Claxton Mfg. Co., Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 29, 1978

237 N.L.R.B. 1393 (N.L.R.B. 1978)

CLAXTON MFG. CO., INC.
Claxton Manufacturing Co., Inc. and Laborers' Inter-
national Union of North America, Local 896, AFL-
CIO. Case 10-CA- 13442
August 29, 1978
DECISION AND ORDER
BY CHAIRMAN FANNING AND MEMBERS PENELLO
AND MURPHY
Upon a charge filed on February 14, 1978, by
Laborers's International Union of North America,
Local 896, AFL-CIO, herein called the Union, and
duly served on Claxton Manufacturing Co., Inc.,
herein called Respondent, the General Counsel of
the National Labor Relations Board, by the Regional
Director for Region 10, issued a complaint and no-
tice of hearing on March 31, 1978, against Respon-
dent, alleging that Respondent had engaged in and
was engaging in unfair labor practices affecting com-
merce within the meaning of Section 8(a)(5) and (1)
and Section 2(6) and (7) of the National Labor Rela-
tions Act, as amended. Copies of said charge, com-
plaint, and notice of hearing before an Administra-
tive Law Judge were duly served on the parties to this
proceeding.
With respect to the unfair labor practices, the com-
plaint alleges in substance that on November 11,
1977, following a Board election in Case 10-RC
11076, the Union was duly certified as the exclusive
collective-bargaining representative of Respondent's
employees in the unit found appropriate ' and that,
commencing on or about November 17, 1977, and at
all times thereafter, Respondent has refused, and
continues to date to refuse, to bargain collectively
with the Union as the exclusive bargaining represen-
tative, although the Union has requested and is re-
questing it to do so. Further, on or about November
17 and December 21, 1977, and January 17, 1978, by
letter and on or about November 28, 1977, orally, the
Union requested Respondent to furnish it a list of
employees in the appropriate unit, their addresses,
dates of hire, classifications, and rates of pay, and
information as to fringe benefits and work rules. On
or about November 17, 1977, and at all times there-
after, Respondent has refused said request. On April
14, 1978, Respondent filed its answer to the com-
I Official notice is taken of the record in the representation proceeding.
Case 10-RC-11076 as the term "record" is defined in Secs. 102.68 and
102.69(g) of the Board's Rules and Regulations, Series 8, as amended See
LTV Electrosystems. Inc., 166 NLRB 938 (1967), enfd. 388 F.2d 683 (C.A. 4,
1968); Golden Age Beverage Co., 167 NLRB 151 (1967), enfd. 415 F.2d 26
(C.A. 5, 1969); Intertype Co. v. Penello, 269 F.Supp 573 (D.C.Va., 1967);
Follett Corp., 164 NLRB 378 (1967). enfd. 397 F.2d 91 (C.A. 7. 1968), Sec.
9(d) of the NLRA. as amended.
plaint admitting in part, and denying in part, the alle-
gations in the complaint.
On May 5, 1978, counsel for the General Counsel
filed directly with the Board a Motion for Summary
Judgment. Subsequently, on May 17, 1978, the Board
issued an order transferring the proceeding to the
Board and a Notice To Show Cause why the General
Counsel's Motion for Summary Judgment should not
be granted. On May 31, 1978, Respondent thereafter
filed a response to the Notice To Show Cause. On
June 27, 1978, Respondent filed a motion for leave to
file an amended answer.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the Na-
tional Labor Relations Board has delegated its au-
thority in this proceeding to a three-member panel.
Upon the entire record in this proceeding, the
Board makes the following:
Ruling on the Motion for Summary Judgment
In its answer to the complaint, Respondent admits
the refusal to bargain and refusal to supply informa-
tion but denies that a majority of its employees se-
lected the Union and denies that its actions violated
Section 8(a)(5) and (1) of the Act. Further, in its an-
swer Respondent affirmatively asserts that (I) it was
deprived of its right to a ruling on each of its objec-
tions to the election and the reasons or bases thereof;
(2) it was erroneously denied a hearing on its objec-
tions to the election in violation of due process; and
(3) the Union had not been designated by a majority
of Respondent's employees in a free election. In its
response to the Notice To Show Cause, Respondent
again asserts that the representation case was wrong-
ly decided. In its motion to file an amended answer,
Respondent asserts that it should be permitted to
amend its answer to allege newly discovered or previ-
ously unavailable evidence and that this evidence
was adduced at an unfair labor practice hearing held
on September 20, 1977, in Case 10-CA-12781.
Our review of the record herein, including the rec-
ord in Case 10-RC-11076, reveals that, pursuant to a
Stipulation for Certification Upon Consent Election,
an election was conducted on July 1, 1977. Of the
total number of votes cast, 277 were for the Union,
168 against, with I void ballot and 12 challenged bal-
lots. On July 8, 1977, Respondent filed objections to
conduct affecting the results of the election.
On August 25, 1977, the Acting Regional Director
for Region 10 issued his report on objections in
which he recommended that the Board overrule the
objections in their entirety and that a certification of
representative be issued to the Union. Respondent
filed exceptions to the Regional Director's report on
237 NLRB No. 117
1393
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
objections essentially reiterating its objections and
arguing that the election should be set aside and a
second one directed or alternatively, that the case
should be remanded to the Regional Director for a
hearing on the objections. On November 7, 1977, Re-
spondent filed a motion to consider evidence alleging
that it had newly discovered evidence presented at
the September 20, 1977, unfair labor practice hearing
in Case 10-CA-12781 which supported its objections
to the election. Thereafter, on November 11, 1977,
the Board issued a Decision and Certification of
Representative in which it denied Respondent's mo-
tion and adopted the Regional Director's findings
and recommendations.2
With respect to Respondent's contention that it
was deprived of its right to a ruling on each matter
raised in its objections, it is clear that the Acting Re-
gional Director in his report on objections properly
considered each issue before him and ruled thereon,
and consequently we find no merit to this contention.
We also reject Respondent's contention that the
Union had not been designated by a majority of its
employees and that Respondent should be allowed to
amend its answer to allege newly discovered or previ-
ously unavailable evidence on grounds that these is-
sues were litigated in the prior representation pro-
ceeding and Respondent is not entitled to relitigate
them in the instant case.' Finally, Respondent's con-
tention that it was erroneously denied a hearing on
its objections to the election is also without merit,
inasmuch as a party is only entitled to a hearing
when it has shown substantial and material issues
which would warrant one.4 In the instant case Re-
spondent has failed to show such issues.
We therefore find that Respondent has not raised
any issue which is properly litigable in this unfair
labor practice proceeding. Accordingly, we deny Re-
spondent's motion to file an amended answer and
grant the General Counsel's Motion for Summary
Judgment.
On the basis of the entire record, the Board makes
the following:
FINDINGS OF FA I
I. THE BUSINESS OF RESPONDENI
Respondent is a Georgia corporation with its office
and place of business located in Claxton, Georgia,
where it is engaged in the manufacture of ladies' under-
wear and sleepwear. During the past calendar year,
2 The Board also denied Respondent's motion to consider esidence
3See Pittsburgh Plate Glass Co. v. N.LRB., 313 U.S. 146, 162 (1941);
Rules and Regulations of the Board, Sees 102 67(f) and 102.69(c)
4Smith & Aircraft Company, 229 NLRB 304 (1977); Modine Manufactur-
ing Company, 203 NLRB 527 (1973).
which period is representative of all times material
herein, Respondent sold and shipped finished products
valued in excess of $50,000 directly to customers locat-
ed outside the State of Georgia.
We find, on the basis of the foregoing, that Re-
spondent is, and has been at all times material
herein, an employer engaged in commerce within the
meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act and that it
will effectuate the policies of the Act to assert juris-
diction herein.
11 IHI. LABOR ORGANIZAIION INVOLVED
Laborers' International Union of North America,
Local 896, AFL-CIO, is a labor organization within
the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act.
111 'IHE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
A. The Representation Proceeding
1. The unit
The following employees of Respondent constitute
a unit appropriate for collective-bargaining purposes
within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act:
All production and maintenance employees
employed by Respondent at its Claxton, Geor-
gia, plant, including plant clerical employees but
excluding all office clerical employees, profes-
sional employees, guards and supervisors as de-
fined in the Act.
2. The certification
On July 1, 1977, a majority of the employees of
Respondent in said unit, in a secret-ballot election
conducted under the supervision of the Regional Di-
rector for Region 10, designated the Union as their
representative for the purpose of collective bargain-
ing with Respondent. The Union was certified as the
collective-bargaining representative of the employees
in said unit on November 11, 1977, and the Union
continues to be such exclusive representative within
the meaning of Section 9(a) of the Act.
B. The Request To Bargain and Respondent' Refusal
Commencing on or about November 17, 1977, and
at all times thereafter, the Union has requested Re-
spondent to bargain collectively with it as the exclu-
sive collective-bargaining representative of all the
employees in the above-described unit. Commencing
on or about November 17, 1977, and continuing at
all times thereafter to date, the Respondent has re-
1394
CLAXTON MFG. CO., INC.
fused, and continues to refuse, to recognize and bar-
gain with the Union as the exclusive representative
for collective bargaining of all employees in said
unit. Further, the Union, by letter on November 17
and December 21, 1977. and Januarv 17. 1978. and
orally on November 28, 1977. requested that Respon-
dent supply it with a list of employees in the appro-
priate unit, their addresses, dates of hire, classifica-
tions, and rates of pay, and information as to fringe
benefits and work rules. And, since on or about No-
vember 17. 1977, Respondent has failed and refused.
and continues to refuse. to suppl, the requested in-
formation.
Accordingly, we find that Respondent has. since
November 17. 1977, and at all times thereafter. re-
fused to bargain collectively with the Union as the
exclusive representative of the employees in the ap-
propriate unit and that, by such refusal to bargain
and to supply information. Respondent has engaged
in and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the
meaning of Section 8(a)(5) and (I) of the Act.
IV. IHE EFFECT OF THIE t Ni-AR lABOR PRAC11( 1S it PON
COMM.tR(CI}
The activities of Respondent set forth in section
III, above, occurring in connection with its opera-
tions described in section 1, above, have a close, inti-
mate, and substantial relationship to trade, traffic.
and commerce among the several States and tend to
lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing
commerce and the free flow of commerce.
V Till- R1MEI)DY
Having found that Respondent has engaged in and
is engaging in unfair labor practices within the mean-
ing of Section 8(a)(5) and (1) of the Act. we shall
order that it cease and desist therefrom, supply the
requested information, bargain collectively with the
Union as the exclusive representative of all employ-
ees in the appropriate unit, and, if an understanding
is reached, embody such understanding in a signed
agreement.
In order to insure that the emplo yees in the appro-
priate unit will be accorded the services of their se-
lected bargaining agent for the period provided by
law, we shall construe the initial period of certifica-
tion as beginning on the date Respondent commenc-
es to bargain in good faith with the Union as the
recognized bargaining representative in the appropri-
ate unit. See Mar-Jac Poultry Comparny, Inc., 136
NLRB 785 (1962); Commerce Comipanl d 'h 'a Lamar
Hotel, 140 NLRB 226, 229 (1962). enfd. 328 F.2d 600
(C.A. 5, 1964), cert. denied 379 U.S. 817 (1964): Bur-
mutt ('oe\vrluction (rompani'. 149 NI.RB 1419. 1421
(1964), cnfd. 350 F.2d 57 (C.A. 10. 1965).
-Ihe Board, upon the basis of the foregoing facts
and the entire record makes the following:
CONt. IL [SIONS Oi- .4AW
I. Claxton Manufacturing Co., Inc., is an em-
ployer engaged in commerce within the meaning of
Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
2. I.aborers' International Union of North Amer-
ica. Local 896. AFI. CIO. is a labor organization
within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act.
3. All production and maintenance employees em-
ployed by Respondent at its Claxton. Georgia, plant,
including plant clerical employees but excluding all
office clerical employees, professional employees.
guards. and supervisors as defined in the Act. consti-
tute a unit appropri-ate for the purposes of collective
bargaining within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the
Act.
4. Since November 11, 1977. the above-named la-
bor orLanization has been and now is the certified
and exclusive representative of all employees in the
aforesaid appropriate unit for the purpose of collec-
tive bargaining within the meaning of Section 9(a) of
the Act.
5. By refusing on or about November 17, 1977,
and at all times thereafter, to bargain collectively
with the above-named labor organization as the ex-
clusive bargaining representative of all the employees
of Respondent in the appropriate unit. Respondent
has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor prac-
tices within the meaning of Section 8(a)(5) of the Act.
6. By refusing on or about November 17, 1977,
and at all times thereafter, to supply information re-
quested by the Union regarding names of employees
in the appropriate unit, their addresses, dates of hire,
classifications. and rates of pay, and information as
to fringe benefits and work rules, Respondent has
engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices
within the meaning of Section 8(a)(5) of the Act.
7. By the aforesaid refusals to bargain and to sup-
ply requested information, Respondent has inter-
fered with, restrained, and coerced, and is interfering
with, restraining, and coercing, employees in the ex-
ercise of the rights guaranteed to them in Section 7 of
the Act, and hereby has engaged in and is engaging
in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Sec-
tion 8(a)(I) of the Act.
8. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair
labor practices affecting commerce within the mean-
ing of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
1395
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ORDER
Pursuant to Section 10(c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor Re-
lations Board hereby orders that the Respondent,
Claxton Manufacturing Co., Inc., Claxton, Georgia,
its officers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall:
1. Cease and desist from:
(a) Refusing to bargain collectively concerning
rates of pay, wages, hours, and other terms and con-
ditions of employment with Laborers' International
Union of North America, Local 896, AFL-CIO, as
the exclusive bargaining representative of its employ-
ees in the following appropriate unit:
All production and maintenance employees
employed by Respondent at its Claxton, Geor-
gia, plant, including plant clerical employees but
excluding all office clerical employees, profes-
sional employees, guards and supervisors as de-
fined in the Act.
(b) Refusing to supply the above-named labor or-
ganization with information necessary for collective
bargaining, including the names of employees in the
appropriate unit, their addresses, dates of hire, classi-
fications, and rates of pay, and information as to
fringe benefits and work rules.
(c) In any like or related manner interfering with,
restraining, or coercing employees in the exercise of
the rights guaranteed them in Section 7 of the Act.
2. Take the following affirmative action, which the
Board finds will effectuate the policies of the Act:
(a) Upon request, bargain with the above-named
labor organization as the exclusive representative of
all employees in the aforesaid appropriate unit with
respect to rates of pay, wages, hours, and other terms
and conditions of employment and, if an under-
standing is reached, embody such understanding in a
signed agreement.
(b) Upon request, supply the above-named labor
organization with the information necessary for col-
lective bargaining, including the names of employees
in the appropriate unit, their addresses, dates of hire,
classifications, and rates of pay, and information as
to employees' fringe benefits and work rules.
(c) Post at its Claxton, Georgia, facility copies of
the attached notice marked "Appendix." 5 Copies of
said notice, on forms provided by the Regional Di-
rector for Region 10, after being duly signed by Re-
spondent's representative, shall be posted by Re-
spondent immediately upon receipt thereof, and be
maintained by it for 60 consecutive days thereafter,
in conspicuous places, including all places where no-
tices to employees are customarily posted. Reason-
able steps shall be taken by Respondent to insure
that said notices are not altered, defaced, or covered
by any other material.
(d) Notify the Regional Director for Region 10, in
writing, within 20 days from the date of this Order,
what steps have been taken to comply herewith.
In the event that this Order is enforced by a judgment of a United States
Court of Appeals. the words in the notice reading "Posted by Order of the
National Labor Relations Board" shall read "Posted Pursuant to a Judg-
ment of the United States Court of Appeals Enforcing an Order of the
National Labor Relations Board."
APPENDIX
NOTICE To EMPLOYEES
POSTED BY ORDER OF THE
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
An Agency of the United States Government
WE WILL NOT refuse to bargain collectively
concerning rates of pay, wages, hours, and other
terms and conditions of employment with La-
borers' International Union of North America,
Local 896, AFL-CIO, as the exclusive represen-
tative of the employees in the bargaining unit
described below.
WE WILL NOT refuse to supply the above-
named Union with information necessary for
collective bargaining, including the names of
employees in the appropriate unit, their address-
es, dates of hire, classifications, and rates of pay,
and information as to fringe benefits and work
rules.
WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner
interfere with, restrain, or coerce our employees
in the exercise of the rights guaranteed them by
Section 7 of the Act.
WE WILL, upon request, bargain with the
above-named Union as the exclusive representa-
tive of all employees in the bargaining unit de-
scribed below, with respect to rates of pay, wag-
es, hours, and other terms and conditions of
employment and, if an understanding is
reached, embody such understanding in a signed
agreement. The bargaining unit is:
All production and maintenance employees
employed by Respondent at its Claxton,
Georgia, plant, including plant clerical em-
ployees, but excluding all office clerical em-
ployees, professional employees, guards, and
supervisors as defined in the Act.
WE WILL. upon request, supply the above-
named Union with the information necessary
1396
CLAXTON MFG. CO., INC.
for collective bargaining, including the names of
employees in the bargaining unit described
above, their addresses, dates of hire. classifica-
tions, and rates of pay., and information as to
fringe benefits and work rules.
CLAXTON MANUFACTURING CO., INC.
1397