United Aircraft Corporation, Chance Vought Aircraft Division, Employer And International Union Of United Automobile, Aircraft And Agricultural Implement Workers Of America, Cio, Petitioner, 209 (1949)

In the Matter of UNITED AIRCRAFT CORPORATION, CHANCE VOUGHT AIRCRAFT DIVISION, EMPLOYER and INTERNATIONAL UNION OF UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AIRCRAFT AND AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO, PETITIONER Case No. 16-RC-310.-Decided July 14, 1949 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing in this case was held on March 15, 1949, at Dallas, Texas, before Elmer Davis, hearing officer.

The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.1 Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member panel [Members Reynolds, Murdock, and Gray].

Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds:

1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act.

2. International Association of Machinists, Lodge 1639, herein called the I. A. M., and International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers of America, Local Union No. 59, AFL, herein called the I. B. E. W., intervened at the hearing.2 The Petitioner, the I. A. M., and the SThe I. A. M. moved to dismiss the proceedings in this case on two grounds: (1) the pendency of an unfair labor practice charge in Case No. 16-CA-130, and (2) that the Petitioner is 'fronting' for its Local 893 which has not complied with the filing requirements of the Act, and is not, therefore, the real party in interest. A complaint issued in Case No. 16-CA-130, and at the close of the hearing in connection therewith the Trial Examiner granted the Employer's motion to dismiss the complaint. The Board has this day sustained the action of the Trial Examiner, and has dismissed the complaint. As the charges are no longer pending, there is no present bar to an election on this ground, and the Petitioner's request for oral argument in this issue is hereby denied. As for the 'fronting' allegation, it appears that the Petitioner has issued, but is holding in abeyance, a charter for Local 893. The Local has no officers, has issued no membership cards, and has collected no dues. We find that Local 893 is not in existence as a functioning labor organization and that the Petitioner is the real party in interest. Matter of Cribben &

   Seston Company, is hereby denied.

   2 Amalgamated Lithographers of America, Local No. 35, CIO, withdrew its motion to intervene at the hearing, after all parties stipulated to the exclusion of lithographers from the unit. The Employer committed itself to a consent election if this labor organization should file a petition and make a representative showing among the lithographers.

   1. B. E. W. are labor organizations claiming to represent employees of the Employer.

3. A question of representation exists concerning the representation of employees of the Employer, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.

4. The appropriate unit:

   The Petitioner and the I. A. M. seek plant-wide units. The I. B E. W. asks for two separate units, one for powerhouse employees, the other for maintenance electricians. The Employer, the Petitioner, and the I. A. M. stipulated as to the composition of the plant-wide unit, and all parties agreed to a self-determination election for powerhouse employees. The parties are in disagreement with respect to a separate unit for the maintenance electricians.

   There are approximately 30 maintenance electricians at the Employer's Grand Prairie,...