Western Union Telegraph Co.

In the Matter Of WESTERN' UNION TELEGRAPH COMPANY and COM-, MERCIAL TELEGRAPHERS UNION, LOCAL 48, A. F. L. Case No. R-2150.Decided May 8, 1941 Jurisdiction : telegraph industry. Practice and Procedure : petition dismissed where no appropriate unit within the, scope of the petition. Mr. M. T. Cook, Mr. W. L. Glasheen, Mr. L. M. Messner, and Mr. C. J. Eldridge, of San Francisco, Calif., Mr. J. W. Inwood, of Los Angeles, Calif., and Mr. Ralph H. Kimball, of New York City, for the Company. Mr. A. H. Petersen, of Los Angeles, Calif., Mr. George R. Graint, of North Hollywood, Calif., Miss Anne L. Walker, and Miss V. Dorothy Weimaan, of Los Angeles, Calif., Mr. -Hugh C. McKenney, of Washington, D. C., and Mr. Frank Powers, of Chicago, Ill., for the C. T. U. Mr. Paul G. Henderson and Mr. J. B. Williams, of Los Angeles, Calif., and Mr. Roland L. Hansen, of Glendale, Calif., for the Independent. Mr. Gene Gaillac and Mr. E. E. Hediger, of Los Angeles, Calif., and Mr. Lawson, Wimberly, of Washington, D. C., for the I. B. E. W. Mr. Harry A. Kaplan and Mr. Bruce Risley, of Los Angeles, Calif., Boudin, Cohn e€ Glickstein, by Mr. Sidney Elliott Cohn and Mr. Victor Rabinowitz, of New York City; and Mr. J. P. Selly, of New York City, for the A. C. A. ' Mr. N. Barr Miller, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND . ORDER STATEMENT OF THE CASE On September 19, 1940, Commercial Telegraphers Union, Local 48, A. F. L., herein called the C. T. U., filed with the Regional Director for the Twenty-first Region (Los Angeles, California) a petition alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of Western Union Telegraph Com- 31 N. L R 13, No. 106. 653 654- DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD pany, Los Angeles, California, herein called the Company, and re- questing an investigation and certification of representatives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act. On November 2, 1940, "the National Labor Relations, Board, herein called the Board, acting pursuant to Sec- tion 9 (c) of the Act and Article III, Section 3, of the National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, ordered an investigation and authorized the Regional Director to conduct it and to provide for an appropriate hearing upon. due notice. On November 7, 1940, the Regional Director issued a notice of hearing, copies of which were duly served upon the Company, upon the C. T. U., and upon United Communication Workers of America, herein called the Independent, a labor organization claiming to represent employees directly affected by the investigation. Pursuant. to notice, a hearing was held on November 14, 1940, at Los Angeles, California, before James A. Cobey, the Trial Examiner duly desig- nated by the Chief Trial Examiner. - The Company, the C. T. U., and the Independent were represented and participated in the hear- ing. The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, herein called the I. B. E. W., entered a speci-,il appearance.' Full oppor- tunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing upon the issues was afforded all parties. At the outset of the hearing the Independent orally requested the Board to establish as appropriate a bargaining unit consisting of all the Company's employees in the Los Angeles metropolitan dis- trict instead of a unit of traffic department employees as petitioned for by the C. T. U. The C. T. U. objected to this request and to the admission of evidence offered in support thereof on the ground that the Independent had not filed a petition setting forth such unit in compliance with the Board's Rules and Regulations. The Trial Examiner ruled that evidence of the appropriateness of a larger unit was admissible because it was relevant to a determination of the appropriateness of the smaller unit petitioned for by the C. T. U., but reserved for consideration by the Board the question of whether the unit requested by the Independent should be established as appro- priate in the absence of a petition filed in accordance with the Board's Rules and Regulations. The ruling of the Trial Examiner admitting the evidence is affirmed. In view of our findings below, we deem it unnecessary to rule on the effect of the failure of the Independent to file a petition.' 1 All the' parties, including the I. B E. W., stipulated that they had received "due notice" of this hearing. 2 Cf. Matter of Elliott Bay Lumber Company, Elliott Bay Hill Company and Plywood and Veneer Workers Union, Local No 26, 8 N. L. R. B. 753, 754. WESTERN UNION TELEGRAPH CO. 655 During the course of the hearing the Trial Examiner made sev- eeral other rulings on motions and on objections to the admission of evidence. The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial exami- ner and finds that no prejudicial errors were committed. The rulings are hereby affirmed. On December 3, 1940, after the close of the hearing, American Communications Association and American Communications Asso- ciation, Local 32, both hereinafter called the A. C. A., filed,a motion that the hearing in this proceeding be reopened and,that the A. C. A. be permitted to intervene therein. On December 12, 1940, the Board granted the motion of the A. C. A. and ordered that the record be reopened and the A. C. A. permitted to intervene in the proceeding.3 On December 26, 1940, the I. B. E. W. filed with the Board a mo- tion for leave to file a petition for investigation and certification of representatives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the Act, for the plant department employees in, the Western Division4 of the Company which includes Los Angeles, and for consolidation of said petition with the proceedings herein. The motion is hereby denied.,' On January 16, 1941, the Regional Director issued a notice of further hearing, copies of which were duly served upon the Company, the C. T. U., the Independent, the I. B. E. W., and the A. C. A. A further hearing was held on January 24, 1941, at Los Angeles, Cali- fornia, before James A. Cobey, the Trial Examiner duly designated by the Chief Trial Examiner. All parties were represented and par- ticipated in the hearing and were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to examine aiid cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evi- dence bearing upon the issues. During the course of -the further 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 February 18, 1941, upon request of the C. T. U. and pursuant to notice duly served upon all the parties, a,hearing for the purpose of oral 'argument was held before the Board in Washington, D. C. The Company, the C. T. U., the I. B. E. W., and the A. C. A. ap- peared and participated in the hearing. Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following : 3 On December 19, 1940, the Independent filed a memorandum in response to the motion of-the A C. A. requesting that the Board deny said motion. The Western Division referred to in the I B. E W. motion is designated by the Company as its Pacific Division 5 A petition of the I. B. E. W for investigation and certification of representatives of plant department employees in the Pacific Division, filed in the Twentieth Region (San Francisco, California), is under investigation by the Boaid. e I 656 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD FINDINGS OF FACT 1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY Western Union Telegraph Company is a corporation organized and existing, pursuant to the laws of the State of New York. Its principal office is located at 'New York City. It is engaged through- out the United States and in various foreign countries in the re- ceiving and transmission by` telegraph and cable of intrastate, interstate, and international communications. In the United States it maintains a vast system of wire network for the' purpose of receiving and transmitting communications. In addition to its corrt- munication system in the United States, the respondent owns or leases cables connecting directly or indirectly certain points in foreign countries and in the United States. In operating its na- tional and international communicating system, the respondent owned or operated as of December f, 1939, 211,530 miles of pole lines, 4,070 miles of land line cable, 1,876,867 miles'of wire, 30,324 nautical miles of ocean cable, and 19,543 telegraph offices, not including 16,208 telegraph-agency stations. , At the close of 1939 the respondent employed 44,299 persons. In the Los 'Angeles metropolitan area there were employed, at the time of the first hearing herein, 1;115 persons. The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the meaning of Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. II. THE LABOR ORGANIZATIONS INYOLVED Commercial Telegraphers Union, Local 48, A. , F. L., affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, United Communication Workers of America, unaffiliated, American Communications Association, and American Communications Association, Local 32, affiliated,with the Congress of Industrial Organizations,, and International Brother- hood of Electrical Workers,-affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, are labor organizations admitting to membership employees of the Company in the Los Angeles metropolitan area. III. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT The C. T. U. in its petition requests the Board to find appropriate a unit composed of all employees in the traffic department of the Company in the Los Angeles metropolitan area. 'The Independent and the A. C. A. contend that a unit consisting. of employees in the traffic department only is inappropriate . At the hearing the Independent requested that the Board - find appropriate a unit con- WiESffERN UNION'- TELE'GR'APH Co. 657 sisting of all employees of the Company in, the Los Angeles metro- politan area, that is, employees in the traffic, commercial, accounting, ,and plant departniiuents.6 The I. B. E. W. desires the exclusion of plant-department employees from any unit established in the Los Angeles metropolitan area.7 The Company, while favoring a single Nation-wide -bargaining unit, admits, as contended by the C. T. U. and the Independent, that its employees in Los Angeles should not be denied the right of collective bargaining pending organization of the employees on a Nation-wide basis. ,The Los Angeles metropolitan area constitutes a functional office within the Pacific Division of the Company, which division is one of eight territorial divisions in the operating structure of the Com- pany. The business in the Los Angeles area is conducted through four departments, namely : traffic, commercial, accounting, plant. Each de- partment is in the charge of a superintendent who directs all the opera- tions in his department and is responsible to the head of his re- spective department in the Pacific Division. The head of each of the four departments in the Pacific Division is in turn responsible-to a vice president of the Company who coordinates all the operations of that department throughout the United States. In the Los Angeles metropolitan area, the traffic department, employ- ing some 430 persons handles the transmission of all incoming and out- going messages, tests and regulates' the wire service, and maintains the equipment in the operating rooms. The commercial department, with 586 employees, including 331 messengers, is responsible for the acceptance of messages for transmission by the traffic department, the delivery of all incoming messages received by the traffic depart- ment, the making of rates, development of new business, and the maintenance of public relations. In the branch offices, the com- mercial department also is responsible for the sending of messages, a function performed by employees of the traffic department in the central- office. The accounting department, employing 44 persons, handles the collection of fees for all messages and prepares statistical 'reports of revenue and disbursements. The 48 employees in the plant department are responsible for- the construction and maintenance of land lines, wires, and cables and also have charge of the installation of offices-and equipment. Operations in the four departments are iiiterdependent and closely integrated. 8 Prior to January 1, 1941, there were five departments in the Los Angeles metropolitan area On that date the purchasing and stores department was transferred to the San -Francisco office of 'the Company 7 As stated above, the I . B E. W. has filed ' with the Regional Office for the Twentieth Region ( San Francisco , California ) a petition for investigation and certification as the representative of all plant-department employees in nine western States, constituting the Pacific Division of the Company. 658 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD The C. T. U., the Independent, and the A. C. A. each recognizes that a metropolitan-wide unit in Los Angeles is more appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining than departmental units, and each admits to membership substantially all employees of the Com- pany in the Los Angeles metropolitan area.' The showings of mem- berships in the labor organizations here involved, indicate that self- organization has to some extent advanced beyond the traffic depart- ment.9 Each of the organizations has already admitted to its mem- bership some employees in the Los Angeles metropolitan area outside the traffic department, and each indicated at the hearing that it is engaged in, or expects to engage in, active efforts to organize the employees of other departments at Los Angeles. Under these cir- cumstances, we find that the employees of the traffic department in the Los Angeles metropolitan area do not constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining. The Independent, the only labor organization presently desiring an election in the Los Angeles area in a unit larger than the traffic department, has made no sufficient showing of representation of employees in other departments than traffic to warrant holding an election in a metropolitan-wide unit at this time. Therefore, we 'shall not consider in this proceeding the request of the Independent for a bargaining unit-of all employees in the Los Angeles metropoli- tan area. IV. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION On the basis of the above findings, we find that no, question has arisen concerning the representation of employees of the Company in the Los Angeles metropolitan area in a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining. We shall accordingly order the petition dismissed. Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following : CONCLUSION OF LAW No question concerning representation of employees of Western Union Telegraph Company, Los Angeles, California , in a unit which 8 The C T. U. stated at the hearing that in Los Angeles it had waived its claim to em- ployees of the plant department in favor of the I B E W, which claims to be organizing such employees throughout the Pacific Division of the Company. However, plant-depart- ment empl8yees are eligible to membership in the C. T. U and the C T. U has included them in metro poli tan-wide units in other cities ' 9 The C T U. made no showing of the extent of its membership among employees in other departments than traffic. The Independent submitted 109 authorization cards which, ac- cording to the statements of the Regional Director and the Trial Examiner, appear to bear original, genuine signatures of employees in other departments than traffic There are a total of 685 employees in such departments The record does not disclose how many members the I B E W has enlisted among employees in the plant department at Los Angeles. WESTERN UON TETiE 'GRAPH CO. 659 is appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining has arisen within the meaning- of Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act. ORDER Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and conclusion of law, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that the petition for investigation and certification of representatives of employees of Western Union Telegraph Company, Los Angeles, California, filed by Commercial Telegraphers Union, Local `48, A. F. L., be, and it hereby is, dismissed. 441843-42-vol. 31-43