Courtland Manufacturing Co.Download PDFNational Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsAug 23, 195195 N.L.R.B. 1292 (N.L.R.B. 1951) Copy Citation 1292 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD fashioned hosiery industry on an industrial basis. Of approximately 55 mills under contract with the Union and performing integrated operations such as those at the Employer's plant, the Union's expert witness was able to refer to only 2 at which the Union has contracts covering knitters only. In addition, the record reveals that negotia- tions between the Union and the organized industry before their im- partial wage tribunal are conducted upon the basis of the total labor cost to the employers, and not upon the specific pay rates of knitters or other employees in the industry. As stated above, I do not believe that the record justifies the estab- lishment of a separate unit for knitters. On the contrary, because of the pattern of bargaining in the industry'26 the Union's organizational practices,27 the integration of the knitters' operations with those of other employees in the plant,28 the absence of a formal apprenticeship training program'29 the lack of any substantial distinction between knitters and other employees,30 and because the skill of full-fashioned hosiery knitters appears to be only a production talent 31 which can be acquired in a comparatively short time, I would find that the group of employees whom the Union seeks to represent do not constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining on either a craft or any other basis. 20 Davis & Furber Machine Company , supra; Pacific Mills, 53 NLRB 164. 27 Pacific Mills, supra ; cf. Todd Shipyards Corporation , 63 NLRB 526. Se Saco-Moc Shoe Corp.. supra ; L2berty Hosiery Mills, Inc., supra. 21 Davis & Furber Machine Company, supra; Gulf Oil Corporation , 79 NLRB 1274. 80 Footnote 19, supra. 81 Davis & Farber Machine Company, supra. COURTLAND MANUFACTURING COMPANY and UNITED ELECTRICAL, RADIO AND MACHINE WORKERS OF AMERICA (UE), PETITIONER COURTLAND MANUFACTURING COMPANY and INTERNATIONAL BROTHER.. HOOD OF TEAMSTERS, CHAUFFEURS, WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS OF AMERICA, LOCAL 676, AFL, PETITIONER. Cases Nos. 4-RC-1092 and 4-RC-1141. August 23,1951 Decision and Direction of Elections Upon separate petitions duly filed, a consolidated hearing was held in the above cases before Harold X. Summers, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed." 1 Amalgamated Local 77, Playthings, Jewelry and Novelty Workers International Union, CIO, hereafter called the Toy workers, an Intervenor herein, moved to dismiss the petition in Case No. 4-RC-1092, in substance, on the grounds that (1) there is a contractual bar; (2) the unit sought is inappropriate; (3) the Petitioner, herein called the UE, has made 95 NLRB No. 171. COURTLAND MANUFACTURING COMPANY 1293 Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with these cases to a three-member panel. [Members Houston, Murdock, and Styles]. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds : 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the, meaning of the Act. 2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent certain em- ployees of the Employer. 3. The Employer and the Toy Workers entered into a collective bargaining agreement on February 1, 1950, which provided that it was to continue in full force and effect until April 1, 1951, and there- after from year to. year. unless either party gave written notice to the other of its desire to terminate or modify this agreement at least 90 days prior to its expiration date. In accordance with the terms of the contract, the Toy Workers notified the Employer by registered letter dated December 28, 1956, of its desire to negotiate a new contract. The petition in Case No. 4-RC-1092 was filed on February 26, 1951. On or. about March 22, 1951, agreement on the terms of a new contract was reached by the Employer and Toy Workers, and on March 29, 1951, the agreement was reduced to writing and signed by the parties.. The amended petition in Case No. 4-RC-1141 was filed on May 11, 1951. The Employer and the Toy Workers urge a contractual bar. We do not agree. The timely notice by the Toy Workers of its desire to negotiate a new contract effectively prevented an automatic renewal of the February 1, 1950, agreement; and, as the new contract was not formally executed until after the filing o_ f the petition in Case No. 4-RC-1092, we find that no bar exists to a current determination of representatives.2 no adequate showing of interest; ( 4) there Is a history of successful bargaining between. the Toy workers ;and the Employer; and (5) an investigation should be made to determine if the Petitioner has complied with the filing requirements of Section 9 (f), (g); and (h) of the Act. As to (1), (2), and (4), we find these contentions to be without merit for the reasons set forth below in paragraphs numbered 3 and .4 respectively. As to ( 3), the Petitioner 's showing is a matter for administrative determination and is not litigable by the parties. Indiana Oxygen Company, 93 NLRB No. 130. .. We are administratively satisfied that the Petitioner 's showing is both current and adequate . As to ( 5), the fact of compliance by a labor organization which is required to comply is a matter for administrative determination and is not litigable by the parties . Moreover, the Board is administratively satisfied that the Petitioner is in compliance . See Sunbeam Corporation, 94 NLRB 844; Swift & Company, 94 NLRB 917; cf. Highland Park . Manufacturing Company, 71 S. Ct. 489 . Accordingly , the motion to dismiss is hereby denied. The International Brotherhood of Pulp, Sulphite and Paper Mill Workers , AFL, which was permitted to intervene over the objection of the Toy workers, notified the Board, after the hearing, that it desired to withdraw from these proceedings. We hereby grant this withdrawal request, and therefore deem it unnecessary to rule on the propriety of the Toy workers ' motion to dismiss the intervention. Scripps-Howard Radio Station, Inc., 93 NLRB 1095 ; United States Rubber Company, 91 NLRB No. 213, and cases cited therein. 1294 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD We find that a question affecting commerce 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 units : Case No. 4-RC-1092 The UE seeks a unit composed of all production employees includ- ing die makers and janitors but 'excluding maintenance employees. The Toy Workers and the Employer contend that the present con- tractual unit of all production employees excluding maintenance men and die makers is the only appropriate unit 3 However, the Toy Workers would include' Iand the Employer would exclude, the janitors.. The Employer is engaged in the assembly of mechanical toys. It purchases some parts from subcontractors and stamps other parts in its pressroom. As parts are received, they are stored in the receiving department. They are then transferred to the assembly department to be assembled. The completed toys are thereafter moved to the shipping department where they are packed for shipment. At the time of the hearing, there were two die makers working in the die shop, maintaining, sharpening, repairing, and, on occasion, making dies, which are used in the Employer's pressroom. The two maintenance employees, working under the supervision of the general foreman of the assembly department, perform all the maintenance work in the assembly department .4 Some of their maintenance duties consist of repairing machinery, building tables; repairing windows; and performing electrical repair work. 'Although the nature of their duties would indicate that they work at times in the production areas, the record shows no interchange of work beween the maintenance men and the production employees: The Employer's two janitors perform regular janitorial duties throughout the entire plant. The bargaining history' adverted to above shows that the produc- tion employees alone have been represented by the Toy Workers, and that the maintenance employees, die makers,' and janitors have been without representation. As set forth above, none of the parties would include the maintenance men. However, the UE would include the die makers and the janitors. 8 The contract described the unit as follows : ". . . all production employees of the employer at 6th and Jefferson Streets plant, excluding the clerical and office employees, professional employees , supervisors , maintenance and toolmakers , as defined in the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947, and watchmen." Apparently the truck drivers who are sought as a separate unit in Case No. 4-RC-1141 were included among the production employees as laborers. * It does. not appear that there are any other maintenance employees at the Employer's plant. COURTLAND MANUFACTURING COMPANY 1295 On the basis of the above facts and the entire record it is clear that the die. makers, maintenance men, and janitors' have essentially the same ' interests and working conditions as the production workers. Accordingly, as no adequate reason.5 has been presented which' would warrant a departure from the Board's usual practice of including production and maintenance employees in the same unit and, as-the 'die makers and the janitors are now sought by the UE as part of the more comprehensive unit, and the maintenance men would otherwise be without representation, we shall include all three categories in the unite And, as a question concerning representation now exists among all employees in the unit, Board policy requires the inclusion of die makers, maintenance men, and janitors in the same voting'group with the production employees.7 We find that all production and maintenance employees at the Employer's plant in Camden, New Jersey, including the die makers, maintenance men, janitors, matron, and stock boys, but excluding all office and clerical employees, the truck drivers, professional employees, watchmen, guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act, constitute a unit appropriate for collective bargaining within the meaning: of .Section '9 (b) of the Act. Case No. 4-RC-1141 The International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Ware- housemen & Helpers of America, Local 676, AFL, hereinafter known as the Teamsters, seeks a unit of all truck drivers. 8 All the other -parties agree that such a unit would be appropriate and do not wish to appear on the ballot if the Board orders a separate election. The truck drivers drive the Employer's trucks between the plant and the warehouse, which is two blocks distant. They also assist in the loading and unloading of the trucks, and one of the drivers, on occasion, drives throughout the city on special errands. Although the truck drivers have previously been included in the production unit under the classification of laborer, they, are primarily engaged in the driving of the Employer's trucks. In view of the foregoing and the agreement of the parties as to the requested unit, we find that all truck drivers, excluding supervisors within the meaning of the Act, constitute a separate appropriate unit " The president of the Employer was not aware of the reason for not including the janitors under the collective bargaining agreement , but said, as to the die makers and maintenance men, they were "entirely different categories. " Cf. Western Picture Frame Company, 93 NLRB No. 52, and cases cited therein. Blue Ribbon Creamery , 94 NLRB 201 ; Waterous Company, 92 NLRB 76. The record indicates that there are 2 or 3 regular truck drivers. 1296 DECISIONS OF'NATIONAL LABOR. RELATIONS -BOARD for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Sec- tion 9 (b) of the Act.9 5. The record shows that there is one employee at the Employer's operation who divides his time equally between driving one of the Employer's trucks and working as a laborer in the Employer's re- ceiving, department. We are of the opinion, and we find, that the part-time truck driver has a sufficiently substantial interest in the conditions of employment in both the plant unit and the truck drivers' unit and in the outcome of both directed elections to entitle him to vote in each election. Ac- cordingly, we shall permit the part-time truck driver to vote in both elections. 10 [Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication in this volume.] IInternational Paper Company, Southern Kraft Division , et al., 94 NLRB 483. 10 Cf. Swift and Company, 58 NLRB 657; Wadham's Division of Socony -Vacuum Oil Company, 54 NLRB 1164. SEASHORE TRANSPORTATION COMPANY and AMALGAMATED ASSOCIATION OF STREET, ELECTRIC RAILWAY AND MOTOR COACH EMPLOYEES OF AMERICA, AFL, PETITIONER. Case No. 34-RC-88. August 23, 1951 Decision and Direction of Election Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before John H. Pickens, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.' Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-mem- ber panel [Members Houston, Reynolds, and Murdock]. I At the hearing, the Employer moved to dismiss the petition on the ground that the Petitioner had presented no proof of'an adequate showing of interest among the employees in the unit requested . The hearing officer overruled the motion , stating that the question of whether or not a petitioner has made an adequate showing of merest is an administrative matter not subject to attack at the hearing. We affirm the hearing officer 's ruling. J. P. Stevens & Co ., Inc., 93 NLRB 1513 ; Ballantine Produce Co., Inc., 81 NLRB 629. The Employer also moved to dismiss the petition ( a) on grounds relating to the com- pliance status of the Petitioner, and (b ) on the grounds that its operations do not affect interstate commerce , and, that its operations are so local in nature that assertion of jurisdiction by the Board in this case would not effectuate the policies of the Act. The hearing officer referred these motions to the Board. As to (a), the fact of compliance, by a labor organization which is required to comply, is a matter for administrative determination and is not litigable by the parties. Moreover, the Board is administratively satisfied that the Petitioner is in compliance . See Sunbeam Corporation, 94 NLRB 844; Swift & Company, 94 NLRB 917; Cf. Highland Park Manufacturing Co., 71 S. Ct. 489. As to (b), we find , for the reasons appearing in paragraph 1, infra, that the Employer is engaged in commerce and that it would effectuate the purposes of the Act to assert jurisdic- tion. The Employer's motions to dismiss are hereby denied. 95 NLRB No. 170. Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation