaried employees, and employees have been transferred into analyst positions from other areas of the Employer's operations Accordingly, in view of the foregoing and on the record as a whole, we find, without passing upon the precise technical status of the dispute classifica- tions, that gas analysis technicians and liquid analysis technicians share a community of interest with the residu- al unit of technicians , propellant samplers, and logistics employees sufficient to warrant their inclusion in the unit found appropriate herein' As the nonadministrative salaried technicians , propel- lant samplers , and logistics employees encompass all unrepresented nonadministrative salaried employees of the Employer at this location, we find they constitute a residual unit which may be appropriate for separate representation Accordingly, we find that the following employees constitute an appropriate unit for the purposes of collec- tive bargaining within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act " All technicians, propellant samplers, and logistics employees occupying salaried classifications at the Employers Cape Kennedy, Merritt Island and Titusville, Florida, operations, including gas analy- sis technicians and liquid analysis technician but excluding all other employees office clerical employees professional employees guards and supervisors as defined in the Act ORDER It is hereby ordered that the petition in Case 12-UC-12 be, and it hereby is, dismissed [Direction of Election9 omitted from publication The Sheffield Corporation 134 NLRB 1101 As the IAM seeks to represent the residual unit separately in the event of an election and since the Employer does not oppose IAM s participation in the election on that basis Chairman McCulloch and Member Fanning have decided to dispense with the usual provisions for a self determination election which would require the IAM to repre sent the sought after salaried employees as part of its existing production and maintenance unit if at all Member Brown dissents from the majority s failure to require a self determination election whereby residu al employees could vote on whether or not they wish to be represented by IAM as part of the existing production and maintenance unit Y In order to assure that all eligible voters may have the opportunity to be informed of the issues in the exercise of their statutory right to vote all parties to the election should have access to a list of voters and their addresses which may be used to communicate with them Excelsior Underii ear Inc 156 NLRB 1236 N L R B v W) man Gordon Compam 394 U S 759 Accordingly it is hereby directed that an election eligibility list containing the names and addresses of all the eligible voters must be filed by the Employer with the Regional Director for Region 12 within 7 days of the date of this Decision Order and Direction of Election The Regional Director shall make the list available to all parties to the election No extension of time to file this list shall be granted by the Regional Director except in extraordinary circumstances Failure to comply with this requirement shall be grounds for setting aside the election whenever proper objections are filed