Western Union Telegraph Co.

In the Matter of WESTERN UNION TELEGRAPH COMPANY and- COM- MERCIAL TELEGRAPHERS UNION In the Matter of WESTERN UNION TELEGRAPH COMPANY and INTER- NATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS ' Cases Nos. R-2651 and R-92652. Decided August 00, 1941 Jurisdiction : telegraph industry. Investigation and Certification of Representatives : existence of question: re- fusal to accord recognition to any union until certified by the Board ; labor organization whose contention as to appropriate unit not upheld permitted upon request to withdraw its name from ballot; election necessary. Where union failed to appear at continued hearing and record indicates that said union has been dissolved during continuance, its name omitted from ballot, -but leave granted to have name placed upon ballot upon- application, in view of inconclusive nature of the testimony as to its dis- solution. Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining _ Proposed unit of all plant department employees in division of Company's operations covering nine States rejected where, among other things, such employees within certain metropolitan areas are included in contracts cover- ing all employes in such areas, petitioning union has made no showing of designation by such employees in certain metropolitan areas, and such employees in certain metropolitan areas have indicated desire to be repre- sented together with employees in other departments. However, certain groups of plant department employees namely, line gang employees and employees individually assigned to so-called "miscellaneous locations," and plant department employees in metropolitan areas, who have shown a desire for representation apart from employees in other departments in a metro- politan area and who are not included in contracts covering other employees of the Company, may appropriately be combined into a single unit; further, certain of said groups of 'plant department employees within a metro- politan area in which organization has been conducted among all employees may also appropriately be included within a unit of employees in all depart- ments of such metropolitan area. The desires of the employees, as ex- pressed in elections directed, held determinative. Mr. M. T. Cook, of San Francisco, Calif., for the Company. Mr. Frank R. Williams, Mr. Vincent P. Dunn, and Mr. F. L. Guy, of San Francisco, Calif., for the C. T. U. Mr. Gene Gaillac, of San Francisco, Calif., for the I. B. E. W. Mr. Bruce Risley, of San Francisco, Calif., for the A. C. A. 34 N. L. R. B., No. 77. N 579 580 DECISIONS OF NAT10NAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Mr. J. B. Williams, of Los Angeles, Calif., and Mr. R. L. Hansen, of Glendale, Calif., for the U. C. W. A. Mr. G. A. Ford, of San Francisco, Calif., for the I. C. U. Mr. Robert F. Koretz, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS STATEMENT OF THE CASE On January 17, 1941, Commercial Telegraphers Union, herein called the C. T. U., filed a petition with the Regional Director for the Twen- tieth Region (San Francisco, California) in the above proceedings designated as Case No. R-2651, alleging that a question affecting com- merce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of West- ern Union Telegraph Company, herein called the Company, in the San Francisco metropolitan area? On January 22 International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, herein called the I. B. E. W., filed a petition with the Regional Director in the proceedings designated above as Case No. R-2652, and on March 24 an amended petition, al- leging that a question had arisen concerning the representation of plant department employees of the Company in its Pacific Divlsion.2 Each of the petitions requested an investigation and certification of repre- sentatives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act. On April 16 the National Labor Relations Board, herein called the Board, acting pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the Act, and Article III, Sections 3 and 10 (c) (2), of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, ordered an investigation and au- thorized the Regional Director to conduct it and to provide for an appropriate hearing upon due notice, and further ordered that the two afore-nientloned cases, Case No. R-2651 and Case No. R-2652, be consolidated. On April 23 the Regional Director issued a notice of consolidated hearing, copies of which, together with copies of the petitions and amended petitions, were duly served upon the Company, upon the C. T. U., upon the I. B. E. W., and upon American Communications Association, herein called the A. C. A., and its Local No. 30, upon In- 1 This area includes the cities of San Francisco , South San Francisco, Burlingame and San Mateo , California 2 The Company's Pacific Division covers the State of California , Idaho, Nevada, Utah, Wyoming, Arizona, Montana, Oregon and Washington. . WESTERN UNION TELEGRAPH COMPANY 581 dependent Communications Union, herein called the I. C. U., upon Independent Communications Union of Spokane, Washington, herein called the I. C. U. Spokane, and upon United Communications Workers of America, herein called the U. C. W. A., labor organizations claiming to represent employees directly affected by the investigation. Pur- suant to notice, a hearing was held at San Francisco, California, on May 1, 1941, before James C. Paradise, the Trial Examiner duly desig- nated by the Chief Trial Examiner. At the opening of the hearing there was introduced in evidence, without objection, a notice of post- ponement of the consolidated hearing until further notice, copies of which were duly served upon the parties. Pursuant to a further notice of consolidated hearing, copies of which were duly served upon the parties, a hearing was held at San Francisco, California, on June 17 and 18 before John Paul Jennings, the Trial Examiner duly designated by the Chief Trial Examiner in place and stead of James C. Paradise. The Company, the C. T. U., the I. B. E. W., the A. C. A., and the I. C. U. appeared, were represented by counsel or by a representative and participated in the hearing. Full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bear- ing upon the issues was afforded all parties. During the course of the hearing the Trial Examiner made several rulings on 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. Subsequent to the hearing, th/A. C. A. submitted a brief which the Board has considered. Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY Western Union Telegraph Company, a New York corporation with its principal office at New York City, is engaged throughout the United States and in various foreign countries in the receiving and transmis- sion by telegraph and cable of intrastate, interstate and international communications. At the close of 1939, the Company employed 44,299 persons, of which number 1,333 were located outside the United States. Case No. R-2651 concerns employees of the Company in the San Fran- cisco metropolitan area, where the Company employs over 900 persons. Case No. R-2652 concerns approximately 300 plant department em- ployees in the Company's Pacific Division. The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce, within the meaning of the Act. 451269-42-vol. 34--38 582 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED Commercial Telegraphers Union 3 and International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers are labor organizations affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, admitting to membership employees of the Company. American Communications Association is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, admitting to membership employees of the Company .4 Independent Communications Union is an unaffiliated labor organi- zation admitting to membership employees of the Company in the San Francisco metropolitan area. Independent Communications Union of Spokane, Washington, is an unaffiliated labor organization admitting to membership employees of the Company in Spokane, Washington. United Communications Workers of America is a labor organiza- tion admitting to membership employees of the Company in the Los Angeles, California, metropolitan area. III. THE QUESTIONS CONCERNING REPRESENTATION The Company refuses to recognize any of the labor organizations here concerned as the exclusive representative of employees of the Company within the units claimed to be appropriate unless and until they are certified as such by the Board. At the hearing there was introduced into evidence reports by the Regional Director showing that the C. T. U., the A. C. A. and the I. C. U. each represent a substantial number of employees in the San Francisco metropolitan area,5 and that the I. B. E. W. represents a substantial number of plant department employees in the Pacific Division.e 3 It appears that Local 34 of Commercial Telegraphers Union has jurisdiction over employees of the Company in the San Francisco metropolitan area. 4It appears that Local No. 30 of the American Communications Association has juris- diction over employees of the Company In the San Francisco metropolitan area. E The Regional -Director' s report shows that these labor organizations submitted the following number of membership applications bearing apparently genuine and original signatures of employees whose names appear upon the March 8, 1941 , pay roll, which contains the names of approximately 800 persons other than supervisory and confidential employees : C. T. U.: 192 membership applications -dated between December 1939 and December 1940. A. C. A.: 150 membership applications dated between January 1937 and -December 1940. I. C. U.: 82 membership applications dated during August and December 1940. The Regional Director's report shows that the I. B. E. W. submitted 141 membership applications bearing apparently genuine and original signatures of employees whose names appear on the March 15, 1941 , pay roll. In her report the Regional Director set forth the following tabulation showing geographically the approximate number of employees, WESTERN UNION TELEGRAPH COMPANY 583 We find that questions have arisen concerning the representation of employees of the Company in San Francisco and of plant depart- ment employees of the Company in the Pacific Division. IV. THE EFFECT OF THE QUESTIONS CONCERNING REPRESENTATION UPON COMMERCE We find that the questions concerning representation which have arisen, occurring in connection with the operations of the Company described in Section I, above, have a close, intimate and substantial relation to trade, traffic, and commerce among the several States and with foreign countries and tend to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce and the free flow of commerce.. V. THE APPROPRIATE UNITS The C. T. U. in its petition in Case No. R-2651 requests the Board to find appropriate a unit composed of employees of the Company in the San Francisco metropolitan area, excepting plant department employees. The A. C. A. and the I. C. U. contend that employees of the Company in the San Francisco metropolitan area, including plant department employees, constitute an appropriate bargaining unit. The I. B. E. W. in its petition in Case No. R-2652 requests the Board to find appropriate a unit of plant department employees in the Company's Pacific Division, including plant department em- ployees at San Francisco. The A. C. A. contends that this unit is inappropriate. The Company maintains a neutral position regarding the appropriate unit or units? within the unit claimed to be appropriate by the I. B E W.; the number of membership applications of such employees submitted by the I B. E. W. ; and the number of member. ship applications of such employees submitted by other labor organizations: Approxi- mate total eligibles I. B. E. W. Other Los Angeles ------------------------------------- 52 16 11 (U. C. W. A ). San Francisco ------------------------------------ 65 38 1 (A. C. A). Portland------------------------------------------ 10 9- 0. Seattle-- ----------------------------------------- 8 5 0. Salt Lake---------------------------------------- 3 2 0. Spokane----------------------------------------- 3 0 2 (I. C. U. Spokane). Oakland------------------------------------------ 4 0 0. Phoenu ----------- ------ ------------------------- 2 2 0. Sacramento -------------------------------------- 2 0 0. Tacoma--------------------- ------------------ 2 - 0 0. Miscellaneous (only 1 eligible in each locality ) ---- 31 1s 0. Line gangs - -------------------------------------- 122 49 0. Total ------------------------------------- 304 141 14. 7 While the Company favors a Nation-wide bargaining unit, it admits that employees who are organized in particular localities should not be denied the right of collective bargaining pending organization of employees on a Nation-wide basis. 584 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD The Company's operations in the United States are conducted on a departmental basis; the departments which are concerned with field operations are the traffic, commercial, plant, and accounting depart- ments. For administrative purposes, the several departments are divided into- six territorial divisions, one of which is the Pacific Division, which extends through nine western States. The Com- pany's operations in San Francisco constitute a local unit within the Pacific Division. Said operations are conducted through five local departments, namely : traffic, commercial, accounting, plant, and pur- chasing and stores. In the San Francisco metropolitan area, the traffic department, in which there are some 395 employees, is engaged in the receipt and transmission of messages to and from San Francisco. The commer- cial department, in which there are about 364 employees, is engaged in solicitation of business, public relations work, pick-up and delivery of messages by messenger, and the operation of branch offices. The accounting department, with some 77 employees, keeps records of revenue and disbursements and performs other similar work. The purchasing and stores department, with about 13 employees, handles the purchase and distribution of supplies, the uniform equipment, and similar matters. The plant department, in which there are about 65 employees, is engaged in the construction and maintenance of equipment outside the main office, and in installation of equipment. Operations in the local departments are interdependent and inte- grated; in particular, the proper functioning of the traffic and com- mercial departments is dependent upon the performance by the plant department of its duties. We find that employees in the traffic, commercial, accounting and purchasing and stores departments are within the unit of employees in the San Francisco metropolitan unit. We further find that em- ployees in the plant department may appropriately be included in said unit. As set forth below, the desires of these employees shall be determinative in this regard. There are also located in San Francisco four departmental offices which supervise -and coordinate all local departments within the Pacific Division, including those at San Francisco. These offices are the general manager's office of the commercial department, the divi- sion traffic superintendent's office, the division plant superintendent's office, and the division auditor's office and are hereinafter collectively called the San Francisco division offices. The A. C. A. would exclude all employees in such offices on the ground that their work pertains to division matters rather than local functions. The C. T. U. and I. C. U. agree to the exclusion of several apparently supervisory or WESTERN UNION TELEGRAPH COMPANY 585 confidential employees therein, but urge the inclusion in the unit of certain clerks, stenographers and office boys." These employees per- form all their work in San Francisco and the nature of their.duties is similar to that of local department employees whom the parties agreed to include in the unit of San Francisco metropolitan area em- ployees. We are satisfied that the fact that their work concerns divisional matters does not warrant the exclusion of these employees, and we find below that certain clerks, stenographers, and office boys are within the San Francisco metropolitan area unit. Finally, there is'also located at San Francisco the district super- intendent's office, which has jurisdiction over so-called "district offices" in California and other States and has no connection with operations at San Francisco. It appears that each of the three em- ployees in this office performs supervisory functions. The parties agreed to, and we shall, exclude these employees from the unit. There are approximately 304 employees in the plant department of • the Pacific Division. These employees fall geographically within the following three groups : (1) The approximately 135 plant department employees with headquarters at the San Francisco, Los Angeles, Portland, and Seattle metropolitan areas. Nearly all of these persons perform their work within the respective metropolitan areas. (2) The approximately 47 plant department employees with headquarters at socalled "miscellaneous locations," that is, at, smaller cities and towns throughout the Pacific Division. Of these persons, 31 are the only plant department employees assigned to their respective head- quarters; s of the remaining 16, approximately 3 are assigned to headquarters at Salt Lake City, 3 at Spokane, 4 at Oakland, 2 at Phoenix, 2 at Sacramento, and 2 at Tacoma. All said 47 employees usually work within a radius of about 50 miles of their headquarters; it is shown that, in general, the smaller the size of the town or city designated as their headquarters, the greater the amount of time spent at work outside of headquarters. (3) The approximately 122 line 'The I B E W would exclude from its proposed unit as clerical employees the persons in the division plant superintendent 's office. These persons are classified upon the pay roll as follows : Section Eqptmn ., Boise, Idaho ; Section Eqptmn , Great Falls , Mont ; Section Eqptmn., Riverside, Calif ; Section Lineman, Pt. Townsend , Wash. ; Section Eqptmn, Bakersfield , Calif. ; Section Eqptmn, San Diego , Calif ; Section Lineman, Tekoa, Wash ; Section Eqptmn., Cheyenne, Wyo ; Section Egptmn., Stockton , Calif. ; Section Eqptmn., El Centro , Calif. ; Section Eqptmn., Fresno, Calif. ; Section Eqptmn., Watsonville, Calif. ; Section Egptmn. , Butte, Mont. ; Section Eqptmn., Billings, Mont ; Section Egptmn., Medford, Ore. ; Section Lineman. La Grande, Ore. ; Section Lineman, Long Beach, Calif. ; Section Eqptmn ., Reno, Nev. ; Section Eqptmn., Tonopah, Nev. ; Section Lineman , Lacrosse , Wash. ; Section Eqptmn, Pocatello, Idaho ; Section Egptmn , Eugene, Ore ; Section Lineman , Yakima, Wash. ; Section Eqptmn., San Jose, Calif. ; Section Egptmn , Tucson, Ariz ; Section Eqptmn , Chico, Calif ; Section Lineman, The Dallies, Ore ; Section Eqptmn ., Santa Barbara, Calif. ; Section Lineman, Walla Walla, Wash ; Section Lineman, Pendleton , Ore.; Section Eqptmn, Pasadena, Calif. 586 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD gang employees who have no assigned headquarters_ and perform work throughout the entire Pacific Division. Their employment and pay-roll records are maintained in San Francisco. In support of its position that a unit of plant department employ- ees in the Company's Pacific Division is appropriate the I. B. E. W. adverts to the following facts, among others : that it has sub- mitted evidence of designation by 141 of the approximately 304 em- ployees within the allegedly appropriate unit, whereas other labor organizations here concerned have submitted little evidence of designation; 10 that approximately 50 per cent of said employees per- form work which is division-wide in scope; that seniority among said employees is on a division-wide basis, whereas seniority in other departments is on a local basis; and that the work of plant depart- ment employees differs from that of employees in other departments. The A. C. A., in support of its position that a unit of plant depart- ment employees throughout the Pacific Division is inappropriate and that a unit of all employees, including plant department employees, in the San Francisco "metropolitan area is appropriate, adverts to the following facts, among others : that the I. B. E. W. admits em- ployees in all departments to membership and has organized on an industrial basis elsewhere in the telegraph industry, as evidenced by the I. B. E. W.'s contract with the Postal Telegraph Cable Com- pany covering all employees in certain northwestern States; that the C. T. U. likewise admits all employees of the Company to mem- bership and has organized all employees, including plant department employees in certain localities; that in the Pacific Division, the C. T. U. has contracts with the Company covering all employees, including those in the plant department, in Phoenix, Arizona, and in Oakland, California, and the I. C. U. Spokane likewise has a contract with the Company covering all employees in Spokane, Washington; that op- erations in the Company's departments are highly integrated and interdependent; that there are several groups of employees within the plant department performing different types of work, requiring varying degrees of skill; and that the plant department employees within a metropolitan area have a closer work relationship to em- ployees in other departments within such area than to plant depart- ment employees in other metropolitan areas or to line gangmen. Under all the circumstances of this case, including the fact that plant department employees in certain metropolitan areas within the Pacific Division are included in contracts covering all employees within such areas, the fact that the I. B. E. W. has made no showing of designation in certain metropolitan areas, and the fact that in certain metropolitan areas employees have indicated, according to 10 See footnote 6, supra. WESTERN UNION TELEGRAPH COMPANY 587 the designations submitted by other organizations organizing throughout all departments, their desire to be represented together with employees in other departments, we are of the opinion that the unit of all plant department employees requested by the I. B. E. W. is not appropriate. However, we are also of the opinion that certain groups of plant department employees, namely, the line gang employees and the 31 employees assigned to each of 31 "miscel- laneous locations," and plant department employees in metropolitan areas, who have shown a desire for representation apart from em- ployees in other departments in a metropolitan area through their designation of the I. B. E. W., and who are not included in contracts covering other employees of the Company, may appropriately be combined into a single unit; and that certain of said groups of plant department employees within a metropolitan area in which organiza- tion has been conducted among all employees may also appropriately be included within a unit of employees in all departments of such metropolitan area. Accordingly, the desires of the employees, as expressed in elections which we shall direct, shall be determinative. Under these circumstances, and in accordance with the specific ex- clusions of employees determined below, we shall order elections among the- Company's employees, within the following groups:- (a) All employees in the San Francisco metropolitan area in the traffic, commercial, accounting, and purchasing and stores depart- ments, and in the San Francisco division offices, and including the clerk to the city foreman of the plant department, but excluding the em- ployees occupying the positions listed in Appendices A and B, to de- termine whether they desire to be represented by the A. C. A.; by the C. T. U., or by the I. C. U., for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by none of said organizations; (b) All employees in the plant department in the San Francisco metropolitan area,12 but excluding the employees occupying the posi- 11 No elections are directed among plant department employees at Spokane , Washington, where such employees are covered by a contract with the I. C. U Spokane ; at Phoenix, Arizona, and Oakland, California , where the plant department employees are covered by contracts with the C . T U.; and at Sacramento , California, and Tacoma , Washington, where the I B. E W. has submitted no evidence of designation Of the three cities in which plant department employees are covered by contracts , namely, Spokane, Phoenix, and Oak- land, the I. B E. W. has submitted evidence of designation at Phoenix. In the event that the C. T. U. files with the Board at Washington , D. C., within 10 days of the date of this Decision and Direction of Election a waiver of its claim to the representation of plant department employees at Phoenix, we shall direct an election among such employees to determine whether or not they desire to be represented by the I B. E W. for the purposes of collective bargaining , with the same effect as the other elections directed herein. n While at one point in the hearing the I. B E W. stated that it would not object to the inclusion of the building force employees of the San Francisco plant department in the metropolitan unit at San Francisco , at a later point in the hearing the division-wide unit of plant department employees requested by the I. B E. W . was defined as including building force employees . We are satisfied and find that such employees should be included in the election units of plant department employees at San Francisco and Los Angeles. 588 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD tions listed in Appendix D, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented by the I. B. E. W., by the A. C. A., or by the I. C. U., for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by none of said organiza- tions; (c) All line gang employees 13 and the 31 plant department em- ployees individually assigned to each of 31 " miscellaneous locations," 14 excluding the employees occupying the positions listed in Appendix C, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented by the I. B. E. W. for the purposes of collective bargaining; (d) All employees in the plant department in the Los Angeles met- ropolitan area,15 excluding the employees occupying the positions listed in Appendix E, to determine whether or not they desire to be repre- sented by the I. B. E, W. for the purposes of collective bargaining ;18 (e) All employees in the plant department at Portland, Oregon, excluding the employee occupying the position listed in Appendix F, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented by the I. B. E. W. for the purposes of collective bargaining; (f) All employees in the plant department at Seattle, Washington, excluding the employees occupying the positions listed in Appendix G, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented by the I. B. E. W. for the purposes of collective bargaining; (g) All employees in the plant department at Salt Lake City, Utah, excluding the employee occupying the position listed in Appendix H, to determine whether they desire to be represented by the I. B. E. W., or by the A. C. A., for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by neither.17 We shall certify the union, if any, designated by a*majority of the employees within each election unit as the exclusive representative thereof, subject to the following qualifications: If the A. C. A., or the I. C. U., wins both elections among employees at San Francisco, it will be certified as the exclusive representative of employees in both election units combined. If the A. C. A. wins both elections among employees at Salt Lake City, it will be certified as the exclusive rep- is This definition includes employees in the following work classifications set forth on the Company's pay rolls : Inspectors ; Inspector 's Helpers ; Groundmen ; Apprentice Line- men ; Linemen ; Cooks ; Cookees ; Assistant Gang Foremen ; Watchmen. 14 See footnote 9, supra. It appears that these cities are small in size and consequently that the single employees assigned to each spends a considerable part of his working time away from headquarters. The I. B. E. W. submitted 18 designations of these persons, and there is no showing that any other labor organization seeks to include them in an industrial unit. Accordingly, we shall permit them to express their desires for representa- tion together with the line gang employees. 15 See footnote 12, supra 11 As set forth in Section VI, infra, the U. C. W. A. is granted leave to have its name placed upon the ballot in this election. 17 In Case No. R-2243, decided this day, arising upon a petition by the A. C A. for an investigation and certification of representatives of employees of the Company at Salt Lake. City, Utah, we direct an election among certain employees in the traffic and commercial departments. WESTERN UNION TELEGRAPH COMPANY 589 resentative of employees in both election units combined.18 If a ma- jority of the employees in each of more than one group selects the I. B. E. W., all the employees in the groups which so designate the I. B. E. W. shall constitute a single bargaining unit. Questions arose at the hearing concerning the proposed exclusion of certain employees from the units. We shall consider 'these employ- ees by departments or groups. Traffic department (San Francisco) All parties agreed, and we find, that the traffic manager, night traffic managers, Morse testing and regulating chief, automatic test- ing and regulating chief, chief clerk, secretary to the chief clerk, as- sistant chief operators (automatic and telephone), and nurse should be excluded from the unit. The A. C. A. would exclude, and the C. T. U. and I. C. U. would include, the following employees : The early and late night testing and regulating chiefs test wires and adjust repeaters. Each has a sub- ordinate during a part of his tour of duty. Their salaries are higher than those of other employees, excepting the night traffic manager, who work during the night. We shall exclude them from the unit. The Commercial new department supervisor, Morse supervisors, tele- printer supervisors, automatic supervisors, telephone supervisors, route supervisor, and service supervisors, devote practically all of their time to the supervision of an average of about nine or more em- ployees. They assign operators to their tasks, distribute work, report infractions of rules, and have authority to recommend discipline. They earn from about $20 to $40 per month more than their subordi- nates. We shall exclude them from the unit. The automatic monitor checks messages submitted for transmission against messages as trans- mitted, and reports on accuracy and speed of operators to the assistant chief operator, who in turn discusses errors with the operator con- cerned and turns the report over to the statistical department for entry upon the operator's record. We shall exclude the automatic monitor from the unit. The clerks in the traffic manager's office, whom the A. C. A. would exclude as confidential employees, work in said office under the supervision of the chief clerk. It appears that these persons devote about 30 per cent of their time to work involving the use of .pay-roll records, and the remainder of their time to routine reports concerning the number of messages handled and complaints involved. The division traffic superintendent testified, "we do not consider them confidential employees." We shall include said clerks in the unit. 18 See footnote 17, supra. 590 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Commercial department (San Francisco) All parties agreed, and we find, that the superintendent, secretary to the superintendent (A. Giuntini) ; chief clerk, city commercial man- ager, sales manager, manager of the delivery department, assistant to the manager of the delivery department (J. J. Damerell), manager of credits and collections, cashier, employing supervisor of messengers (J. Hammill), and the early night manager should be excluded from the unit. The A. C. A. would exclude (and the C. T. U. and I. C. U. would include) 12 branch managers of the 35 employed in San Francisco, apparently upon the ground that said 12 persons are closely related to the management by virtue of the number of employees under their supervision and the amount of time spent in outside solicitation. How- ever, the record shows that there is no clear delineation between the branch managers whom the A. C. A. would exclude and those whom they would include. Thus, the number of subordinates of said 12 branch managers varies from 5 to 19; while the number of subordinates of the others varies from 0 to 10; the amount of time devoted by said 12 branch managers to outside solictation varies from, a minimum of 2 hours per week to a minimum of 5 hours per day, while the amount of time devoted by the others to outside solicitation varies from no time to a minimum of 31/2 hours per day. While the salaries of branch managers as a rule vary according to the number of their subordinates, it is shown that one branch manager whom the A. C. A. would exclude has 12 subordinates and spends a minimum of 5 hours per day in solicitation, but receives the minimum pay granted to branch manag- ers in San Francisco. The record shows that all branch managers in San Francisco have the same degree of authority over their subordi- nates. They have no authority to hire or discharge, although they can recommend discipline or discharge. They can change tours of duty or obtain additional help only by request of their superior, who has records concerning the "load" of business to guide him in this con- nection. We are of the opinion that no sufficient showing has been made to warrant the exclusion of the 12 branch managers named by the A. C. A. We find that all branch managers should be included in the unit. The A. C. A. would also exclude as confidential employees the com- mercial representatives and the personal service representative: The C. T. U. and the I. C. U. would include these employees in the unit. The work of the commercial representatives is confined to sales devel- opment; each of these persons specializes in certain types of sales work. It appears that their salaries are above the average salaries paid to commercial department employees. In the course of their duties they WESTERN UNION TELEGRAPH COMPANY 591 contact various users of telegraph service, chiefly business concerns. While the general manager of the commercial department testified that "there are some things that they do treat in confidence in connection with various patrons," there is no showing that such matters concern the Company's labor relations. We shall include the commercial rep- resentatives in the unit. The personal service representative contacts firms having teleprinter lines connected with the Company's main office and in the course of her duties engages in sales work similar in nature to that of the commercial representatives. We shall include the personal service representative in the unit. Accounting department (San Francisco) All parties agreed, and we find, that the accounting center manager and the assistant accounting center manager should be excluded from the unit. Purchasing and stores department (San Francisco) All parties agreed, and we find, that the division storekeeper and head clerk should be excluded from the unit. Plant department (San Francisco) The proposed exclusions of employees in this department are con- sidered below together with the proposed exclusions of other employees in the plant department throughout the Pacific Division. The San Francisco division offices All parties agreed that all employees in the general manager's office of the commercial department should be excluded from the unit, ex- cepting the mail clerks, whom the C. T. U. and the I. C. U. would in- clude; the file clerk, whom the I. C. U. would include; and the office boy, whom the C. T. U. and the I. C. U. would include. The mail clerks, who open and distribute incoming mail and envelop and post outgoing mail for all San Francisco departments and offices, and the office boy, shall be included in the unit. The file clerk, who has access to and handles all files, including confidential files, shall be excluded as a confidential employee. We find that all employees in the general managers office of the commercial department, except the mail clerks and office boy, should be excluded from the unit. All parties agreed, and we find, that all employees in the division traffic superintendent's office should be excluded from the unit. All parties agreed, and we find, that the following employees in the division plant superintendent's office should be excluded from the unit : the general foreman, field engineers, division ticker supervisor, divi- 592 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD sion supervisor of maintenance, chief clerk, equipment inspectors, main- tenance foreman, chief line inspector, division supervisor of equipment, division plant superintendent, division plant engineer, division super- visor of lines, supervisor, secretary to division plant superintendent (H. M. Barre), and clerk in charge of service records (H. Feil). The C. T. U. and the I. C. U. would include the remaining employees, clas- sified on the pay roll as clerks, stenographers and office boy. The clerks and stenographers are engaged principally in preparing esti- mates for plant department projects, in preparing correspondence in connection with the procurement of certain facilities from other com- munications companies, and in reviewing daily work reports and time sheets which are used in the preparation of pay rolls. These persons have access to confidential service records only on infrequent occasions, that is, when the person in charge of said records is absent. We shall include the clerks, stenographers, and office boy in the unit. All parties agreed, and we find, that the following employees in the division auditor's office should be excluded from the unit : the division auditor, chief accountant, plant accountant, supervisor accounting bureau, chief traveling auditor, traveling auditors, supervisor money orders, and private secretary to division auditor (L. E. Casebeer). The C. T. U. and the I. C. U. would include, and the A. C. A. would ex- elude, elude, the remaining employees in this office, who are classified as clerks. These clerks work in specialized groups performing accounting work involving the use of various types of records and reports. While it appears that certain of these persons have access to pay-roll and service records, the division auditor testified that their work does not involve "confidential" matters "reserved to-the management." It also appears that their work is similar to that performed by certain clerks in the San Francisco accounting department whom the parties agreed to in- clude within the unit. We shall include the clerks in the division auditor's office in the unit. Plant department employees throughout the Pacific Division All parties agreed, and we find, that the following employees should be excluded from the units : city foremen in Los Angeles, San Fran- cisco, Seattle, and Portland; building supervisors in San Francisco and Los Angeles; shop foreman in San Francisco; and the maintenance foreman in Los Angeles. The•I. B. E. W. would include, and the A. C. A. would exclude, the transmitter chiefs at San Francisco and Los Angeles. ' It is shown that these employees exercise supervisory authority over several tickermen ; that they report infractions of rules and recommend discipline; and that their salary is about 10 per cent higher than that of their subordi- nates. We shall exclude them from the units. WESTERN UNION TELEGRAPH COMPANY 593 The I. B. E. W. would include, and the A. C. A. would exclude, the following employees : The city foreman at Salt Lake City 10 has au- thority to discharge his subordinates for cause and to hire temporary employees. We shall exclude him from the units. The line gang foremen, who supervise from 8 to 16 employees, and the underground foreman, who supervises from 1 to 20 employees, are authorized to hire employees and to discharge employees for cause. We shall exclude them from the unit. The I. B. E. W. would exclude from its proposed unit all clerical employees. In addition to those in the division plant superintend- ent's office, mentioned above, it would exclude the clerks to the city foremen in San Francisco, Seattle, and Los Angeles and the clerk to the maintenance foreman in Los Angeles. These employees handle correspondence and prepare daily work reports and time sheets. It appears that the A. C. A. and C. T. U. would include the clerk to the city foreman in San Francisco in the metropolitan unit therein. Under the circumstances, we shall exclude the above-mentioned clerks from the election units of plant department employees set forth above, but we shall include the clerk to the city foreman in San Francisco in the metropolitan unit therein.20 The record in Case No. R-2243, decided this day, shows that at the time of the hearing therein there was headquartered at Salt Lake City a plant department employee classified on the December 21, 1940, pay roll as section lineman. The A. C. A. urged' his exclusion from the city-wide unit at Salt Lake City in Case No. R-2243 because the prin- cipal part of his duties were performed outside the limits of Salt Lake City on a section of railroad line extending south from Salt Lake City. In view of the fact that he has his headquarters at Salt Lake City, and apparently performs his duties within a limited distance of Salt Lake City, the section lineman, if any,21 at Salt Lake City shall be included in the election unit of Salt Lake City plant department employees. VI. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES We find that the questions which have arisen concerning the repre- sentation of employees can best be resolved by the elections referred to in Section V above. At the hearing the parties agreed that eligibility to vote should be determined by the pay roll for the period immediately preceding the 1° The I. B E W . would also include in its proposed unit the city foreman at Spokane. Inasmuch as we have excluded all plant department employees at Spokane from the election units herein, we do not consider this issue m As set forth above, the clerks, stenographers and office boy in the division plant super- intendent' s office are within the San Francisco metropolitan unit. 21 The March 15, 1941, pay roll of plant department employees in the Pacific Division, which was introduced in evidence in the instant proceedings , does not list this person. 594 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Direction; that temporary employees, that is, persons with less than 3 months' continuous service, should not be eligible to vote; and that employees temporarily detailed to another department, office, city, or company, and employees who did not work during such pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation or on furlough should be eligible to vote. Our Direction of Elections will provide accordingly, subject to such other limitations and additions as are set forth therein. Inasmuch as the unit of plant department employees hereinabove found appropriate differs from that requested by the I. B. E. W. in its petition, if the I. B. E. W. desires not to appear upon the ballot in any of the elections directed, it shall notify the Regional Director for the Twentieth Region to that effect within 10 days of the date of this .Decision and Direction of Elections; thereupon its name shall be omitted from the ballot. The U. C. W. A. did not appear at the hearing on June 17 and 18; at this time the representative of the I. B. E. W. stated that he was informed that the U. C. W. A. no longer continued in existence. Under the circumstances, we shall not place the U. C. W. A. upon the ballot in the election among plant department employees at Los Angeles. However, in view of the inconclusive nature of the testi- mony as to the dissolution of the U. C. W. A., we hereby grant the If. C. W. A. leave to have its name placed on the said ballot by filing a written application to that effect with the Regional Director for the Twentieth Region within 10 days of the date of this Decision and Direction of Elections; upon such filing its name shall be placed upon the ballot. Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following : CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Questions affecting commerce have arisen concerning the repre- sentation of employees of the Company in the San Francisco metro- politan area and in the plant department of the Pacific Division, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act. DIRECTION OF ' ELECTIONS By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National Labor Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Rela- tions Act, 49 Stat. 449, and pursuant to Article III, Section 8, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, it is hereby WESTERN UNION TELEGRAPH COMPANY 595 DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation authorized by the Board to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Western Union Telegraph Company, elections by secret ballot' shall be conducted as early as possible but not later than thirty (30) days from the date of this Direction, under the direction and super- vision of the Regional Director for the Twentieth Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Article III, Section 9, of said Rules and Regulations, among the employees within the groups described below who were employed by the Company during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of this Direction, including employees who did not work during such pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation or on furlough or in the active military service or training of the United States, or temporarily laid off, and employees tem- porarily detailed to another department, office, city, or company, but excluding temporary employees (employees with less than 3 months' continuous service) and employees who have since quit or been discharged for cause : (a) All employees in the San Francisco metropolitan area in the traffic, commercial, accounting, and purchasing and stores depart- ments; and in the San Francisco division offices, and including the clerk to the city foreman of the plant department, but excluding the employees occupying the positions listed in Appendices A and B, to determine whether they desire to be represented by American Com- munications Association, by Commercial Telegraphers Union, or by Independent Communications Union, for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by none of said organizations; (b) All 'employees in the plant department in the San Francisco metropolitan area, but excluding the employees occupying the posi- tions listed in Appendix D, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented by International Brotherhood of Electrical Work- ers, by American Communications Association, or by Independent Communications Union, for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by none of said organizations; (c) All line gang employees 22 and the 31 plant department em- ployees individually assigned to each of 31 "miscellaneous loca- tions," 23 excluding the employees occupying the positions listed in Appendix C, to determine whether or not they desire to be repre- sented for the purposes of collective bargaining by International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers; sa See footnote 13, supra. 23 See footnote 9, supra. 596 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD (d) All employees in the plant department in the Los Angeles metropolitan area, excluding the employees occupying the positions listed in Appendix E, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented by International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers for the purposes of collective bargaining; (e) All employees in the plant department at Portland, Oregon, excluding the employee occupying the position listed in Appendix F, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented by Inter- national Brotherhood of Electrical Workers for the purposes of collective bargaining ; (f) All employees in the plant department at Seattle, Washing- ton, excluding the employees occupying the positions listed in Appen- dix G, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented by International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers for the purposes of collective bargaining; (g) All employees in the plant department at Salt Lake City, Utah, excluding the employee occupying the position listed in Appendix H, to determine whether they desire to be^represented by International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, or by American Communications Association, for the purposes of collective bar- gaining, or by neither. MR. EDWIN S. SMITH, dissenting in part: I am of the opinion that the petition of the I. B. E. W. for a unit of plant department employees in the Pacific Division should be dismissed. I am also of the opinion that the Board should find appropriate a unit of employees of the Company within all de- partments in San Francisco. The claim of the I. B. E. W. for a division-wide unit of plant- department employees cannot be supported upon any criterion of unity of interest of employees within this group. The I. B. E. W. admits to membership all employees of the Company, and has in fact organized on an industrial basis elsewhere in the telegraph in- dustry, as. evidenced by its contract with Postal Telegraph Cable Company covering all employees of that company in a certain geo- graphical area. In defining the unit claimed to be appropriate as "semi-industrial," the I. B. E. W. recognizes that such unit is com- posed of a number of groups of employees possessing widely varied skills, and that several of such groups are totally separate from each other both geographically and functionally. Indeed, the record shows plainly that plant department employees who have their head- quarters at various cities in the Pacific Division have more in com- mon with employees in other departments in such cities, by reason of the location of their work and the interdependence of their duties, WESTERN UNION TELEGRAPH COMPANY 597 than with plant department employees in the line gangs. The ma- jority of the Board recognizes this fact by holding that plant depart- ment employees in metropolitan areas may appropriately be included with employees in the other departments in a single unit, but never- theless holds that plant department employees in such metropolitan areas may split themselves off from such appropriate units upon the sole ground, so far as appears, that certain of these employees have designated the I. B. E. W. The majority reaches this result despite the fact, noted above, that the I. B. E. W. in the instant case has disregarded the elements of mutuality of employee interest which it has recognized, as the record shows, elsewhere in the industry by representing employees on an industrial rather than a departmental basis. All parties apparently agree that a Nation-wide unit of all em- ployees of the Company may in the future be appropriate. However, in the absence of a showing that employees have organized on a Nation-wide basis, the Board has determined upon bargaining units confined to a metropolitan area. To permit particular groups of employees to separate themselves from the remaining employees in a metropolitan area amounts to a disregard of the interdependence and integration of the Company's operations in such an area, would disrupt the Board's precedents of holding appropriate industrial units in a particular area pending Nation-wide organization'24 and would multiply the problems to be solved before a Nation-wide unit, which all parties apparently concede may be appropriate, may be established. Accordingly, I am of the opinion that the Board should find appro- priate a unit of all employees in the San Francisco metropolitan area in the traffic, commercial, plant, accounting, and purchasing and stores departments and the San Francisco divisional offices, excluding the 24See Matter of The Western Union Telegraph Company, Inc. and The-Commercial Telegraphers' Union, 11 N. L. R. B , 1154; Matter of the Western Union Telegraph Com- pany and Commercial Telegraphers' Union, etc., 17 N. L. R B., 683; Matter of Western Union Telegraph Company and American Communications Association Local 54-B, etc, 23 N. L. R. B 824; Matter of The Western Union Telegraph Company and American Federation of Labor, Federal Union No 22$60, 30 N L R B 679; Matter of Western; Union Telegraph Company and Springfield Local Number 51, etc., 30 N L. R B 720; Matter of The Western Union Telegraph Company and h'atibnal Western Union Council of A. F. L Federal Unions and C T. U Locals, 30 N. L R B. 1127; Matter of d'hei Western Union Telegraph Company and Commercial Telegraphers' Union, 30 N L. R B. 365; Matter of Western Union Telegraph Company and American Federation of Labor, etc, 30 N. L R B. 1169; Matter of The Western Union Telegraph Company and Na- tional Western Union Council of A. F. of L Federal Unions and C T. U. Locals, 30 N. L R. B 1181 ; Matter of Western Union Telegraph Company and National Western Union Council of A F of L Federal Unions and C. T. U Locals, 31 N L R B 560; Matter of The Western Union Telegraph Company and United Western Union Employees of Buffalo, 32 N. L R B 210; Matter of The Western Union Telegraph Company and Tele- graph Employees Independent Union, et al, 32 N. L. R B 428; Matter of Western Union Telegraph Company and National Western Union Council of A F. of L Federal Unions'and C. T. U. Locals, 32 N. L. R. B 175 451269-42-vol. 34-39 598 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD employees listed upon Appendices A, B, and D. Within this unit I believe that the Board should order an election to determine whether a majority of these employees desire to be represented by the A. C. A. of the I. C. U., for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by neither, provided however, that the C. T. U. be permitted a place upon the ballot if it so desires. While I would deny the petition of the I. B. E. W., such denial would be without prejudice to the I. B. E. W.'s right to file a petition for an investigation and certification of repre- sentatives of the line-gang employees only. A substantial number of these employees have indicated their desire for collective bargaining. They form a well-defined group ; they are not headquartered at any city within the Pacific Division; and the division-wide nature of their duties not only separates them from employees in the cities but renders infeasible collective bargaining on their behalf on the basis of city- wide units. APPENDIX A Traffic Department (San Francisco) Traffic manager Night traffic managers Morse testing and regulating chief Automatic testing and regulating chief Chief clerk Secretary to the chief clerk Assistant chief operators (automatic and telephone) Nurse Early and late night testing and regulating chiefs Commercial news department supervisor Morse supervisors Teleprinter supervisors Automatic supervisors Telephone supervisors Route supervisors Service supervisors Automatic monitor Commercial Department (San Francisco) Superintendent Secretary to the superintendent Chief clerk City commercial manager Sales manager Manager of the delivery department Assistant to the manager of the delivery department WESTERN UNION TELEGRAPH COMPANY Manager of credits and collections Cashier Employing supervisor of messengers Early night manager Accounting department (San Francisco) Accounting center manager Assistant accounting center manager Purchasing and stores department (San Francisco) Division storekeeper Head clerk APPENDIX B San Francisco division offices (1) General manager's office of the commercial department- All employees except mail clerks and office boy (2) Division traffic superintendent's office- All employees (3) Division plant superintendent's office- General foreman Field engineers Division ticker supervisor Division supervisor of maintenance Chief clerk Equipment inspectors Maintenance foreman Chief line inspector Division supervisor of equipment Division plant superintendent Division plant engineer Division supervisor of lines Supervisor Secretary to division plant superintendent Clerk in charge of service records % (4) Division auditor's office- Division auditor Chief accountant Plant accountant Supervisor accounting bureau Chief traveling auditor Traveling auditors Supervisor money orders Private secretary to division auditor 599 600 DECISIONS OF .NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD APPENDIX C Line gang employees in Paci fic_ Division Line gang foremen Underground foremen APPENDIX D Plant department (San Francisco) City foreman Shop foreman Building supervisor Transmitter chief Clerk to city foreman APPENDIX E Plant department (Los Angeles) City foreman Building supervisor Maintenance foreman Transmitter chief Clerk to city foreman Clerk to maintenance foreman APPENDIX F City foreman Plant department (Portland) APPENDIX G Plant department (Seattle) City foreman Clerk to city foreman APPENDIX H Plant department (Salt Lake City) City foreman