Dallas Airmotive, Inc. and International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO

• Decision Date: 25 January 2019
• Docket Number: 16-CA-192780
• Parties: Dallas Airmotive, Inc., Respondent v. International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO, Aeronautical Industrial District Lodge 776[1] Charging Party
• Court: National Labor Relations Board

Dallas Airmotive, Inc., Respondent and International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO, Aeronautical Industrial District Lodge 776^[1] Charging Party

No. 16-CA-192780

United States of America, National Labor Relations Board

January 25, 2019

Linda Reeder and Maxie Gallardo, Esqs. for General Counsel

Rod Tanner, Esq. for Charging

Party Bill Finegan, Esq. for Respondent

DECISION

Sharon Levinson Steckler, Administrative Law Judge.

Statement of the Case

This case was tried in Fort Worth, Texas on June 11-13, 2018. Charging Party International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO, Aeronautical Industrial District Lodge 776 (Lodge 776) filed a charge against Dallas Airmotive, Inc., a subsidiary of BBA Aviation Company, (Respondent) on February 8, 2017. Counsel for the General Counsel (General Counsel) issued a Complaint and Notice of Hearing on December 29, 2017. On January 11, 2018, Respondent filed its Answer in which it denies any violations of the Act.

In late 2016, Respondent relocated bargaining unit employees to a site less than 10 miles away as part of its plan to close a facility. The complaint alleges that the bargaining unit employees make up a majority of the employees at the new facility, but Respondent refused to recognize Lodge 776 as the exclusive bargaining representative. In addition, the complaint alleges a number of unilateral changes after the bargaining unit employees transferred to the new facility. At hearing I granted General Counsel's motion to amend the complaint that Respondent allegedly violated Section 8(a)(2) by establishing a committee of employees that dealt with Respondent.

On the entire record, including my observation of the demeanor of the witnesses, and after carefully considering the briefs filed by the parties, I make the following

Findings of Fact^[2]

I. Jurisdiction

Respondent Dallas Airmotive, Inc., a Texas corporation and a subsidiary of BBA Aviation Company, ^[3] a Delaware corporation, with offices and locations in the Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas metropolitan area (DFW Metroplex), has been engaged in repair and maintenance of aircraft engines. During the 12-month period ending November 28, 2017, Respondent purchased and received at these facilities goods, materials and services valued in excess of $50, 000 from points located outside the State of Texas. Respondent admits, and I find, that it has been an employer engaged in commerce within the meaning of Section 2(2), (6) and (7) of the Act.

II. Respondent's Facilities and Union Representation

As of the beginning of 2014, Respondent had several facilities, including one located at Forest Park in Dallas, Texas (Forest Park facility). Two other facilities were located within the DFW Metroplex: Dallas Love Field airport (Love Field, also called Hangar C); and, Heritage Park, in Grapevine. Texas (Heritage Park). Respondent also had a facility in Neosho, Missouri.^[4]

Respondent's facilities repair and refurbish aircraft engines. The facilities worked on different brands of engines. Some facilities also perform the testing in the test cell area. The airplane and helicopter engines arrive on Respondent's docks and are then scheduled for disassembly. Once disassembled, the employees clean the motor parts of the engine. The parts are inspected. Based upon inspection, Respondent gives a cost estimate of repairs to the customer. Once the customer approves the repairs, Respondent orders any needed parts or proceeds with repairing parts. Part of the component repair process may include plasma treatment to worn metal parts. Parts are sprayed with metal and re-machined for refurbishment. Once all the parts are available in the facility, the reassembly is scheduled and proceeds. When the motor is reassembled, it is tested in the test cell and then shipped back to the customer.

Of the facilities involved here, only Forest Park employees were unionized. The Machinists have represented the Forest Park bargaining unit since 1966. Since that time, the parties have entered into successive collective bargaining agreements, including one in effective from March 23, 2015 through March 23, 2018. The bargaining unit consisted of “all production and maintenance employees employed by [Respondent] at its facilities located at 6114 Forest Park Road, Dallas Texas.” (Jt. Exh. 28, Art. I.)^[5] Respondent admits, and I find, that the Machinists and Lodge 776 are labor organizations within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act.

The Forest Park facility was located near a large medical center that included Parkland Hospital and University of Texas-Southwestern Hospital. The Forest Park facility contained several product lines that refurbished, repaired and/or overhauled aircraft engines. The Forest Park employees also tested the engines after the overhauls and/or repair. The process of testing creates much noise and vibration, which was considered inappropriate for its neighborhood. The Forest Park facility transferred its work to different facilities. In 2014 and 2015, some of the Forest Park employees transferred to Love Field and Heritage Park; others were laid off in 2014. However, in 2016 and 2017, Respondent eventually transferred the remaining Forest Park bargaining unit employees to Respondent's new facility located at DFW Airport (DFW Center). Almost all of the relocated Forest Park employees retained the same job duties as before and with the same supervision. Respondent continued to recognize Lodge 776 for whatever employees remained at the Forest Park facility, but refused to recognize Lodge 776 for the employees at DFW Center.

Doug Meador served as Respondent's president until about 2016. (Tr. 512.) Max Allen served as general manager of the Forest Park facility from October 2014 until March 2015. From March 2015 until his termination on August 2, 2017, Allen served as Vice President of Operations over all the facilities in the United States for repair, overhaul and all operational duties, including safety, quality and training. While Allen was general manager, Nandu Madireddi was chief of operations (COO). Allen last reported to Mark Johnstone, CEO and President of BBA Aviation.

David Daniel is currently Vice President, Human Resources for American, Singapore and Brazilian operations, a position he has held since October 2016. Before that time, he was Human Resources Director for the same facilities.

Paul Black, Jr., president and directing business representative of Lodge 776, supervises 18 staff members, including Doyle Huddleston, a business representative in charge of Respondent's Forest Park bargaining unit. Throughout the events described here, Respondent was aware that only Huddleston, and not employee members of the bargaining committee, had the authority to enter into agreements on behalf of the International Union and Lodge 776 for the Forest Park bargaining unit. (See, e.g., Tr. 509-510.)

III. 2014: Respondent Announces Layoffs and Need to Move Some Work from Forest Park

In 2014, Respondent expected to close the Forest Park facility within 2 years. (Tr. 516, 519) At the time, Respondent was committed to transferring work from Forest Park to Heritage Park and Love Field, with plans to improve those facilities to accommodate its production needs. (Tr. 520.)

On January 10, 2014, Respondent and Lodge 776 representative met about rumors regarding the Forest Park facility's future. Respondent was represented by COO Madireddi, General Manager Allen, HR Director Daniel and counsel. Lodge 776 was represented by Business Representative Huddleston, and negotiating committeemen and employees Jimmie LeFlore and Wesley Blaine. Huddleston also was aware that business at the Forest Park facility was slow. COO Madireddi advised the Lodge 776 bargaining team that growth around Forest Park was an issue because of the noise created by the facility and that Respondent was looking for a site for relocation, particularly for the test cell work. Madireddi also stated concerns about a possible injunction because of noise and other environmental issues. Additionally, the property value of the Forest Park facility improved and Respondent had too much “foot print” in the Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex. (R. Exh. 8.) Huddleston asked for recognition for the bargaining unit at other locations. Madireddi said Respondent was looking at other phases and other lines --- the unionized employees might have a job there and might not, and those with job would be dispersed to sites currently available. At that time, the available sites were Heritage Park and Love Field. (Tr. 156-157.) Respondent presented a slide show discussing a phased approach, but focused on Phase I, which Respondent also called “Sea Change.” Madireddi talked about different times for moving work from Forest Park, but only Phase I was definite. Also indefinite were the number of employees moving from Forest Park to different facilities. Madereddi emphasized that Forest Park employees would be required to apply for jobs and perhaps be hired. When asked for recognition for the test cell unit, Respondent could not say where the test cell work was moving and emphasized that the Forest Park employees might not move to a different location.

HR Director Daniel sent to Huddleston and others an email, dated January 15, 2014, regarding the Phase I transition of Forest Park. With an attached memorandum from COO Madireddi intended for Forest Park employees, the Phase I plan was to move “excess capacity” from Forest Park to other facilities around Dallas-Fort Worth. Phase I's expected completion was June 2014, leaving a work force of 150 bargaining unit employees at the Forest Park facility. At the end of that time, the work left at Forest Park would be the Rolls-Royce Spey/Tay lines, Rolls Royce accessories, much of the component repair work, and all current engine testing. A number of engines and component...