Cheraw Brick Works

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 28, 1946

66 N.L.R.B. 1355 (N.L.R.B. 1946)

In the Matter of J. W. BRASINGTON , J. B. BRASINGTON , J. L. BRASING-
TON, AND W. L. BRASINGTON , CO-PARTNERS D/B/A CHERAW BRICK
WORKS and UNITED STONE & ALLIED PRODUCTS WORKERS OF AMERICA,
CIO
Case No. 10-R-1664.-Decided March 28, 1946
ill r. IV. L. Brasington, of Cheraw, S. C., for the Company.
Jlr. E. L. &tndefur, of Winston Salem, N. C., for the Union.
Mr. Bernard Goldberg, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
upon the basis of a petition duly filed by United Stone & Allied
Products Workers of America, CIO, herein called the Union, alleg-
ing that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the
representation of employees of Cheraw Brick Works , Cheraw, South
Carolina, herein called the Company, the National Labor Relations
Board on January 11 , 1946, conducted a prehearing election pursuant
to Article III, Section 3,1 of the Board's Rules and Regulations,
among employees of the Company in the alleged appropriate unit,
to determine whether or not they desired to be represented by the
Union for the purposes of collective bargaining.
At the close of the election a Tally of Ballots was furnished the
parties . The Tally shows that there were approximately 45 eligible
Voters and that 44 of these eligible voters cast valid ballots , of which
4 were for the Union , 21 were against , and 19 were challenged.
't'hereafter , pursuant to Article III, Section 10,2 of the Rules and
r li,n amendment of November 27, 194.x, this section of the Rules now permits the con-
duet of a secret ballot of employees prior to hearing in cases which present no substantial
issue.
As amended November 27, 1945, this section provides that uliere the initial hearing
i, held after the election, all issues, including issues with respect to the conduct of the
election or conduct affecting the election iecults and issues raised by challenged ballots,
shall be heard at such hearing
At the hearing, the Union's representative stated that charges of unlawful interference
bs the Company with the election had been filed with the Board (Case No 10-C-1844)
but that, notkithstandi ng this fact, the Union desired to proceed with the disposition of
the challenged ballots, without going into the question of the Company's conduct at this
time In the event that it loses the election, the union representative stated, the Union
will file another petition Mien the effect of the untair labor practices has been dissipated
66 N. L. R. B., No. 164.
1355
1356 I)ECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOTt RELATIONS BOARD
Regulations, the Board provided for an appropriate hearing upon
due notice before Albert D. Maynard, Trial Examiner. The hearing
was held at Cheraw, South Carolina, on January 31, 1946. The Com-
pany and the Union appeared and participated. All parties were
afforded full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine
witnesses, and to introduce evidence 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
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Cheraw Brick Works, a partnership consisting of J. W. Brasing-
ton, J. B. Brasington, J. L. Brasington, and W. L. Brasington, is
engaged in the manufacture, sale, and distribution of rough, smooth
face, and common brick at a plant located in Marlboro County,
South Carolina. During the 1945 calendar year, the Company pur-
chased raw materials , principally coal, valued at approximately
$13,000, all of which was shipped to the plant from sources outside
the State of Carolina. During the same period, the Company manu-
factured brick valued at approximately $820,000, of which 50 percent
in value was shipped out of the State.
The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
U. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
United Stone & Allied Products Workers of America, affiliated
with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, is a labor organiza-
tion, admitting employees of the Company to membership.
III. TIIE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Company has refused to recognize the Union as the collective
bargaining representative of its employees in the alleged appropriate
unit.
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.
Iv. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Union seeks a unit of all employees of the Company who work
in connection with the processing and manufacturing of brick and
clay products, excluding clerical, office, administrative, and super-
CHERAW 13rt[CK WORKS 1357
visory employees. The election was held among the employees m
this unit and the Company concedes its appropriateness.
In accord with the agreement of the parties, we find that all enm-
ployees of the Company at or in the vicinity of Cheraw, South Caro-
lina, who work in connection with the processing and manufacturing
of brick and clay products, excluding clerical, office, administrative.
and 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.
V. TILE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
The only question raised at the hearing relates to the eligibility
of the employees whose votes were challenged to participate in the
election. One of the challenges was made by the Union; the other 18
challenges were filed by the Company.
The Union challenged the ballot of Tom Chavis on the ground
that he is a supervisory employee. The evidence establishes that,
although Chavis assists in the direction of the loading crew, among
other duties , he lacks the power either to change or effectively to
recommend a change in the status of the employees whose work he
directs. Accordingly, we find that he is not a supervisor within the
Board's customary definition and we shall, therefore, overrule the
Union's challenge to his ballot.
The Company has cha Ilenged the ballots of 18 women whose names
are listed in the Direction below on the ground that they are tem-
porary employees. The women have been employees for periods
which vary from a few months to as much as 21 months. On being
hired, they were not told that they were only temporary employees
and they have, since their hiring, been treated like concededly perma-
nent employees. The Company contends that the women are tem-
porary employees because they cannot do their present work as
efficiently as men and they will be replaced when men become avail-
able. The immediate outlook for replacing the women. the Company
admits, is obscure. Whatever the ultimate intentions of the Com-
pany, it clearly appears that the women whose votes have been
challenged are akin in their status to war service appointees who.
the Board has held , have such substantial interests in common with
permanent employees as to entitle them to participate in the choice
of a bargaining representative.3 In accord with previous determina-
' See Matter of R R . Donnelley & S ons Company, 59 N L. R B 122 Matter of The
C''onnecticut Potter Company , 52 N. L. R P. 1237 Matter of zl'orthern Indiana Pubhe
.service I'omupany , 51 N. I. R. T1 500
1 358 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
tions in like cases , we shal) overrule the challenges to the ballots of
the 18 women listed below.
Inasmuch as we have found that the 19 voters whose ballots were
challenged were eligible to vote in the election, we shall direct the
Regional Director to open and count all the challenged ballots.
DIRECTION
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, and pursuant to Article III, Sections 9 and 10, of National
Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3, as amended,
it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives 'for the purposes of collective bargaining with Cheraw Brick
Works, Cheraw, South Carolina, the Regional Director for the Tenth
Region shall, pursuant to said Rules and Regulations, within ten
(10) days from the date of this Direction, open and count the chal-
lenged ballots of Tom Chavis, Mary Frances Bell, Estelle Bridges,
Ilettie Brower, Ollie Brower, Mary Brower, Marie Davis, Annie
Ellerbe, Rebecca Gary, Gussie Harrington, Elizabeth Johnson, Aline
McCutchen, Mary McQueen, Flora Nesbitt, Aileen Parsons, Blanche
Powe, Maggie Sims, Lois Smith, and Elizabeth Jackson, and shall
therefore prepare and cause to be served upon the parties a Supple-
mental Tally of Ballots including therein the count of the challenged
ballots.
CHAIRMAN HErtzoG took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Direction.