D. O. Frost Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Feb 21, 1947

72 N.L.R.B. 900 (N.L.R.B. 1947)

In the Matter of HERBERT A. GREENS, D/B/A D. O. FROST Co., EM -
PLOYER and LOCAL 24, WATERPROOF GARMENT WORKERS' UNION,
AFFILIATED WI'T'H INTERNATIONAL LADIES' GARDIIFNT WORKERS'
UNION, AFL, PETITIONER "`
Case No. 1-R-3478.-Decided Febntary 21,19-1j7
Mr. John R. Cahill, of Gloucester, Mass., for the Employer.
Mr. George Roewer, of Boston, Mass., for the Petitioner.
Mr. Frederick Cohen, of Boston, Mass., for the Intervenor.
Mr. David C. Buchalter, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION -
Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at Glou-
cester, Massachusetts, on December 27, 1946, before Sam G. Zack,
hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are
free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations
Board makes-the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYI'II
Herbert A. Greene, an individual doing business as D. O. Frost
Co., is engaged at a plant in Gloucester, Massachusetts, in the manu-
facture of protective waterproof work clothing. During the year
preceding the hearing the Employer purchased for use at this plant
raw materials valued in excess of $100,000, of which approximately
90 percent represented shipments from sources outside the Colnnnon-
wealth of Massachusetts. During the same period, the Employer
sold finished products valued in excess of $250,000, of which approxi-
mately 90 percent represented shipments to points outside the Conn-
monwealth.
The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
72 N L. R. B., No. 153.
900
D. O. FROST CO.
11. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
90 1
The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated, with the American
Federation of Labor, claiming to represent employees of the
Employer.,
Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America , herein called the
Intervenor , is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress of
Industrial Organizations , claiming to represent employees of the
Employer.
III. Ti-IE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Employer refuses to recognize the Petitioner as the exclusive
bargaining representative of employees of the Employer in the
absence of definite proof of the Petitioner's majority representation.
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning
the representation of employees of the Employer, within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
IF. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Petitioner seeks a unit of all production employees of the
Employel:!at its Gloucester, Massachusetts, plant, including firemen-
watchmen but excluding executives, office and clerical employees, main-
tenance employees, and all supervisory employees. The Intervenor
agrees that the unit sought by the Petitioner is appropriate. The
Employer agrees generally with the proposed unit; it would, however,
exclude the firemen-watchmen sought to be included 2, and would
include employee Harriet Webber, whom the Petitioner would
exclude as a supervisor. There has been no collective bargaining
history at this operation.
Firemen-watchmen: The Employer's two firemen-watchmen work
separate shifts; one is on duty from 1 p. m. to 10 p. in.,.and the other
from 10 p. In. to 7 a. m. Their main function is to protect the Employ-
er's property against fire and theft. In this connection, they are
required to make hourly rounds of the premises and to ring a clock
at regular stations. The fireman-watchman on the afternoon shift
has the additional duty of sweeping the office and maul stitching room
I The Petitioner waived any right to urge any of the acts alleged by it as untair labor
practices in Case No i-C-2945 as a basis for objections to any election which may be
do ected in the instant case
We r'egaid the testimony to the effect that, at similar plants in the area, firemen-
watchmen are included in similar units to the one sought here, as being too general in
nature to have controlling weight Moreover, we view as significant the agreed exclusion
herein o1 maintenance eniplovees with whom the firemen-watchmen appear to have a
reasonably close community of interest
902 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
floors. During the winter months both also tend the furnace. They
do not have any monitorial duties. It is thus apparent that these
individuals perform custodial functions and, as such, their duties and
interests are substantially different from, and unrelated to, those of
the production employees. We shall, therefore, exclude the firemen-
watclm7en from the unit hereinafter found appropriate.3
Harriet Webber: The record discloses that this employee distributes
raw materials and supplies to the production workers and collects
completed work from thew. While she does, at times, relay to other
employees, instructions given by the forelady, she exercises no con-
trol over these employees-and does not inspect their work; nor does
she have authority to hire, discharge, reprimand or effectively to
recommend such action. Like other production employees in the
plant, she is paid on an hourly basis and is under the immediate super-
vision of the same forelady. We are persuaded, on all the facts and
the entire record, that this employee is not a supervisory employee
within our usual definition of that term. We shall therefore include
her in the unit as a production employee.
Accordingly, we find that all production employees of the Employer
at its Gloucester, Massachusetts, plant, but excluding executives, office
and clerical employees, maintenance employees, firemen-watchmen,
and all or any other 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.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the
purposes of collective bargaining with Herbert A. Greene, d/b/a
D. O. Frost Co., Gloucester, Massachusetts, an election by secret ballot
shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than thirty (30)
'clays from the date of this Direction, under the direction and super-
vision of the Regional Director for the First Region acting in this
matter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject
to Sections 203.55 and 203.56, of National Labor Relations Board
Rules and Regulations-Series 4, among the employees 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 includ-
ing employees in the armed forces of the United States who present
3 Matter of Union Underwear Company, Inc . 63 N L R E 92.
D. O. FROST CO. 903
themselves in person at the polls, bijt excluding those employees who
have since quit or been discharged for cause and have not been rehired
or reinstated prior to the date of the election, to determine whether
they desire to be represented by Local 24, Waterproof Garment Work-
ers' Union, affiliated with International Ladies' Garment Workers'
Union, AFL, or by Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America,
CIO, for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by neither.
CFIAI nIAN HERZOG took•no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Direction of Election.