Bemis Bro. Bag Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 10, 1943

51 N.L.R.B. 211 (N.L.R.B. 1943)

In the Matter of BEMIS BRO. BAG COMPANY and TExTIIM WORKERS
UNION OF AMERICA, C. I. O.
Case No. R 55!49.Decided July 10, 1943
Mr. Carl Wilde , of Indianapolis , Ind., for the Company.
Mr. Ralph Cline , of Indianapolis , Ind., for the C. I. O.
Mr. Cassatt Martz, of Indianapolis , Ind., for the Independent.
Miss Frances Lopinsky , of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
(Upon petition duly filed by Textile Workers Union of America,
C. I. 0., herein called the C. I. 0., alleging that a question affecting
commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of
Bemis Bro. Bag Company," Indianapolis, Indiana, the National Labor
Relations Board provided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice
before Louis M. Groeniger, Trial Examiner. Said hearing was held
at Indianapolis, Indiana, on June 17,1943. The Company, the C. 1. 0.,
and Independent Employees Association, herein called the Independ-
ent, appeared, participated, and were afforded full opportunity to be
heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evi-
dence bearing on the issues. The Trial Examiner's rulings made at
the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
All parties were afforded opportunity to file briefs with the Board.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Bemis Bro. Bag Company. a Missouri corporation with its principal
office in St. Louis, Missouri, operates some 20 plants, 1 of which is in
Indianapolis, Indiana, and is concerned in this case. The Company
I The correct name of the Company is as set out above. In the petition and other formal
papers the Company was incorrectly designated as "Bemis Bag Company."
51 N. L. R. B., No. 48. ,
211
540612-44-vol 51-15
212 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
manufactures, sells, and distributes cloth and paper bags `and page,
cartons. During 1942 the chief products purchased by the Company
for use in its business at the Indianapolis plant, most of which came
from outside the State, were cotton and burlap cloth and paper valued
in excess of $500,000. Sales,, about 65 percent of which- were made
outside the State of Indiana, were in.execss of $500,000.
The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
H. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED '
Textile Workers Union of America is a labor organization affiliated
with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, admitting to member-
ship employees of the Company.
Independent Employees Association is an unaffiliated labor organi-
zation admitting to membership employees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On April 24, 1943, the C. I. O. requested recognition as the exclu-
sive bargaining representative of the Company's employees. On May
1 the Company replied, refusing recognition to the C. I. O. for the
reason that it was then recognizing and bargaining with the Inde-
pendent and for the further reason that in December 1942, the Board
sustained the Regional Director's refusal to issue a notice of hearing
on a ,prior petition filed by the C. I. O. in August 1942.
On May 25, 1943, the Company and the Independent executed a
contract terminating May 25, 1944. The previous contract in force
between the Independent and the Company terminated June 1, 1943.
We find, contrary to the contention of the Company and the Inde-
pendent, that the present contract is no bar to a determination of
representatives since the C. I. O. had given notice of its demands
before the contract of May 25, 1943, was executed.2
A statement of the Field Examiner introduced in evidence at the
hearing indicates that the C. I. O. represents a substantial number
of employees in the unit herein found to be appropriate.3
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning
the representation of employees of the Company, within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
2 'Sec Matter of Globe Mills, Inc., 41 N L It. B 94 Obviously the Board's action in De-
cembe, 1942 in refusing to authorize a hearing on the piuor petition was based on the fact
that the petition was premature , since the contract then had.5 months to run It did not
preclude the C. I O. from making a later timely claim, as it did.
3 The C I O. submitted 118 authorization cards, dated April and May 1943, 83 of which
'appear to bear genuine signatures of employees on the Company ' s pay roll of June 3, 1943_
There are approximately 235 employees in the appropriate unit.
BEMIS BRO. BAG COMPANY 213
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
All parties are in agreement that all employees, other than super-
-N isory employees, armed guards, and office clerical employees, should
be included in the unit. The following categories are in dispute :
timekeepers, whom the C. I. O. would include within the unit, but
whom the Company and the Independent would exclude; and watch-
men and factory clerical workers, whom the Company and the
Independent would include and the C. I. O. would exclude.
The timekeepers are, with the exception of one, members of the
office clerical staff. One works in the machine shop. Timekeepers
were not covered by the pontract. We find timekeepers to be office
clerical workers and shall exclude them from the unit.
The watchmen work on rotating shifts, acting as firemen when on
the day shift, and as combination firemen-watchmen when on the night
shift. They are unarmed, and the record shows that they work pri-
marily as firemen. We find that they are maintenance employees and
shall therefore include them in the unit.
The factory clerical workers are under the supervision of the fore-
men of their respective departments. They are paid on an hourly
rate and their work is confined to their own departments. Since their
work is closely aligned with that of production employees, we shall
include the factory clerical employees in the unit.
We find that all employees of the Company at its Indianapolis,
Indiana, plant, including shipping department employees, firemen-
watchmen, and factory clerical employees, but excluding plant-pro-
tection employees, timekeepers, office clerical workers, and all
supervisory employees with authority to hire, promote, discharge,
discipline or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or
effectively recommend such action, constitute a unit appropriate for
the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section
9 (b) of the Act.4
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
We shall direct that the question concerning representation which
has arisen be resolved by an election by secret ballot among the
employees of the Company in the unit found appropriate in Section
IV, above, who were employed during the pay-roll period immedi-
ately preceding the date of the-Direction of Election herein, subject
to the limitations and additions set forth in the Direction.
' This is substantially the same unit covered by the contract between the Copipany ant
the Independent.
214 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National Labor
Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations
Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor Rela-
tions Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, it is hereby
DnRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Bemis Bro. Bag
Company, Indianapolis, Indiana, an election 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- supervision
of the Regional Director for the Ninth Region, acting in this matter
as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to
Article III, Section 10, of said Rules and Regulations, among all
employees of the Company in the unit found appropriate in Section
IV, above, who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately
preceding the date of this Direction including employees who did not
work during said pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation
or temporarily laid off, and including employees in the armed forces
of the United States who present themselves in person at the polls,
but excluding employees who have since quite 'or been discharged for
cause, to determine whether they desire to be represented by Textile
Workers Union of America, C. I. 0., or by Independent Employees
Association, for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by neither.