Denison Cotton Mills Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jan 24, 1952

97 N.L.R.B. 1191 (N.L.R.B. 1952)

CARLTON WOOD PRODUCTS COMPANY 1191
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. Blue Mountain District Council of Lumber and Sawmill Workers, affiliated
with the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, A. F. of L.,
is a labor organization within the meaning of Section 2 (5) of the Act.
2. All production and maintenance employees , excluding office, clerical, and
supervisory employees as defined in the Act, constitute a unit appropriate for
the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of
the Act.
3. Blue Mountain District Council of Lumber and Sawmill Workers, affiliated
with the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, A. F. of L.,
was, on May 15, 1950, and at all times since has been the exclusive representative
of all the employees in the aforesaid unit for the purposes of collective bargaining
within the meaning of Section 9 (a) of the Act.
4. By refusing on and after June 20, 1950, to bargain collectively with the
aforesaid Union as the exclusive representative of the employees in the appro-
priate unit , Respondent has engaged in and is engaging in an unfair labor practice
within the meaning of Section 8 ( a) (5) of the Act.
5. By the aforesaid unfair labor practice, the Respondent has interfered with,
restrained , and coerced its employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed
in Section 7 of the Act, thereby engaging in an unfair labor practice within the
meaning of Section 8 (a) (1) of the Act.
6. The aforesaid unfair labor practice is an unfair labor practice affecting
commerce within the meaning of Section 2 ( 6) and (7) of the Act.
[Recommended Order omitted from publication in this volume.]
DENISON COTTON MILLS COMPANY and TEXTILE WORKERS UNION OF
AMERICA, CIO . Case No. 16-CA-303 . January 24, 1952
Decision and Order
On June 27, 1951, Trial Examiner Albert P. Wheatley issued his
Intermediate Report.in the above-entitled proceeding, finding that
the Respondent had engaged in and was engaging in certain unfair
labor practices and recommending that it cease and desist therefrom
and take certain affirmative action, as set forth in the copy of the
Intermediate Report attached hereto. Thereafter, the Respondent
filed exceptions to the Intermediate Report.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, the National
Labor Relations Board has delegated its powers in connection with
this proceeding to a three-member panel [Chairman Herzog and Mem-
bers Murdock and Styles].
The Board has reviewed the rulings made by the Trial Examiner
at the hearing and finds that no prejudicial error was committed.
The rulings are hereby affirmed. The Board has considered the Inter-
mediate Report, the Respondent's exceptions, and the entire record in
the case, and, except as hereinafter modified, hereby adopts the Trial
97 NLRB No. 193.
1192 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Examiner's findings of fact but, for the reasons stated below, rejects
his conclusions and recommendations.
1. Apart from an allegation, hereinafter considered, that the Re-
spondent independently violated Section 8 (a) (1) of the Act, the
complaint in this case alleges that the Respondent refused to bargain
with the charging Union in violation of Section 8 (a) (5) of the Act.
In this case, however, the Union had been certified at a time when the
CIO, with which the Union is affiliated, was not in compliance with.
the filing requirements of the Act, and when under the Supreme
Court's decision in the Highland Park case," the Board was without
authority to issue such a certification. For the reasons recently stated
in Board decisions,' the statute, as now amended, exonerates the Re-
spondent's "failure to honor" a certificate which the Board was with-
out power to issue. We are therefore required to dismiss the allega-
tion that the Respondent' violated Section 8 (a) (5) of the Act.
2. The Trial Examiner also found that the strike, which began
on June 26, 1950, and which was still in progress at the time of the.
hearing, was caused by the Respondent's unlawful refusal to bargain.
As we have found that the Respondent did not unlawfully refuse to,
bargain, we find that the cause of the strike was economic in nature.
3. The Trial Examiner further found that the Respondent inde-
pendently violated Section 8 (a) (1) on the basis of the following-
incidents : (1) Supervisors Edgett and-Groff solicited two separate
strikers to return to work, stating that the Respondent would never
sign a contract; and (b) Supervisors Coffin and Moore, the latter on
two occasions, solicited strikers to return to work, stating in sub-
stance that the employees filling their jobs were making more money
than the strikers did and that the strikers could make more money
than before the strike. The Trial Examiner concluded that the state-
ments of Edgett and Groff, standing alone, did not violate the Act,
but when viewed in light of the Respondent's unlawful refusal to
bargain, constituted an integral part of a pattern of illegal opposition
to the purposes of the Act and were reasonably calculated to under-
mine the collective bargaining representative.
However, we have found above that the Respondent did not violate-
Section 8 (a) (5) of the Act. We conclude therefore that the state-
ments of Edgett and Groff were not unlawful.' The statements of
Coffin and Moore, viewed in the light of the record as a whole, lead
us to infer and find that the strikers were being told that they could
earn more money because the current complement of 'employees en-
joyed a higher wage level than that which prevailed before the strike,.
1 N. L. R. B. v. Highland Park Manufacturing Co., 341 U . S. 322.
2 The Advertiser Company, Inc, 97 NLRB 604; American Twine d Fabric Corporation,.
97 NLRB 868.
8 The Texas Co., 93 NLRB 1358.
DENISON COTTON MILLS COMPANY 1193
and not that the solicited strikers were being offered a premium over
and above the wage rates being paid to other employees in return
for abandoning'the strike. So viewed, we do not believe that these
statements, under these circumstances, contained any unlawful prom-
ise of benefit so as to constitute a violation of the Act. We conclude
therefore that the Respondent did not independently violate Section
8 (a) (1) of the Act.
Accordingly we shall dismiss the complaint in its entirety.
Order
Upon the entire record in the case, and pursuant to Section 10 (c)
of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor
Relations Board hereby orders that the complaint herein against the
Respondent be, and it hereby is, dismissed.
Intermediate Report and Recommended Order
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
The above -entitled matter involves allegations that Denison Cotton Mill Com-
pany,' herein called Respondent , unlawfully refused to bargain with Textile
Workers Union of America , CIO, herein called the Union or TWUA , and allega-
tions that Respondent unlawfully interfered with , restrained , and coerced its
employees in the exercise of their rights guaranteed under the National Labor
Relations Act, as amended , herein called the Act. These issues framed by the
complaint ( as amended at the hearing ) and answer ( as amended at the hearing)
were litigated at a hearing before the undersigned in Sherman , Texas, on April
23 and 24 , 1951 . Counsel for the General Counsel of the National Labor Rela-
tions Board , herein called the General Counsel, and for Respondent and an
international representative of the Union participated fully in the aforemen-
tioned hearing. At the conclusion of the General Counsel 's case-in-chief , counsel
for Respondent moved to dismiss the complaint , as amended , and did not offer
any evidence on Respondent 's behalf. This motion was taken under considera-
tion and Is now disposed of in accordance with the following findings and con-
clusions . After the close of the hearing, briefs were received from the General
Counsel and from Respondent which have been considered.
There is no dispute concerning the following matters, and the evidence reveals
and the undersigned finds: ( 1) That Respondent is engaged in commerce within
the meaning of the Act ; 2 (2) that Textile Workers Union of America , CIO, and
Local 1087 thereof, are labor organizations within the meaning of the Act; (3)
that all production and maintenance employees of Respondent at its place of
business in Denison , Texas, exclusive of office clerical employees , guards, pro-
' The pleadings were amended at the hearing to show the correct name of Respondent
to be as stated above.
2 Respondent Is a Texas corporation having its principal office and place of business in
Denison, Texas , where it engages in the manufacture , sale, and distribution of cotton
textiles and related products . In the course and conduct of its business , Respondent causes
and has continuously caused approximately $ 100,000 worth of materials to be transported
to its place of business in Denison , Texas, from points and places outside of Texas and
causes and has continuously caused products valued at approximately $750,000 to be sold,
delivered , and transported to points and places outside of Texas.
1194 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
fessional employees , and all supervisors as defined in the Act constitute a unit
appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of
the Act ; and (4) that at all times material herein, the Union has represented
for the purposes of collective bargaining a majority of the employees in'the
-aforesaid unit.
It is alleged that Respondent unlawfully refused to bargain on or about March
22, June 8, June 20 , July 24, August 25, all in 1950 , and January 17, 1951, and
at all times thereafter , that Respondent caused and prolonged a strike beginning
on June 26, 1950, and that Respondent interfered with, restrained, and coerced
its employees by- (a) informing its employees that Respondent would never sign
a contract with the Union ; ( b) soliciting its striking employees to return to
work on an individual basis; (c) raising the wages of employees who had not
yet gone on strike; ( d) informing employees on strike that unless they returned
to work immediately, there would be no jobs available with the Company for
them in the future . Respondent denies the foregoing conduct.
Facts
On November 4, 1949, the National Labor Relations Board certified the Union
as the exclusive bargaining representative of the employees in the afore-men-
tioned unit.' On November 7, 1949, the Union requested a meeting for the pur-
pose of negotiating a contract and suggested a date not later than November 15,
1949. Respondent advised the Union that it was "tied up indefinitely" on a
pending lawsuit but would "write you just as soon as the above mentioned ques-
tions permit scheduling a definite and early date for our meeting ." Thereafter
the parties scheduled a meeting for Wednesday, November 30.
On November 30, 1949, the parties met at the time and place previously agreed
upon. At this meeting the Union submitted its proposed contract attached hereto
as Appendix A. In its contract the Union sought ( 1) exclusive recognition as
collective bargaining representative; (2) checkoff of union dues; (3) use of
company bulletin boards; (4) access to company premises ; ( 5) a specified
procedure concerning cases of discipline or discharge and grievances concerning
such ; ( 6) detail provisions concerning wages including a minimum wage of
94 cents per hour; (7) detail provisions concerning workloads and work assign-
ments (fatigue allowances, changes in work assignments, earnings guaranteed) ;
(8) 8-hour day and 40-hour week with overtime and with extra pay for -work
-performed on Saturday or Sunday ; ( 9) paid holidays ; ( 10) provisions concern-
ing grievance procedure ; ( 11) provision concerning arbitrations , strikes, and
lockouts ; (12) provisions concerning seniority ; (13) provisions concerning leaves
of absence ; ( 14) provisions concerning employment and seniority of veterans;
-(15) provisions concerning vacations and vacation pay; (16 ) provisions con-
cerning insurance benefits ; and (17 ) automatic renewal provisions. -
The meeting of November 30, 1949, was the first meeting of the parties and was
"a get acquainted meeting." The Union 's proposed contract was read clause by
clause and where necessary explained by union officials present . After the first
reading of the proposed contract , union representatives suggested that the parties
go over the contract and "start negotiating and reach an agreement on certain
clauses that we could." Company representatives- stated "they would like to
have more time to think about it, and they would think it over ." Respondent
was asked to meet the next day but said "no, they wouldn 't be ready , that they
would notify me [Dernoncourt, union spokesman] when they would meet." The
meeting adjourned at 5 p. m.
See Case No. 16-RC-425.
DENISON COTTON MILLS COMPANY 1195
By letter dated December 7, 1949, Respondent proposed December 13 as the
next meeting date. By letter dated December 8, 1949, the Union requested the
Company to set a date for the next meeting. Apparently these letters crossed
in the mail and on December 10 the representatives of parties conferred via tele-
phone and agreed upon December 15, 1949, as their next meeting date. This
agreement was confirmed by a letter from Respondent dated December 10, 1949.
According to Dernoncourt at the December 15, 1949, meeting
We started through the contract in chronological order, starting first with
the agreement clause. The company stated that they saw no objection to
the agreement clause as such. After some discussion on it we passed and it
was agreed to, we passed on to the recognition clause of the contract.' The
employer-the company said then that they saw no objection to the recogni-
tion clause of the contract.
Then we got down to a subsection of the clause, union security, the check-
off. After some discussion on that, the company said that they saw no objec-
tion to that clause with the exception that they didn't know whether accord-
ing to state law they could check off initiation fees or not, they would have
to look into that matter.
Another subsection of that clause is the use of bulletin boards. At that
meeting it was agreed between the company and the union that during
negotiations and until the contract had been completed that the union would
be able to use the existing bulletin boards for the purpose of posting notices
of routine union business if first we cleared it through management, to the
company offices.
We went to Article III, discharge and discipline. The company did not
agree to that article. They said it would have to be reworded.
We then passed on to the next article on wages. There was no agreement
reached by either party an that article.
There are various sections and we got down to reporting pay ; on the other
sections that we discussed in there , wage revision , there was no agreement
on it.
We discussed minimum wages ; were unable to reach an agreement on that.
We discussed equality of pay for women workers. The company saw no
objection to that, and anybody doing that same type of work would receive
the same pay.
We didn't get through reporting pay.
However, in that meeting we also worked out a temporary grievance
procedure. The grievance procedure was as follows, that the first step
would be that the employee with the grievance would write the grievance
down on paper and along with the shop steward present it to the foreman of
that department. If-the foreman had to answer that grievance within 24
hours; if the grievance wasn't then satisfactorily settled, the second step
would be to take the grievance then to the mill superintendent, that is, the
shop steward and the grieved employee would then take the grievance to
the mill superintendent , the mill superintendent would then have 48 hours to
answer that grievance in writing.
The third step of the procedure was that if it hadn't been satisfactorily
settled at the two preceding steps that there would be a special grievance
meeting held between myself [Dernoncourt], the grievance committee, and
the plant manager , to try and work out and settle the grievance. There
was no arbitration to this temporary grievance procedure , and it was only
to be in effect until the contract was finally negotiated and consummated.
6 The Union 's proposed contract attached hereto as Appendix A.
1196 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
The meeting, the company asked for an adjournment of the meeting at
5: 00 p. m a I [Dernoncourt] asked the company if they would continue to
meet and negotiate the contract, the 2-hour meeting wasn't long enough.
The company said no. I asked them then if they would meet the next day.
They said no, they would inform us as to when they would meet e
By letter dated December 29, 1949, Dernoncourt requested a meeting during
the first week of January. By letter dated December 30, 1949, Respondent re-
plied "we will be glad to meet with you in the meeting room at 301M West
Woodard Street from 3: 00 to 5: 00 P. M. on Thursday 5th." The parties met at
the appointed time and place and "continued with the contract [Union's proposed
contract, Appendix A] where we had left off at the previous meeting of De-
cember 15.'
On January 9, 1950, Jesse Olin Turner, president of Local 1087 of the Textile
Workers Union of America, CIO, and a member of the Union's negotiating
committee, sought from Munson [W. B. Munson III, vice president of Respondent]
permission to post copies of notices concerning a union meeting on company
bulletin boards. Munson stated he was busy and told Turner "Leave it here and
I will call you back later and let you know about it." Later that day Munson
sent for Turner and told him "that for the time being that there wasn't no
agreement to put any notice of that kind in the mill, and he [Munson] couldn't
O.K. it." Turner reported his failure to secure permission to post the notice
to Dernoncourt who telephoned Respondent's attorneys about the matter on
January 11, 1950. On that same date C. H. Gillespie, Jr., attorney for Respond-
ent, wrote a letter to Dernoncourt stating
After your telephone call this afternoon with reference to posting of a
notice of a union meeting on the plant bulletin board of the Denison Cotton
Mill, I discussed the matter with Mr. Munson, and it is our recollection that
at the last meeting with you we stated in effect that when an agreement
had been reached, it might contain provisions for posting routine union
notices containing no political or objectionable matter on the plant bulletin
board, but that we would probably not go so-far as to place a bulletin board
in each department.8
When a final agreement has been reached there will probably be no ob-
jection to notices being placed on the bulletin board within the limitations
indicated in the' last meeting ; however, we do not feel that it would be ad-
visable either to arrive at an agreement piecemeal or to put it into effect
one provision at a time. For that reason, we do not contemplate any
changes in the established policies in relation of the mill with the Union
until final agreement in the contract negotiations has been reached. For
reasons indicated, we believe it advisable to deny the privilege of posting
notices at this time.
In January 1950, Alvin Hall, union shop steward on the night shift in the
weave room, made futile efforts to adjust a grievance! The uncontradicted
testimony of Hall concerning this matter follows :
s Meeting scheduled for from 3 to 5 p. m. The correspondence between the parties
reveals that these hours were set by Respondent.
6 Dernoncourt testified that generally the meetings lasted "two hours or shorter, and
when I asked for longer meetings the company said they weren't interested in an endurance
contest."
4 The record does not reveal further details concerning this meeting except that the
meeting lasted "I would imagine, well, it lasted two hours."
's Dernoncourt testified without contradiction that there was agreement that during the
negotiations union notices could be posted and that permission to post notices was
not subject to agreement on other matters under consideration as inferred by this letter.
The undersigned finds that there was an agreement that during the negotiations existing
bulletin boards could be used for notices of routine union business.
9 Hall testified this occurred along in the middle of January 1950.
DENISON COTTON MILLS COMPANY 1197
Q. Would you tell us about that, Mr. Hall?
A. Well, it was long in January of 1950; there was-Jimmy Saunders
came to me with a-that he had got laid off for not cleaning up quills, he
picked up the quills, empty quills, that the day boy on the day shift had
left scattered on the floor, and wanted to know what to do about it.
So I told him we'd write up a grievance, and we wrote up grievances, took
it to Lemley Coffin, which was shop steward-shop foreman, and he was
busy. I stood around there for five or ten minutes, and he looked. around
and said, "Hall, something for you?"
I said, "Yes, sir, Lemy, I have a grievance here on Jimmy Saunders." I
said, "He's been laid off by you."
He said, "That's right." He said, "That's what you have there in your
hand, that piece of paper?"
I said, "Yes, sir."
He said, "I don't even want to see it. It don't mean anything to me."
I said, "0. K."
Q. Did you do anything further about it, Mr. Hall?
A. I told Jimmy Saunders to come over the next morning and we'd go in
and see the foreman of the whole weave shop, at which was Mit Taule.
Q. How do you spell that, Mr. Hall?
A. M-i-t T-a-u-1-e, I believe.
Q Go ahead.
A. So the next morning up in the morning, somewhere around 9: 00 o'clock,
I met Jimmy Saunders at the, front gate. We went in and vVent up to the
second floor of the weave shop and found Mit Tattle, and I walked tip to him
and I said, "Mit, I have come in as shop steward of the union to talk to you
about Jimmy Saunders." I said, "I have a grievance here."
He said, "Well," said, "I'll tell you, Hall," he said, "I haven't had no au-
thority on whatsoever handling grievances." He said, "There isn't anything
until I do get that authority that I can do about-it." He said, "As far as me
and you is concerned, there isn't anything me and you have got to talk about,
but I will talk to Jimmy."
$o he told Jimmy to wait a few minutes, so I turned around and left.
Q. I see. Was that the end of that incident, Mr. Hall?
A. Well, as far as my part of it was, it was the end of it 30
apparently Gillespie and Dernoncourt agreed tentatively upon Tuesday, Janu-
ary 21, 1930, as the next meeting date and by letter dated January 20, 1950, Gil-
lespie confirmed this schedule and advised Dernoncourt "we will meet with you
at the customary meeting room from 3: 00 to 5: 00 Tuesday afternoon, January
24th." At this meeting the parties "continued through the contract clause by
clause, and there was discussion on various clauses." With respect to particular
matters discussed at this meeting, Dernoncourt testified as follows:
By Mr. BANE :
Q. Mr. Dernoncourt, do you remember whether or not you went through the
section of the contract on paid holidays at that meeting?
'° In its brief Respondent states we wish to point out that there is no showing as to the
authority of Coffin or Taule except the statement that they were foremen. However at
the hearing Respondent conceded "that the foreman of the weave shop is a supervisor" and
there is positive testimony that Lem Coffin was night foreman of the weave shop and that
Mit Taule "was the main foreman over the weave shop." Furthermore, Hall testified that
Mit Taule hires and fires and that Lem Coffin "could lay you off," "could send you home "
Under these circumstances the undersigned finds that Coffin and Taule were supervisors
within the meaning of the Act.
1198 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
A. I think we did. I think that was the meeting we went through--that
was towards the end of the contract. We went through paid holidays on
that meeting.
Q. Do you remember what the position of the company was in regard to
that?
A. Yes.
Q. Will you tell us, 1\'lr. Dernoncourt?
A. The company's position was that they wouldn't pay for any holidays,
but there were some holidays that they would recognize.
Q. Mr. Dernoncourt, did you go through the question of adjustment of
grievances at that meeting?
A. Yes, we did. That come after paid holidays in the contract.
Trial Examiner WHFATLES. Let me have that answer back.
(Answer read.)
By Mr. KANE :
Q. Do you recollect what happened in a discussion of the adjustment of
grievances?
A. The company stated that they wanted an employee to be able to take
his grievance up without going through a shop steward . My position was
that the law allowed them to do that. The company stated that they didn't
want regular grievance meetings, that they would have them when necessary.
Also that they wanted the grievance meeting to be held on the employee's
-own time. Now, if there was any other discussion on it , I don 't remember.
Q. Mr. Dernoncourt, do you recollect whether or not there was a discussion
on a no strike clause at that meeting?
A. Yes, there was. The company stated that it wanted . an airtight no
strike clause.
Q. Was there any discussion , Mr. Dernoncourt , with regard to seniority
at that meeting?
A. I would imagine there was . However, I don 't remember what it was,
'because at the time I was in about seven negotiations on the same principle,
I mean there was discussion , it was towards the end of the contract that I
know of, I don't remember what it was, in that particular meeting.
There were other meetings where it was discussed , and I know some of
the company's answers. Whether it was that particular one or not , I don't
know. I don't remember. ,
Q. At this particular meeting , the meeting of January 24, 1950 , Mr. Dernon-
court, was there any discussion between you and the company with regard
to the arbitration?
A. Yes, there was.
Q. Would you tell us what that discussion was?
A. I don't remember at that particular meeting. We discussed it at one
of the meetings. I can tell you the company's position on it. One of the
meetings, whether it was that particular meeting or not I don't know, I think
it was, though . However , I will say this, there was no agreement reached,
and the company was interested in finding out some facts about the American
Arbitration Association. Now, that was at the first meeting where we
discussed arbitration clause. I told them I would send them some booklets
on it, see that they got some material through the mail. That was the first
time we discussed arbitration clauses.
Q. Did you discuss the question of leave of absence with the company at
that meeting?
DENISON COTTON MILLS COMPANY 1199
A. Yes, that follows right along the line of a contract. {
Q. Do you remember what the discussion was?
A. I don't remember that. I discussed it at several times, negotiations,
but that particular meeting I don't remember.
Q At this meeting, Mr. Dernoncourt, did you discuss the seniority of
veterans?
A. Yes, we did.
Q. Do you remember what your discussion on that was?
A. If_ I am not mistaken, the discussion on that was that it was according
to law, he could see no objection to it, the company could see no objection to
it, the veterans were given that right under the law.
Q. Did you at this meeting discuss paid vacations?
A. Said it was-no, I don't remember that. I mean we discussed it at
several times and I don't know just which meeting-what was said at each
meeting without refreshing my memory. As I said, I was in about nine of
these at one time, various companies throughout the state.
Q. Do you remember whether or not, Mr. Dernoncourt, there was a dis-
cussion in regard to insurance benefits at this meeting?
A. There was.
Q. Do you remember what the discussion was?
A. I do not. That was discussed at several times during our negotiations.
Q. Now, Mr. Dernoncourt, did you discuss the termination clause of the
contract at this meeting?
A. We did.
Q. Do you remember what the discussion on that was?
A. The company could see no objection to our termination clause, the best
I remember on It.
Q. The termination clause is the final clause in the contract, is it not,
Mr. Dernoncourt?
A. Right ; it is.
Q. At the conclusion of the discussion of that clause, what occurred?
A. I don't-I don't remember.
Q. Do you recollect, Mr. Dernoncourt, whether or not at that meeting you
asked the company whether they would agree on certain clauses at the time?
A. I did.
Q. Do you remember what the company's reply to that was?
A. That they wouldn't agree to any clause in the contract by itself, they
would have to agree to the contract in its entirety."
On or about February 20, 1950, Dernoncourt telephoned Respondent's counsel,
Gillespie, and told him that he (Dernoncourt) "had substitute proposals on lunch
periods, on workload clauses, and on minimum wages, and asked for a meeting
to discuss these changes, modification of the union's original proposal " That
afternoon Gillespie by letter agreed to meet "from 3: 00 to 5: 00 P. M. Friday,
February 24th" to discuss these new proposals. Gillespie's letter further stated
that Respondent's industrial engineer had not completed his studies concerning
certain workloads and incentive matters and that therefore "we will not be in
a position to discuss matters other than the new proposals which you have."
A. The union committee and myself met with the company and the com-
pany said that they would only talk about the proposals that I had called
11 On cross-examination Dernoncourt testified that at this meeting Respondent "made it
clear that we [Respondent ] would not put the contract into effect piecemeal , when we had
reached these tentative agreements and had a whole contract we would sign it to go into
effect "
1200 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
them and told them we would modify, that they weren't in a position of dis-
cussing any other section of the contract.
I told the company that it had been a month since our last meeting and
that negotiations had been dragging and that our meetings weren't long
enough. The company said that it wasn't interested in an endurance con-
test and that they couldn't meet because income tax season was near. Both
the attorney and the plant, company, were working on those matters.
We discussed our proposals, the substitute modification proposal with
the company. We took out lunch period that we had requested in our
original contract, and changed the workload section, workload and work
assignment section, rather, and reduced our minimum request from 94 cents
to 89 cents an hour for a' minimum wage. The company said they would
take our proposals and think about them and let us know.
I asked for a meeting the next day. The company said they would get in
touch with us when we could have our next meeting. They would let us
know. The meeting adjourned about, well, all I can say, it didn't last two
hours that time. It was a short meeting, an hour, hour and fifteen minutes,
something like that.
Another meeting was scheduled for Thursday, March 16, 1950, from 3 to 5
p. in., and at that meeting the parties "discussed wages mostly." The record
does not reflect further details concerning this meeting except that no agree-
ment was reached. _
After several exchanges of correspondence the parties agreed upon June 8,
1950, from 3 to 5 p. in. as the next meeting date. Concerning the-meeting on
June 8, 1950, Dernoncourt testified on direct examination as follows:
A. I think that that's the meeting that the company gave us a proposal on
wages and Insurance.' No, I don't remember exactly.
Q. Do you remember whether or not at that meeting, Mr. Dernoncourt,
there was a discussion with regard to the minimum wage?
A. There was a discussion in regards to the minimum wage at several
of the meetings, and at that one, I wouldn't-as I said, think it was then
that they presented us with a wage and an insurance proposal. The com-
pany maintained that they would only pay a 75 cent minimum wage. I
told them that the Fair Labor Standards Act set that up that they could
not pay lower than a 75 cent minimum. The company maintained That 75
cents was all they were going to guarantee any employee. '
I asked them if piece rate employees were included in it and the company
said all employees, we would only guarantee them 75 cents an hour."
Q. At this meeting, Mr. Dernoncourt, was there any mention made of the
time and place for the next meeting?
A. At every meeting I asked the company when they would meet with us,
and I assume at that meeting that I asked them the same thing. That was
standard by that time, to find out if We couldn't meet the next day, and the
company never met on two successive days.
On cross-examination Dernoncourt testified
Q. Now, there is one other question, Mr. Dernoncourt. With reference to
the meeting on June 8, 1950, you testified that the company gave you pro-
posals on wages and insurance. As a matter of fact, was that not informa-
tion on the present policy and wages, wage rates and the insurance features
v At this time Respondent was paying some of its pieceworkers a basic rate in excess of
75 cents per hour.
DENISON COTTON MILLS COMPANY 1201
that were in effect at that time? That wasn't in the form of a contract
proposal, was it?
A. Yes, it was. It was in answer to our request for a proposal on wages
and insurance that we had asked for in a contract.
Q. Do you have the documents that were submitted to you at that time?
A. I have them ; not here. I would reckon I have them in the office. I
don't have them with me.
Q. You didn't bring that with you?
A. Don't you have yours?
Q. I think I have copies of it. If it's my recollection that what we sub-
mitted there was wage and insurance data, then you say I am incorrect,
though?
A. (Nods head "Yes.")
Q. I take it you're answering in the affirmative?
A. Yes, that's right. Sorry.
Trial Examiner WIIEATLEY. Meaning that he's incorrect?
The WITNESS. Right. We discussed the proposal at that meeting.
By Mr. GILLESPIE :
Q. And your testimony is that the company actually made you a contract
proposal with reference to wages and insurance program on June 8?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you accept that proposal?
A. I did not.
Q. Now, Mr. Dernoncourt, you testified somewhere on direct examination
that the company stated in effect that it would not guarantee any wage,
minimum wage, above 75 cents. Did the company make any explanation
of that statement?
A. No, they didn't make any explanation. They said they weren't pre-
pared to give any guarantee above 75 cents per hour for any employee.
Q. Didn't they explain that they were willing for their piece rates, present
hourly rate to remain in effect but they would not guarantee, for instance,
sweepers a minimum wage that would be comparative with the wages being
paid for skilled workers?
A. I don't remember them saying that. I asked them if they would
guarantee piece workers anything above 75 cents an hour, the same as un-
skilled workers, and the company said no, they wouldn't guarantee anyone
above 75 cents an hour, piece workers or anyone else.
Q. That was as a minimum guarantee?
A. That was minimum guarantee.
Q. Piece rates were actually set to run considerably above that, weren't
they?
A. Some of them might have been, but there was always a chance that they
would fall down in case of a breakdown to 75 cents, and I pointed that out
in negotiations.
The next meeting was held on June 20, 1950, from 3 to 5 p. m. At this meeting
Respondent submitted a typewritten document entitled "NOTICE To ALL Ear-
PLOYEES" attached hereto as Appendix B. Union representatives protested that
the rules 18 "did not contain several things that our original proposal or our
proposal contained, several subject matters of a contract, and I [Dernoncourt]
Is The notice sets out a series of rules (seven in number) which allegedly set forth the
prevailing wages, hours of work, and other conditions applicable to the Respondent's
plant.
1202 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
enumerated them to the company."" Respondent suggested that the Union study
the rules "and make a proposal on them." Dernoncourt stated he was familiar
with the rules since he had seen them in connection with negotiations with
another employer and that he "didn't need to think about them," that he "was,
ready to take the working rules and our original proposal and go over them both
together and work out an agreement and a contract." Respondent "said that
we ought to take the rules and study them over and there would be no use dis-
cussing them at the present time." The meeting adjourned about 5 o'clock. At
that meeting Dernoncourt again "asked for a meeting the next day. The com-
pany refused."
On June 26, 1950, at the 2:30 p. m. shift change, employees of the first ands
second shifts assembled in the millyard. Union Shop Steward Hall and other
union members then went to Respondent's main office to talk with Munson.
They met Munson standing in the doorway and told him "we'd like to talk to you."
Munson looked out the door and said "All that crowd with you?" Hall re-
sponded "Yes sir, I am just a spokesman for the crowd." Munson said "All
right let's go out on the mill yard where they can all hear. They can't get im
here." In the millyard Munson got up on the loading platform, looked over the-
crowd, and said, "Hall, now what have you got to say?" Hall said , "Mr. Munson.
we have come out to meet, talk to you, try to get you to meet with our repre-
sentatives and our committee on this contract, try to get you to meet and do.
something about it. We'd love to have a meeting on Wednesday, if possible,
if not why as soon as possible." Munson answered, "Is that all you have to say"
and upon receiving an affirmative reply stated, "Well, I'll tell you. I can't meet
Wednesday and I don't know when I can meet. You people have a respectable
job. If you want to go in there and go to work, why go on. If you don't, why
there is the gate." Munson then turned to the audience and said there would
be no one telling him how to run his mill, he had run it satisfactorily in the past
and that he expected to do so in the future, and told the employees that their
jobs were waiting if they care to go to work if they didn't, move off the mill
property. Munson then approached Jesse Turner, president of the Union's local,
who was milling around with the other employees and said, "Clear the yards
out, get these people off of this ground." At the time of the hearing the strike-
was still in progress. Shortly thereafter, Turner and J. R. Compton, vice
president of the union local, approached Munson and tried to schedule a nego-
tiating meeting. Munson told them he couldn't meet that week, didn't know
when he could, and that "he thought that he might meet, he would call a repre-
sentative, get in touch with him and let him know when it would be possible."
Prior to the cessation of work on June 26, 1950, Alvie Hill and Pete Groff'
undertook to dig a well at the residence of Bert Slagle. This well digging enter-
prise was not connected with their employment by Respondent, and Hill and Groff
on this enterprise got equal wages and did the same work. Hill and Groff
also worked for Respondent, Hill as a roving hauler and Groff as night fore-
man over the cloth room. As foreman, Groff "was to inspect the cloth that
came from over the folder and see ,after the boys that-see that they done their
job." Groff assigned work to various people on the shift and changed them
from job to job. In addition employees on the night shift in the cloth room
turned to Groff for advice, counsel, instructions, or help. The undersigned
believes and finds that as night foreman, Groff was a supervisor for Respondent-
Within 2 or 3 days after the cessation of work on June 26, 1950, as noted above,
and while Hill and Groff were engaged in their well digging enterprise and
is The differences between the Union's proposed contract and Respondent 's notice are
readily apparent upon examination of Appendices A and B attached hereto and further
elaboration does not appear warranted. '
DENISON COTTON MILLS COMPANY 1203
"talking about the strike," Groff told Hill that Mr. Munson was not going to
sign a contract and said, "You just as well forget it and go back to work tonight."
By letter dated July 8, 1950, Dernoncourt requested a meeting for July 12, 1950,
at 10 a. in. Respondent answered by telegram "Unable to meet July 12th." By
letter dated July 12, 1950, Dernoncourt requested a meeting for July 15 at 9 a. in.
By letter dated July 13, 1950, Gillespie answered
Your letter of July 12 has been referred to the writers attention.
We were advised that the strike concerned reinstatement of a foreman.
We will not meet to discuss that subject,16 nor will we meet in any con-
tinuous session.
We will meet you on July 24th at 3: 00 P. M. at the usual place for
further contract negotiations.
Please confirm.
By letter dated July 18, 1950, Dernoncourt advised Gillespie "We will meet
with you on July 24th at 3:00 P. M. as you requested in your letter of July
15th." [sic] _
At the meeting on July 24, 1950, the Union's proposed contract (Appendix A)
and Respondent's "NOTICE TO ALL EMPLOYEES" (Appendix B) were dis-
cussed. Dernoncourt testified he "maintained that the company did not have
an agreement -clause in its working rules [Appendix B], therefore it wasn't am
agreement. The company maintained that on the last page of their working
rules was basically an agreement clause. There was much discussion on it.
No agreement was reached that it was." Dernoncourt testified further concern-
ing this meeting.
A. I suggested that we agree to clauses or parts of the contract, clause
by clause. The company said that they couldn't agree or wouldn't agree
to anything only a contract in its entirety, that they would have to see it in
writing before they agreed to it.
I took the clause, bulletin boards, and at that time suggested wording
along this line, that the union could use the company's existing bulletin:
boards for the posting of routine union notices, such notices first to be ap-
proved by the plant manager and a copy given, a copy of the notice given,
to him for his files.
The company again said they wouldn't agree to any part of the contract
clause by clause, that they would have to agree to it in its entirety. We
discussed, and I tried to work out certain other wordings on various clauses,
I don't remember exactly what they were ; I remember bulletin boards was
one of them.
Q. Do you remember, Mr. Dernoncourt, whether or not there was any
specific discussion with regard to the recognition clause?
# i M # # t 4
A. I don't remember whether there was or not. We took several clauses
of the two contracts and discussed them. I remember bulletin boards be-
cause of the incident we had prior to that."
At the July 24 meeting Respondent requested that the Union take the Union's
proposed contract (Appendix A) and Respondent's "NOTICE To ALL EMPLOYEES"
(Appendix B) and work out a compromise proposal and submit it for further
discussion. By letter dated July 26, 1950, Dernoncourt submitted to Respondent
ss The record reveals that a foreman had been fired from the mill or resigned from the
mill 3 or 4 days prior to the strike on June 26
5e On cross-examination Dernoncourt testified that Respondent refused "to put any
-particular clause of the actual,contract into effect until the whole thing was worked out,'"
a"d that this altered the position taken be the Respondent at the December 15 meeting.
1204 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
"a copy of the Union's proposal on a contract .. ." attached hereto as Appendix
C'T and requested a meeting for August 2.
By letter dated July 31, 1950, Gillespie, Jr., advised Dernoncourt :
We have your letter of July 26th enclosing copy of the Union's proposal
for contract between Denison Cotton Mill Company and the Textile Workers
Union of America.
We understood that you were to take the Union's original proposal,,and our
counter-proposal, and work out what you thought would be an acceptable
compromise between the two proposals and we would then study the com-
promise proposal and set a meeting date with you.
It appears from a hasty reading of the proposal which you sent in, that
you have made no effort whatsoever to reach a compromise proposal, but
have followed substantially the form of your original proposal, including in
the new proposal, matters which we have definitely advised you would not be
acceptable to the Company. The wage schedule which you propose appears
to follow your earlier proposals which we have consistently rejected.
We will be unable to meet with you on August 2nd. When we have had
time to carefully study the proposal which you have presented, we will sched-
ule a meeting and discuss it with you.
By letter dated August 7, 1950, Dernoncourt wrote Gillespie :
DEAR MR. GILLESPIE :
On July 31, I received a letter from you stating that you would study
our proposal and set a meeting for negotiations. It has been a week and I
have received no word from you in the matter of negotiations between the
Company you represent, the Denison Cotton Mills, and the Textile Workers
Union of America.
At this time, I request a meeting for Monday, August 14th, at 10: 00 in the
morning.
Sincerely yours,
WAYNE L. DERNONCOURT,
Represent attiue.
By letter dated August 11, 1950, Gillespie advised Dernoncourt :
DEAR MR. DERNONCOURT :
In the contract negotiations at Denison Cotton Mill, the Company went
over in detail the several articles of the Union proposal, and then made a
counter-proposal. In our last meeting, it was apparent that the two pro-
posals were radically different. The company suggested that you take the
two proposals and endeaver to offer some compromise proposal, embodying
so far as possible, the Company's view where acceptable to the Union and
the Union's view where the Union declined to modify its original request.
It was our hope that an efforI to compromise on your part would open the
way to an agreement.
We have carefully analyzed the written proposal which you sent us for
the meeting. It does not represent a compromise, but a restatement and
strict adherence to the demands of the Union which have already been re-
viewed. Further discussion of such proposals serves no purpose. There-
fore, there will be no meeting on August 14th, or at any time thereafter,
until some feasible avenue of resolving the differences is suggested.
Yours truly,
GILLESPIE & GILLESPIE.
11 Since the Union's proposal of November 30 and proposal of July 26 are attached hereto
as appendices, a detailed comparison of these documents is not made herein.
DENISON COTTON MILLS COMPANY 1205
By letter dated August 12, 1950, Dernoncourt advised Gillespie :
DEAR MR. GILLESPIE :
In answer to your letter of August 11th, in which you declined to meet
with the Union for the purpose of negotiating a contract between the parties
until some feasible avenue resolving the differences is suggested . The best
method for resolving the differences that exist is to set down across the
bargaining table and discuss and agree upon the clauses one at a time. This
has always been the way of carrying on negotiations in a matter of this sort.
You state that when the Union sent its proposal it was merely the restate-
ment of the Union 's other proposal . I might point out that the Union pro-
posal was modified in several instances At our last meeting with the
Company,, the Union suggested that the Company and the Union go over
both proposals clause by clause and reach a tentative agreement on it. The
Company stated that it was unable to do that therefore , the impression left
was that the Company was not going to change its mind on any of its
proposals and was going to stick to their proposal.
I still say and will maintain that the best way to resolve these differences
is across the bargaining table. I wish to state also that the Union is ready,
willing and able to meet with the Company at any and all times for the
purpose of negotiating and consummating a contract as provided in the
Labor Relations Act of 1947.
Sincerely yours,
WAYNE L. DERNONCOURT,
Representative.
On August 25, 1950, Dernoncourt wrote Gillespie :
DEAR MR GILLESPIE'
On August 12th, I wrote you a letter in answer to your letter of August
11th, in which you declined to meet with the Union for the purpose of nego-
tiating a contract . In my letter of August 12th , I outlined a method in
which these differences could be resolved and to date I have had no answer
from you on our proposal of dissolving the situation.
I am at this time requesting a meeting between representatives of your
company and the union for Tuesday , August 29, for the purpose of negotiat-
ing a contract , the meeting to be held at 2: 00 p. m. at the usual place.
Sincerely yours,
WAYNE L. DERNONCOURT,
Representative.
By telegram dated August 28, Gillespie advised Dernoncourt ;
UNABLE TO MEET AS YOU REQUEST AT THIS TIME. AM CONFER-
RING WITH MANAGEMENT . WILL WRITE YOU LATER.
• H. GILLESPIE, JR.
On September 8, 1950, Dernoncourt wrote W. B. Munson, III, vice president of
Respondent:
'On August 25, 1950, I wrote to Mr. Gillespie, your attorney ,, requesting
a meeting for August 29th, for the purpose of negotiating a contract. On
August 28 , I received a wire from him stating that you would be unable
to meet on August 29 and that he was conferring with management and
would write me later.
I have not heard from Mr . Gillespie since that date, so at this time, I am
requesting a meeting between management and the union for the purpose of
986209-52-vol 97--77
1206 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
negotiating a contract , the meeting to be held Monday , September 11th, at
1:00 p. in. at the usual place.
By letter dated September 9, 1950, Gillespie advised Dernoncourt :
Perhaps you are correct that our differences can be resolved by a clause
by clause discussion of the Union and Company proposals . I certainly did
not mean to suggest that we would refuse to meet with the Union as required
by the Labor Act . My thought was that we had already. discussed the
matter clause by clause - and that the time had come for thg Union and Com-
pany to try to find a middle ground between the two proposals.
You stated that you were going to submit what you had in mind as a
compromise proposal , and when I found that it was simply a rehash of what
already had been rejected , I saw no particular point in discussing it further.
I feel that it is your duty under the law to submit a bona fide counter-
proposal , not simply to restate your original position . When you do so, it
will be our desire to discuss such a proposal "clause by clause" for the
purpose of reaching an agreement.
The Company will not make any concession whatsoever to settle the
strike, but the Company is willing to meet and negotiate toward some
arrangement that will result in a written contract satisfactory to everybody
concerned.
This letter is in reply to your Registered letter ' of September 8th addressed
to the Company , and management has requested again that you direct
all correspondence to me.
By letter dated September 12, 1950 , Dernoncourt advised Gillespie :
In answer to your letter of September 9, I feel that the way to dissolve
our differences is across the bargaining table and discussing the contract
clause by clause thus reaching an agreement on it.
You also state that you feel that I should present a bona fide counter-
proposal . This is to inform you that I have submitted a bona fide counter-
proposal to you for your consideration and it is our desire and willingness
to meet with you and the company you represent at any time to negotiate
on both our proposals , which to date the company and yourself have refused
to meet with the union Committee and me to discuss the proposals.
On September 18, 1950, the Union filed the charges herein, a copy of which
was received by Respondent on September 21, 1950.
On January 6, 1951 , Gillespie advised NLRB Field Examiner John Funke,
as follows :
We received your letter of December 29th and the Company is willing
to meet with the Union for the purpose of fulfilling its obligation to bargain.
It would be very helpful , however , if the Union showed some indication of
a' desire to compromise its views and its continued refusal to meet any
Company request makes it difficult to hope for an agreement.
We are sending Mr. Dernoncourt a copy of this letter with the sugges-
tion that he name a date when he would like to meet with the Company.
In view of the fact that the annual meetings of the stockholders and
directors of the Company take place on January 8th, it would probably
be best to meet some time thereafter.
By letter dated January 8 , 1951 , Dernoncourt advised Gillespie :
I received a copy of your letter which was sent to Mr. John P . Funke,
Field Examiner for the National Labor Relations Board, and which was
dated January 6, 1951.
DENISON COTTON MILLS COMPANY .1207
The Union has always been ready and willing to meet with the Company
to negotiate in good faith. At this time, the Union will be ready to meet for
negotiations with the Company on Thursday, January 11, 1:00 o'clock in
the afternoon at the usual meeting place.
If you are unable to meet at that time, please inform me as the committee
and I will be there unless we hear from you. -
On January 11, 1951, the negotiators for the Union assembled at the place
where the parties usually met. Respondent's representative did not appear at
the meeting and Dernoncourt and Moore, another representative of the TWUA,
then called at Gillespie's office and were given a copy of a telegram and told it
had been sent to Dernoncourt's office in Dallas. The telegram stated :
Due to conditions outlined our letter of January 6th, unable to meet at.
Denison 11th. Suggest meeting January 17th, usual place , 3:00 P. M.
.r -1 11 - - -
'. -
-
- - --GILLESPIE & GILLESPIE.
The next and last meeting of the parties was held January 17, 1951. Dernon-
court's testimony on -direct examination concerning this, meeting follows :
Q. Will you tell us what occurred at that January J951 meeting?
A. We-the company said at that meeting that they weren't going to
recognize our counterproposal as a counterproposal at all, that there was
no change in it from the original proposal that the union made. I pointed
out that there were several changes in the contract that we had modified
considerably.,
The company said that the changes the union had made were the least
objectionable changes or least objectionable parts of the contract to the
company.
I then asked the company if I put those changes I had made back into
the contract would they agree to that contract. The company said no, they
wouldn't agree to it, that the changes the union had made were the least
objectionable.
I then asked the company if they were willing to go through the contract
or the counterproposal by the union, Exhibit 68, I think that was it.
Do you want to identify that document?
Trial Examiner WHEATLEY. You just did.
The WITNESS. Did I? All right I didn't know. And the company said
as far as they were concerned that we would just be spinning our wheels,
that they weren't considering the union's counterproposal as a counter-
proposal, just a restatement of our facts.
I suggested then that we go through it clause by clause and we discussed the
arbitration clause. The company said that there was no change in our
arbitration clause. I agreed that there was no change in it, but that the
company's working rules had nothing in it about arbitration.
The company said they didn't like the American Arbitration Association.
I said, "Well, let's work out some other way of arbitrating our differences."
The company said they would listen to any suggestion that we had and
consider them, but that they wouldn't agree to anything clause by clause, that
they would have to see everything in writing.
There was no agreement reached on anything. The company also said that
it wasn't the union's duty to meet all of its objections to their original
proposal and present a counterproposal along these lines.
Trial Examiner WHEATLEY. What's the number of the company's original
proposal?
1208 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Mr. KANE. General Counsel's Exhibit 67. -
Trial Examiner WHEATLEY. Thank you.
The WITNESS. Once again I asked that we go.,through.tlle union's counter-
proposal, 68, Exhibit 68, GC Exhibit 68, and the company said they would only
read their original objections to our 'original proposal, 66, and the meeting
adjourned.
By Mr. KANE :
Q. Was there any discussion, Mr. Dernoncourt, before the end of the meet-
ing with regard to any subsequent meetings between the parties?
A. At that meeting I asked that the Federal Mediation and Conciliation
Service be brought in to see if they could help us arrive at a contract. The
company stated that they were willing to talk to the Federal Mediation and
Conciliation Service, but they never said that they would meet with the three-
party-with the three parties in one room. They evaded that question.
Mr. GILLESPIE. We object to the conclusion of the witness. -
Trial Examiner WHEATLEY. Sustained. State what happened.
The WITNESS. The company'evaded-the question.
Trial Examiner WHEATLEY. State what happened. What do you mean
they evaded? What did they say?
The WITNESS. They didn't answer the question. When I asked if they
would meet with the Mediation Service the union and themselves, they didn't
answer the question. -
Trial Examiner WHEATLEY. They just didn't answer at all?
The WITNESS. They just didn't answer at all. They said once, when I
asked once, they said they would talk to the Federal Mediation and Concilia-
tion Service at any time.
Trial Examiner WHEATLEY. Is that what they-said at this meeting?
The WITNESS. And then I asked them again and they didn't answer if
they would meet with the three groups together, the Commissioner from
the Federal Mediation Service, the company and the union.
Trial Examiner WHEATLEY. Let me get this straight. You asked if they
-would meet with the Mediation Service?
The WITNESS. That's right.
Trial Examiner WHEATLEY. They said yes?
The WITNESS. They said they would talk to the Federal Mediation and
Conciliation Service at any time.
Trial Examiner WHEATLEY. Then what happened next?
The WITNESS. I asked them if they would meet. I asked them originally
if they would meet with the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service,
ourselves, the union and the company, sit in a three-party meeting. They
said they would talk with the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service
at any time. I then asked if they would meet with the Federal Mediation
and Conciliation Service then and they didn't answer.
On cross-examination Dernoncourt testified :
Q. Well, isn't it true, Mr. Dernoncourt, that at that meeting we went
back through your proposal made in July, General Counsel's Exhibit 68, and
with reference to most of the paragraphs read you our original objections
to your original proposal, General Counsel's Exhibit No. 66?
A. No. You stated that your objections to our counterproposals would
be the same as your objections to our original proposals and that as far as
the company was concerned you were just spinning your-we were just
spinning our wheels.
DENISON COTTON MILLS COMPANY 1209
Q. ' We stated, too, that on the whole your whole new proposal, Exhibit
No. 68, was substantially the same as your original proposal, Exhibit No. 66,
did we not?
A. You first stated that there was no change in our cofmterproposal from
our original proposal. I then pointed out changes in our proposals, our
two proposals.
Q. The net effect of it was that there was no substantial change, wasn't it?
A Your said then that I had only removed the least objectionable parts
or the parts of the contract that was least objectionable to the company.
Q. And we took the position at that meeting that with the objectionable
part still in there substantially the same we were not making any progress'
with further meetings?
A. Will you restate that, please?
Q. I said, we took the position at that meeting that with your original
proposals which we found objectionable still in that we were making no
progress with further meetings, we were spinning our wheels?
A. I guess you said that. I don't follow the question, what you mean, our
counterproposal was still objectional to-the same as our original proposal.
Q. It was substantially the same, and as long as you were maintaining
that position we weren't getting anywhere at the meetings.
A. You said we weren't getting anywhere until we removed the rest of the
objectionable parts of our contract.
Q How Ion,-, did that meeting last, Dlr. Dernoncourt?
A Oh, I guess the meeting lasted about, I'd say, an hour, maybe an hour
and fifteen minutes.
Q. Was it closer to 37 minutes?
A. Might have been ; I don't know. I said I thought it lasted about an
hour, maybe an hour and fifteen minutes.
Q. And you got up and walked out?
A. We dud ; after the company said that they wouldn't agree to anything
and there was no use going over the two proposals, we walked out.
Q We asked you to submit us an outline to comply with our objections,
didn't we? _
A. No. - _ r
Q Didn't I tell you to give us something to work on, we--will not cate-
gorically • accept any single unit of- the contract, we want a whole contract
to be submitted for approval?
A. You told me that you would not agree to any clause section by section,
you would only agree to a contract in its entirety, if that's what you mean.
That's what you told me.
Q. The only thing that we refused to discuss was the proposals that were
substantially the same as your original proposal, wasn't- it?
A. You refused to negotiate on the basis of both proposals when I asked
you to negotiate on the basis,*take both proposals and work out the contract
clause by clause. That's when you said-
Q. We told you to submit a compromise between the two and we would
be glad to meet further with you, didn't we?
A. No.
Q. What did we tell you?
A. Not at that meeting.
Q. We had told you that before?
A. You told us that at the July meeting before I submitted our counter-
proposal-on July 26, if that is the date that I presented it, and I think it is.
1210 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Q. In July or January, you wouldn't draw anything In-betweeif the two
proposals?
A. I had made changes in our original proposal on July 26 when I sent to
you through the mails the original proposal. From that time on I couldn't
get a meeting with the company to negotiate on them and find out anything
about it until our meeting of January 17.
Mr. DANE. Mr. Examiner, for the record, these references to July 26 are to
General Counsel's Exhibit No. 68.
Trial Examiner WHEATLEY. Thank you.
By Mr. GILLESPIE
Q. But you had received the two letters, General Counsel's Exhibit 47,
dated July 31, and General Counsel's Exhibit 49, dated August 11?
A. I think I stated I have. -
As stated above, the parties did not meet after January 17, 1951. However,
they did exchange correspondence. This correspondence is self-explanatory and
is attached hereto as Appendix D.
Grant Williams, representative of the TWUA, testified that since receipt of
Gillespie's letter of March 1, 19:1 (see Appendix D), he (Williams) has not
requested any further meetings because he felt from the language of the letter
that Respondent was to advise "as to whether or not the company was willing to
meet again," and that he has not "received any further communications since
that of March 1 from the company."
Daisy Cagle, a doffer and an active union member, testified that "along the
first of January" 1951 her brother, Arthur Edgett, weave shop foreman,38 in the
presence of their parents and at the home of their parents, said, "we was wasting
our time out there, that we wasn't going to get nowhere, that Mr. Munson wasn't
never going to sign no contract, that he had too mach money."
On Sunday, April 8, 1951, while Mable Preston, a weaver, was on picket duty
at the gate to Respondent's plant, Lem Coffin 1° said to her "Mable, I think you
just better come back to work because the man that's running your job is making
a lot more money than you made?° and I think it would be wise if you come on
back." Preston replied that she "wouldn't come back under no circumstances and
crossed [sic] the picket line."
Within the month preceding April 24, 1951, Pat Moore, night foreman in the
card room," called Shelton Merrell, a doffer, and asked if he wanted to go back
to work and upon receiving a negative reply, told Merrell "They have started a
night run" and "they told me [Moore] to ask you if you wanted to come back."
Moore also told Merrell, "That it would soon be filled up and there wouldn't be
any vacancy" and that if Merrell "wanted to come back why to come back now."
18 Conceded to be a supervisor.
19 See footnote 10, above.
20 There is no evidence that the man running Preston's job was in fact making m-re
money than Preston made and the undersigned rejects the contention of the General
Counsel that this statement by Coffin is evidence that in fact nonstrikers were paid higher
wages than received by strikers prior to the date of the strike. At the hearing, the
undersigned took under consideration Respondent's motion to strike this testimony. This
testimony is deemed relevant and material to the allegations of the complaint, as amended
at the hearing, that Respondent solicited its striking employees to return to work on an
individual basis and said motion is therefore denied.
n The record reveals that Pat Moore is a second hand in the card room . In its Decision
and Direction of Election in Case No. 16-RC-425 involving this same Company , the Board
found that Respondent's "second hands are supervisors within the meaning of the Act "
A. similar finding was made by the Board in Denison Cotton Mill Company, 63 NLRB 929.
No reason appears for deviating from these findings by the Board.
DENISON COTTON MILLS COMPANY - . 1211
In addition, Moore told Merrell that he "could make about a dollar an hour
now." n Merrell testified that prior to the cessation of work on June 26, 195U, he
was paid a basic rate of &31/•, cents an hour and additional pay according to his
production, but that his extra pay did not exceed "2 or 3 dollars" per week.
Within the "couple of months" prior to April 24. 1951, Pat Moore, second hand
in the card room, called at the home of Catherine Dunnaway, battery filler in
the weave shop, and asked Dunnaway if she would "like to go back to work."
Dunnaway stated she did not want to return to Respondent's employ "without a
contract" and Moore told her that she had "better go back" and she would "make
more money than I [Dunnaway] made before I came out." Moore told Dunn-
away he was hiring all the hands and said to her "Come on back, I'll give you a
job.,,
Conclusions
A. Refusal to bargain
Although on and after November 30, 1949, the Respondent met with the Union
on 10 occasions and 'considered the Union's contract proposals and submitted
counterproposals of its own, Respondent did not enter into the discussions with
an open and fair mind and with a sincere purpose to find a basis of agreement
touching upon wages, hours, and conditions of employment za It is . not enough
to fulfill the obligation to bargain that an employer meet and negotiate with a
union. The obligation of the Act requires that bargaining shall be conducted in
complete good faith . Although the Act does not compel agreement , it does require
the parties to enter into negotiations with a sincere desire to reach and sign an
agreement . It is believed that Respondent has not complied with this require-
ment. While no one fact is necessarily determinative of Respondent 's good faith
and all elements in the negotiations must be examined and appraised, it is
believed that Respondent 's lack of good faith is evidenced , inter alia, by the
following :
1. Respondent 's repudiation of its oral agreements reached during negotia-
tions. On or about December 15, 1949, Respondent and the Union agreed upon
a temporary grievance procedure and the use of Respondent's bulletin boards
by the Union. Nevertheless, shortly thereafter (in January 1950) when the
Union first attempted to use the bulletin boards, Respondent refused to permit
their use. At about the same time Respondent rejected the Union's attempt, in
accordance with the procedure agreed upon, to deal with it with regard to a
grievance.
2. Respondent ' s delays, in some instances without expressing an excuse, in
arranging for meetings requested by the Union, its setting of conference dates,
and confining the meetings to short periods, manifest an intention to go through
many of the motions of collective bargaining without-an intention to consum-
mate an agreement with the Union, but merely to preserve the appearance of
bargaining. Although the Union voiced its opposition to the shortness of the
meetings and to the failure to have successive meetings , Respondent took a
somewhat casual approach toward its obligation and did nothing to correct con-
ditions which were hampering the negotiations and did nothing to facilitate an
22 There is no evidence that Merrell , if he returned , was to do anything other than what
he had been doing prior to June 26, 1950.
23 It is believed that the activities of Respondent ( set forth above ) occurring on and after
March 22 , 1950, 1 e, those activities falling within 6 months of September 21, 1950, when
the charge was served on Respondent , by themselves , as well as when viewed against the
background of events occurring before March 22, 1950, establish that Respondent refused
to bargain within the meaning cf the Act.
1212 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
early and successful completion-thereof. To the contrary, by its arbitrary refusal
to stay in conference more than 2 hours and to confer on successive days, Respon-
dent delayed and impeded the collective bargaining process. Furthermore, Re-
spondent's refusal on June 20, 1950, to take its own proposal and the Union's
proposal submitted on November 30, 1949, and "go over them both together and
work out an agrement and a contract" and its insistence that the Union take
Respondent's proposal and "study them over," in view of the Union's stated
familiarity with the documents involved and Respondent's obvious familiarity
therewith, suggests an intention to delay and impede the bargaining process and
is not compatible with'a good faith effort to reach agreement by compromise.
3. Respondent's refusal to guarantee any employee more than 75 cents per hour
and its failure to explain its unwillingness to guarantee a higher basic wage
rate, in view of its then prevailing practice of paying some employees a basic
rate higher than 75 cents per hour is the antithesis of a good faith endeavor
to reach an understanding and is further evidence of had faith. If Respondent
was unwilling to modify its opposition to the Union's demands it should at the
very least, have made a genuine and sincere effort to persuade the Union to
accept its position.
4. Respondent's counterproposal (notice to employees) evidences an absence
of sincere intention on the part of Respondent to reach an agreement. In its
external appearance this document denies to the Union the status and prestige
to which it was entitled, to be a party to a mutually satisfactory and binding
collective agreement. In appearance and form this document appears to be
nothing more than a series of rules which Respondent and the Union as signa-
tories agree may be brought to the attention of Respondent's employees and is a
radical departure from the usual and customary collective bargaining agreement.
Furthermore this notice omits provisions which Respondent knew were of vital
importance to the Union. Thus it does not contain a recognition clause, checkoff
provisions or provisions concerning union notices, access to Respondent's premises
by union representatives, wages, workloads and work assignments, holidays,
arbitration, N acation and N acation pay, insurance benefits, or provisions con-
cerning reporting pay, although these matters had been discussed and iu some
instances tentative. agreements reached. In addition, in this notice to employees
Respondent attempts to reserve to itself the unilateral power to decide matters
concerning discharge, hours of work, transfers, and promotions, and to handle
grievances without the participation of union representatives It is axiomatic
that the requirements of bargaining under the Act demand sincere efforts to reach
an agreement. The making of a patently unacceptable counteroffer, under the
circumstances, is indicative of a lack of good faith.
5. While going through the motions of bargaining with the Union, Respondent
engaged contemporaneously in conduct designed to undermine the Union's statics
as the majority representative of its employees. Thus Respondent, through its
supervisory, employees, unlawfully solicited strikers stating that Respondent
would not sign a contract with the Union and promising higher wages and
threatening loss of job with Respondent. Revealing of Respondent's true attitude
at the bargaining table and its predisposition not to bargain in good faith is
Munson's statement to the strikers on June 26, 1950, that "there would be no one
telling him how to run his mill, he had run it satisfactorily in the past and that
he expected to do so in the future "
6. After the Union submitted its second contract proposal (after July 26, 1950),
Respondent took the view that the burden was upon the Union to find some
"feasible avenue of resolving the differences," meaning, apparently, "submission"
or to submit proposals until ultimately one which Respondent would be willing
DENISON COTTON MILLS COMPANY 1213
to discuss would be hit upon-and did not actively cooperate to reconcile the
differences or make any affirmative efforts to reach agreement by compromise.
A genuine impasse may under certain circumstances justify a refusal to meet
further unless advance information is supplied indicating that the further
meeting will not be a repetition of the prior meeting. Should the situation
change or where the advance information indicates a willingness to recede from
or modify a prior proposal, however, it is incumbent upon the other party to
meet upon request and bargain in good faith. The facts herein do not indicate
that a genuine impasse was reached. Furthermore, in its second proposal and
in its correspondence thereafter, the Union indicated a willingness to recede
from or modify its prior proposal 24 Nevertheless, in response to requests for
further meetings, Respondent refused to meet unless the Union presented some-
of either party, personal persuasion, and opportunity to inodi,y demands in
dicated a willingness to "listen to any suggestion." Under these circumstances
Respondent's conduct was the negation of the essence of the bargaining process-
interchange of ideas, communication of facts peculiarly within the knowledge
of either party, personal persuasion, and opportunity to modify demands in
accordance with the total situation revealed at a conference-and was further
evidence of Respondent's lack of good faith.
7. If any further evidence of lack of good faith bargaining is necessary it
can be found in Respondent's failure after March 1, 1951, to contact the Union
about further meetings although Respondent was aware of the change of union
spokesman, of the Union's desires for such meetings, and that the Union felt
"that something may be accomplished by meeting."
B Interference, restraint, or coercion
The legality of Respondent's individual solicitation of the strikers must be
determined against the background in which such solicitation was done. Herein
the solicitation constituted an integral part of the pattern of illegal opposition
to the purposes of the Act as evidenced by Respondent's entire course of con-
duct and was conducted under circumstances, and in a manner, reasonably
calculated to undermine the collective bargaining representative and to demon-
strate that Respondent sought individual rather than collective bargaining 25
The-solicitations by Groff and Edgett, standing alone, do not appear violative
of the Act but when viewed in the light of Respondent's other unfair labor
practices follow and appear to be a part of a pattern of illegal opposition to
the purposes of the Act. The statements of both reflect the expressed position
of Respondent's vice president that "there would be no one telling him [Munson]
how to run his mill" and are. therefore found to be violative of the Act. The
solicitations by Lem Coffin and Pat Moore contain promises of benefit designed
to coerce the strikers into returning to work and are therefore violative of the Act.
C. The strike
The evidence concerning the strike of June 26, 1950, which was still in progress
at the time of the hearing, reveals that it was called because Respondent was
24 Inter alia, the Union reduced its demands concerning minimum wages from 94 cents
to 89 cents per hour, reduced its demands from bulletin boards in each department to use of
existing bulletin boards, reduced its demands concerning occasions when access to the
plant was to be granted union representatives, revised its proposed procedure concerning
discharge and discipline to eliminate details and state merely "the employer in the conduct
of its business shall have the power to discipline or discharge an employee for cause," and
relinquished its demands for definite fatigue allowances.
25 See The Texas Company, 93 NLRB 1358
1214 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
not bargaining in good faith. Upon the entire record, the undersigned finds
that the strike on June 26, 1950, and thereafter, was caused by Respondent's
failure to bargain with the Union in good faith and other unfair labor practices
of Respondent.
The undersigned finds and concludes that the afore-mentioned acts and conduct
of Respondent occurring after March 22, 1950, i. e., those activities falling within
6 months of September 21, 1950, when the charge was served on Respondent,
and thereafter, constitute unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section
8 (a) (1) and (5) of the Act and are unfair labor practices affecting commerce
within the meaning of Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act .26
The Remedy
Respondent's illegal activities, discussed above, and the entire record disclose
a general intent on the part of Respondent to defeat the rights guaranteed
by Section 7 of the Act. Therefore it will be recommended that Respondent cease
and desist, not only from the unfair labor practices herein found, but also
from in any other manner interfering with , restraining, or coercing its employees
in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act, and that Re-
spondent take certain affirmative action designed-to effectuate the policies of
the Act.
As indicated herein, and at the hearing, the undersigned believes the evidence
adduced insufficient to support the allegation of the complaint, as amended,
that Respondent violated the Act by "raising the wages of employees who had
not yet gone on strike." It will, therefore, be recommended that this allegation
be dismissed.
[Recommended Order omitted from publication in ,this volume.]
Appendix A
AGREEMENT
AGREEMENT entered into this -------- day of ____________________, 1949, by
and between Denison Cotton Mill Company Incorporated (hereinafter called
the "Employer"), party of the first part ; and TEXTILE WORKERS UNION OF
AMERICA, CIO (hereinafter referred to as the "Union"), party of the second part.
WITNESSETH
In consideration of the mutual covenants herein contained, the parties hereto
agree as follows :
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF THE AGREEMENT
Article I
The purpose of this Agreement is to provide orderly collective bargaining re-
lations, to secure prompt and equitable disposition of grievances, to establish
fair wages, hours and other working conditions, to maintain a harmonious
relationship between the Union and the Employer, to prevent strikes and lock-
outs, and to promote the stability and prosperity of the textile industry for
the benefit of all who are dependent on that Industry.
RECOGNITION AND UNION SECURITY
Article II
(a) Recognition: The Employer hereby recognizes and will deal with the
Union as the exclusive representative for the purposes of collective bargaining
20 Respondent 's motion to dismiss the complaint , as amended , is hereby denied
DENISON COTTON MILLS COMPANY 1215
with respect to wages, rates of pay, hours of work and other conditions of em-
ployment for all production and maintenance employees, excluding supervisors,
office and clerical employees.
The terms "employee" and "employees", as used in this Agreement, refer to
each employee and all employees of the Employer for whom the Union is recog-
nized as the exclusive representative for the purposes of collective bargaining
in accordance with this Article II.
(b) Check-Off: Upon the filing with the office of the Employer of a written
request for such deduction, signed by the individual employee, the Employer will,
pursuant to its terms, during the fall term of this Agreement and any exten-
sion or renewal thereof, deduct weekly from the wages of each employee who
is a member of the' Union, Union membership dues, including initiation fees,
in such amounts as shall be fixed pursuant to the By-Laws of the Local and the
Constitution of the Union. The total amount so deducted during each month
shall be remitted to the Union or its designee, not later than the 10th day of
the succeeding month. The form of such written requests for the deduction
of dues shall be as set forth in Exhibit "B" appended to this Agreement.
(c) Bulletin Boards: The Employer agrees to furnish the Union with Bulletin
Boards in each department on which to Union shall have the right to post notices
of Union meeting's and notices of other official Union business.
(d) Access to Premises: A representative or representatives of the Union shall
have access to the plant of the Employer for the purpose of adjusting grievances,
negotiating the settlement of disputes, investigating working conditions and gen-
erally for the purpose of carrying into effect-the provisions, and aims of this
Agreement Whenever possible he shall snake an appointment in advance for
such visits. In any event the representative of the Union shall on arrival at
the plant clear through the regular channels of the Employer for receiving
visitors and may be accompanied by a representative of the Employer on any
visit into the plant.
DISCHARQE AND DISCIPLINE
Article III
The power of discipline and discharge shall be exercised with justicb and due
regard to the reasonable rights of the employees.
In all cases of discipline or discharge, the Employer shall immediately= present
a written statement of its reasons to the Chairman of the General Shop Com-
mittee, if available ; or '- any '-other' member-- of-the General Shop Com-
mittee. If the Committee intends. to contest such disciplinary action or-dis-
charge it shall, within one (1) week after such presentation , file a written
grievance with the mill Superintendent or his representative. Otherwise, its
right to such a contest shall be deemed ,to have,been'waived. ,
Such grievances, if not adjusted within two (2) weeks thereafter between
representatives of the Employer and the Union, shall be settled by arbitration
as provided in this Agreement. -
Should it be determined that any employee was disciplined or discharged un-
justly, the employee shall be restored to his former status and the arbitrator
shall determine the amount of back pay , if any , to be paid.
WAGES
Article IV
(a) Minimum Wage: Ninety-four cents (94) per hour shall be the minimum
for all employees.
. (b) Wage Schedule: The hourly rates, base rates and expected piece rate
earnings for piece rate workers which are effective during this Agreement, are
1216 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
set forth in a Schedule marked "A", attached hereto and made a part . hereof.
Any changes effected in Schedule "A" through negotiation or arbitration , shall be
reduced to writing and attached to Schedule "A" as an amendment hereto.
(c) Transfers : Employees who are temporarily transferred to work on jobs
other than their regular jobs , shall receive the rates of pay applicable thereto,
or their regular rates_ whichever is higher ; and under no circumstances shall
any employee suffer a loss of earnings as a result of such transfer.
(d) Wage Revision : Either party tq this Agreement may propose to the other
at any time adjustments in rates of pay or wages by giving the other party writ-
ten notice of the adjustments desired ; whereupon the parties will meet promptly
for discussion and will endeavor in good faith to reach an agreement. If an
agreement is reached within fifteen ( 15) days from the service of the written
notice aforesaid then either party may demand arbitration of the issue or issues
as provided in Article IX of this Agreement ; provided that disagreements with
respect to proposed general wage increases , or general wage decreases , shall not
be subject to arbitration except by mutual consent. It is agreed that the Union
and those it represents shall have the right to strike with respect to non-
arbitrable wage issues and in the event of such occurrence , this Agreement shall
continue in full force and effect.
Request - for a revision under this section shall be in ;writing and- shall be
mailed or delivered to the other party not less than sixty (60) days prior to the
requested revision date. Upon the giving of such written notice , the parties
shall immediately negotiate the request and if they are unable to agree within
fifteen ( 15) days after the receipt thereof , either party may request arbitration
of the dispute under the provisions of Article IX of this Agreement.
(e) Equality : Women employees shall receive the same rates of pay as apply
to men employees when they perform the same work as is performed by men.
(f) Shift Premium: A premium of not less than five (5 ) per cent shall be paid
to all employees for all time worked during the second shift hours . A premium
of not less than ten (10 ) per cent shall be paid to all employees for all time
worked during third shift hours
(g) Reporting Pay:
1. Employees reporting for work on their regularly scheduled shift, or at the
request of the Employer , without at least sixteen ( 16) hours' prior notice that
=their services will not^be needed , and who are not put to work ; shall be paid
four ( 4) hours' pay for reporting.
2. Employees who start working a regular shift shall be guaranteed a minimum
of eight ( 8) hours' pay, unless such employees quit or voluntarily lay off; or are
laid off by reason of emergency forced close of the mill beyond the Employer's
control , in which case each employee involved shall be paid for the time actually
worked or paid for reporting , whichever is greater.
(h) Piece Rate -Provisions:
1. The minimum guaranteed wage for all piece rate jobs shall be shown in
Schedule "A" and piece rates shall be so set that ;the average workerwkhall earn
twenty (20%) per cent above the guaranteed day rate.
2. Piece rates for each different type of construction in each piece work occupa-.
tion shall yield not less than expected earnings for the job, or portion of the job
affected.
3. No new piece rates shall be set unless changes are made in materials,
machine or equipment , methods or conditions . Improved motions and processes
introduced by employees or increased skill shall not result in changes in rates.
The Employer will indicate to the Union the reason for proposing changes in
piece rates. No changes may be made except by mutual agreement or arbitration
as hereinbefore provided.
DENISON COTTON MILLS COMPANY 1217
4. New piece rates shall be set to yield earnings equal to or better than' those
existing at the job.
5. Each employee shall receive for each day's work an amount which shall not
be less than the job guaranteed day rate multiplied by the hours worked by him
in that day.
6. Piece work employees ' production and earnings shall be determined daily and
posted in the department within 24 hours.
7. Any employee on a piece rated job whose normal earning capacity is affected
adversely because of no fault of his own shall be compensated at not less than
his normal average hourly earnings for all time worked while such conditions,
exist.
(i) Wage information : Upon the request of the Union , the Employer agrees to
submit the low, high and average hourly earnings , exclusive of overtime and
bonus payments of piece and incentive mate employees - by-job classification and
the number of employees in each job classification . Such requests shall not be-
made more frequently than once each quarter.
The Employer will provide the Union, and keep up to date, a list of all rates,,
classifications and job descriptions in effect in the mill.
The Employer will post and keep up to date a list of all piece rates in effect,
at the mill.
(j) Payment of Wages: Payment of wages shall be made on the job on Em-
ployer time not later than Friday afternoon of each week , and shall be in cash
or pay cheek , with recognition for legitimate deductions including Union dues
and initiation fees.
WORK LOADS AND WORK ASSIGNMENTS
Article V
Changes in work assignments may be made by the Employer for the purpose
of insuring the efficient operation of the mill and obtaining and maintaining
reasonable work loads.
All work loads shall provide the following fatigue allowances, which allowances
are defined for this purpose as being the time during which the employee is not
required to perform any duties of the job:
Doffers, spinning----------------------------------------- 30%
Weavers------------------------------------------------- 20%
Spinners------------------------------------------------- 18%,
Roving Frame Tenders----------------------------------- 18%
Drawing Frame Tenders ---------------------------------- 150/0
Spooler Tenders------------------------------------------ 18%
Picker Tenders ------------------------------------------ 15%
Card Tenders-------------------------------------------- 15%
Battery Hands------------------------------------------- 15%
All others (except Loom Fixers)-------------------------15%a
The above percentages shall be computed on the basis of total time rather
than on working time.
All changes in work assignments shall be described as belonging in one of the
following three, classes :
(1) Routine Changes: Routine changes are those which result from altera-
tions in construction of existing jobs and require no change in methods , machinery
or equipment.
(2) Technological Changes: Technological changes are those which result from,
changes in equipment or machines used on the job.
1218 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
(3) Other Changes: All other changes are those which are neither routine
nor technological in character.
(a) Routine Changes: The Employer shall have the right to institute routine
changes as conditions require. Whenever requested by the Union there shall
be discussion of such changes between the Union and management representa-
tives. If any differences shall develop between the parties with respect to
routine changes and which are not settled by mutual agreement, such differences
shall be submitted for final and binding decision to arbitration, as hereinafter
provided in this Agreement. The employer shall notify the Shop Steward
in advance of any routine change. The Employer will furnish all information
which is necessary to a complete understanding of the proposed change.
(b) Technological Changes: Management shall first inform the Union of the
fact that a change is to be made, of the approximate date of its installation,
the nature thereof, proposed duties and.job assignment, and the expected earn-
ings on a mutually agreed upon form. The parties shall meet and discuss the
proposal at least two (2) weeks before the day fixed for the institution of
such change. The Employer will furnish all information which is necessary to
a complete understanding of the proposed change.
The Employer may install the proposed change for a trial period of four (4)
weeks which may be extended by mutual agreement. During such trial period,
the employees shall be paid no less than their previous average hourly earnings
for the previous quarter as established by the Social Security records. In the
event final agreement during or subsequent to the trial period results in higher
rates of pay, the employees shall be paid retroactively to the date of assignment
to the job. Within fifteen (15) days of the expiration of the trial period, the
Union, if dissatisfied, may present a written statement of its grievances, and
if the same shall not be satisfactorily adjusted by negotiations between the
parties within five (5) days thereafter, the matter may be submitted by the
Union to arbitration for final and binding decision.
(c) Other Changes: There shall be no changes in established work assignments
unless mutually agreed upon made in accordance with the following procedure:
The Employer or the Union may request changes in established work assign-
ments which are neither routine nor technological in character, and, if within
fifteen (15) days after negotiation between the parties, upon such request, the
parties shall be unable to agree, the matter may be submitted to arbitration by
either party hereto for final and binding decision as to the proposed change
and applicable rates of pay. The Employer will furnish all information which
is necessary to a complete understanding of the proposed change.
(d) Earnings Guarantee: The average hourly earnings of any group of
employees affected by a new or changed work assignment shall not be reduced
below the average hourly earnings of the group on the old work assignment:
HOURS OF WORK AND OVERTIME
Article VI
A. Hours of Work: The regular hours of work per shift shall be eight (8)
consecutive hours per day (exclusive of a one (1) hour lunch period) which is
hereby established, and a forty (40) hour per week from Monday to Friday,
inclusive. Each employee shall be permitted to work on his job if it runs
unless otherwise specifically provided herein.
Changes in the present starting time and closing time of shifts shall be
subject to agreement with the Union.
B. Overtime: Overtime shall be governed by the following provisions.
BENISON COTTON MILLS COMPANY 1219
1. Excess Hours: All hours worked in excess of eight (8) hours in any one
day, all hours worked in excess of any regularly scheduled shift of less than
eight (8) hours by employees so scheduled, and all hours worked in excess of
forty (40) in any one week without pyramiding, however, shall be paid for
at the rate of time and one-half,
2. Work on Saturdays: Work performed on Saturdays shall be paid for at
the rate of one and one-half times the employee's regular rate of pay.
3. Sunday Work: Twice the regular rates of pay shall be paid for all work
performed on Sundays.
C. Overtime not to be Pyramided: Where particular. work falls within two
fall on an unscheduled" work day. If any of the above-mentioned holidays shall
be paid.
PAID HOLIDAYS
Article VII
New Year's Day, National Memorial Day, Fourth of July, Labor Day, Armistice
Day, Thanksgiving Day, and Christmas Day are paid holidays even though they
fall on an unscheduled work day. If any of the above-mentioned holidays shall
fall on a Sunday, the succeeding Monday shall be deemed the holiday.
Holiday pay shall be eight (8) hours at the employee's average' straight time
hourly earnings for the week in which the holiday occurs, or, if the employee
does not work during such week, then for the most recent week prior to the
holiday during which he worked.
An employee who works on one of these paid holidays shall be paid at the
rate of one and one-half times his regular rate for all hours worked in addition
to his holiday pay.
ADJUSTMENTS OF GRIEVANCES
Article VIII
A. Procedure: Should any employee have any grievance, an earnest effort
shall be made to adjust such grievance immediately in the following manner.
(1) Step No. 1: Between the Shop Steward and the Immediate Supervisor,
with the aggrieved employee at the employee's discretion.
(2) Step No. 2: Between the Shop Steward and the Department Overseer
with the aggrieved employee at the employees discretion. If not adjusted at
this step, the Shop Steward or the employee shall reduce the grievance to
writing and submit it to the General Shop Committee.
(3) Step No. 3: Between the General Shop Committee and the Plant Superin-
tendent, and the aggrieved employee and Union Business Agent in their discre-
tion ; provided that the General Shop Committee shall have submitted a written
statement of the grievance to the Employer at least forty-eight (48) hours prior
to the grievance meeting. The Plant Superintendent shall reduce his answer
to writing and deliver it to the Committee within five (5) days.
(4) Step No. 4: Between a representative of the Union and a representative of
executive management, with the General Shop Committee in its discretion.
(5) Step No. 5: If the grievance shall not have been adjusted by the above
procedure either party may submit it to arbitration in accordance with Article
IX hereof.
(B) Grievance Meetings: The Plant Superintendent shall meet with the Gen-
eral Shop Committee at least twice per month on regularly scheduled days which
may be changed by mutual consent, but which are hereby tentatively set for the
First Monday and Third Monday at Two Oclock P. M. for the purpose of adjusting
grievances. The Employer's representative of executive management shall meet
1220 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
with the Union 's representative and the General Grievance Committee upon
request and reasonable notice.
The Employer agrees to pay for time actually lost by Shop Stewards, the
General Shop Committee , and the aggrieved employees in attending grievance
meetings , arbitration hearings , and contract negotiations.
NO STRIKES OR LOCKOUTS
Article IX
(a) As to any dispute subject to arbitration , the Unioli agrees that it will not
authorize any strike ( which term includes stoppages or intentional slowdowns
of work by employees ) ; it being specifically understood and agreed , however,
that any strike not expressly authorized or ratified in writing by the General
President of the Union ( a copy of which shall be sent to the Company ) shall be
,deemed for all purposes of unauthorized strike, for which there shall be no
liability on the part of the Union , its Local Unions, or Joint Boards.
(b) As to any dispute not subject to arbitration , the Company agrees that the
Union and those it represents shall have the right to strike and any such strike
shall not be deemed to be a violation of this Agreement , which Agreement shall
continue in full force and effect notwithstanding such strike.
(c) In the event of an unauthorized strike, the Union agrees that upon
receipt of proper notification by telegram or registered mail from the-Company
to the General President of the Union at 99 University Place, New York 3, N. Y.
and to the State Director of the Union for Texas at 1010 Corinth Street, Dallas,
Texas, or such other addresses as may hereafter be furnished to the Company
by the Union , the Union will endeavor to secure a return of the strikers to work,
to the end that the dispute may be settled peaceably in accordance with the pro-
cedure set up herein . In such cases the Company may impose disciplinary
measures upon or discharge the employees involved , in accordance with and
subject to the grievance and arbitration provisions of this Agreement as to the
facts of participation by the employee ,- incitation or instigation by the Company
and whether the discipline was fair, appropriate and justified under all the
circumstances : such disciplinary measures shall be the sole recourse and exclu-
sive remedy of the Company in the event of a breach of this Agreement.
(d) The Company agrees that it will not lockout any of its employees during
the term of this Agreement.
ARBITRATION
Article X
Arbitration shall be handled by the American Arbitration Association and
subjeit to their rules and provisions for arbitration . The arbitration shall be
confined to the issue involved
SENIORITY
Article XI
A. Definition. and Purpose : Seniority is the length of an employee 's service
with the Employer , dating from the first day of last hire unless otherwise specif-
ically provided herein ; the purpose of which is to provide a declared policy of
right of preference measured by such length of service.
0
DENISON•COTTON MILLS COMPANY 1221
B. Definition of Departments: For the purposes of this Agreement, the Em-
ployer s depai tments are as follows :
1. Opening Room
2. Card Room
3. Spinning Room
4. Weave Room
5. Yard and Shop
C. Seniority Rosters: The Employer shall post and maintain on the bulletin
board in each department an up-to-date seniority roster for the department,
showing thereon the names of each employee in the order of seniority standing.
Copies of all seniority rosters shall be furnished to the General-Shop Committee
and Union Business Manager on the first day of the months January, April,
July, and-October of each year.
D. Top Seniority: Members of the General Shop Committee shall have the
seniority in their respective departments for the purposes of lay-off, displace-
ment and recall only. Shop stewards shall have top seniority in the particular
shift of the department in which they serve for the purposes of lay-off displace-
ment and recall only
E Lay-Offs and Displacements: Seniority shall prevail within departments
in all cases of lay-off and in all cases of displacements incident to a lay-off or
reduction in the working force, provided the employee can qualify to perform
the work. The Employer shall not, however, question the qualifications of any
employee for any job classification for which the employee has previously
qualified.
F. Recalls: Seniority shall prevail within departments in all cases of recall
following lay-off, provided the employee can qualify to perform the work. How-
ever, under no. circumstances-shall the Employer question the qualifications of
any laid-off, employee for any job classification for which the employee, has
previously qualified.
Laid-off employees shall have preference over new employees in any department
in the plant, on the basis of seniority, even though they have not accrued seniority
in the particular department
G. Job Vacancies: Whenever a job vacancy (including new jobs) arises, notice
thereof shall be posted and maintained on the bulletin boards in the department
for a period of three (3) full working days. Such notice shall show the date
of posting the title and number of the job, location, shift hours and rates
of pay, and a copy of same shall be furnished to the Departmental Shop Steward
at the time of the posting. Any employee of the department shall have the right
to bid for the job within the bidding period by giving written bid to the Immediate
Supervisor and the Department Shop Steward on forms furnished by the Shop
Steward. The Employee so bidding who has greatest seniority and can qualify
to perform the work shall be given the job immediately. Any employee who
is assigned to a job which is not similar or of the same type as he has pTeviouslyy
operated satisfactorily shall be on trial for a period of four (4) weeks unless
a shorter trial period is agreed upon, and during such trial period the em-
ployee's old job shall not be, posted for bid However, the employee may elect
to return to his old job during the trial period and in such event the trial
assignment shall again be posted for bid as above provided. During all the time
the job is temporarily vacant, it shall be filled in accordance with the provisions
of this Agreement which govern the filling of temporary vacancies.
H. Temporaril Vacanc.cs: Whenever a temporary vacancy arises it shall be
offered to the available spare employee of the department and shift who has
greatest seniority and is qualified to perrorni the work If the iacancy is
D8C20i•-52-vol 07---78
1222 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
declined it shall be offered in the order of seniority standing to the other qualified
and available spare employees on the shift. Should none of such employees de-
sire the vacancy, the Employer may then require that it be filled by the available
qualified spare employee on the shift with least seniority. Any employee who
is assigned to a temporary vacancy on his shift is entitled to remain on the assign-
ment , so long as it is temporarily vacant and the employee is qualified to perform
the work , provided , however , that no qualified employee with greater seniority
shall be sent out while a spare employee with less seniority fills a temporary
vacancy.
1. Permanent Transfers : Permanent transfers from one department to another
will be made only by mutual consent between the employee affected and the
Employer , while in the presence of the Departmental Shop Steward. Such
transferred employee will retain his old job and seniority in the department
from which he was transferred for four ( 4) weeks, during which time he may
elect to return to his old job or way be returned by the Employer , in which
case his seniority status would not be affected . If the transferred employee
remains in the department to which transferred , his seniority rating in the new
department shall date as of the date of the transfer.
J. Temporary Transfers : Temporary transfers from one job to another shall
be made only with the consent of the employee involved , given in the presence
of the Department Shop Steward , and shall not extend beyond four ( 4) weeks
unless by agreement of the General Shop Committee.
K, Transfers Out of Bargaining Unit: If transfers are to be made outside
the bargaining unit, they shall not be restricted by seniority, nor made the subject
of a grievance. Seniority shall be retained and accumulated for any employee
who has been transferred outside the bargaining unit, for a period of thirty (30)
days from the date of his transfer , for the purpose of determining his competency
by management, or for the purpose of his, election to return to his former job.
L. Notice to Union: Each week the Employer shall furnish to the Union Busi-
ness Manager and the General Shop Committee notices of all new employees,
quits, discharges , lay-offs, re-calls, leaves of absence, and the reasons therefor.
LEAVES OF ABSENCE
Article XI
Leaves of absence, without loss of seniority, for appropriate periods, subject to
extension upon reasonable request, will be granted to employees in ease of illness,
pregnancy, or injury. Leaves of absence without loss of seniority will be
granted to any employee selected or elected to act as representative of the
Union. Leaves of absence may be granted by the Employer for other reasons.
The refusal to grant a leave of absence for the above specified or other reasons, or
discrimination between employees in the grant or refusal of leaves of absence,
shall be subject to the grievance procedure and arbitration clauses of this Agree-
ment. In order to avoid unnecessary grievances, the Employer agrees to notify
the Union in writing once a week of any leaves of absences requested by and
granted to employees during the preceding week and of all extension.
EMPLOYMENT AND SENIORITY OF VETERANS
Article XI
1. Employee Veterans: Any employee, who left his employment subsequent to
May 1, 1940, to perform training or service in the land or naval or their auxiliary
DENISON COTTON MILLS COMPANY 1223
services or the merchant marine of the United States, hereinafter referred to as
"military service," shall be deemed an employee on leave of absence and shall ac-
cumulate seniority credit.
2. Provided application is made within ninety ( 90) days after being relieved
from military service or if unable to work by reason of physical disability within
ninety ( 90) days from the time his disability ends, and he has not received a dis-
honorable discharge, be shall be restored to his former job or a job of like status
and pay on the basis of his accumulated seniority , and shall be subject to the terms
and conditions of this Agreement.
VACATIONS AND VACATION PAY
Article XII
A. Qualilcations for and Extent of Vacations : Each employee of the Employer
with seniority on June 1, ____, and on June 1st of each succeeding contract year,
hereinafter called the "eligibility date" :
1. Who has been employed by the Employer for one ( 1) year or more but less
than three years, immediately prior thereto , shall receive a vacation of one (1)
week with vacation pay equal to two (2%Jo ) per cent of his or her total annual
earnings for the full year immediately prior to the eligibility date, or forty (40)
hours' pay at their average straight time earnings , whichever is greater.
2. Who has been employed by the Employer for three (3) years but less than
five years , immediately prior to the eligibility date, shall receive a vacation of one
week with vacation pay equal to three ( 3%) per cent of his or her total annual
earnings for the full year immediately prior to the eligibility date, or sixty (60)
hours' pay at their average straight time earnings , whichever is greater ;
3. Who has been employed by the Employer for five ( 5) years but ,less than
ten (10 ) years immediately prior to the eligibility date shall receive a vacation of
two (2 ) weeks with vacation pay equal for four ( 4%) per cent of his or her total
earnings for the full year immediately prior to the eligibility date, or eighty (80)
hours' at their average straight time earnings , which ever is greater ;
4. Who has been employed by the Employer for ten ( 10) years more immedi-
ately prior to the eligibility date shall receive a vacation of two (2) weeks with
vacation pay equal to six ( 6%) per cent of his or her total earnings for the full
year immediately prior to the eligibility date, or one hundred and twenty (120)
hours' pay at their average straight time earnings , whichever is greater ; and
5. Who has been employed by the Employer for three ( 3) months or more but
less than one (1 ) immediately prior to the eligibility date shall receive two (2%)
per cent of his or her total earnings for the period of employment as vacation
pay.
B. Vacation Period: Vacations shall be scheduled during the period between
June 15, and September 30. The vacation schedule shall be determined by the
Employer who shall , however , confer with the Union before making it up.
C. Payment of Vacation Pay: Vacation pay shall be paid to the employee (in
addition to his or her regular earnings ) during the week prior to the beginning
of his or her vacation period . Employees who qualify for vacations and/or
vacation pay hereunder , but whose employment is terminated for any reason
on or after the eligibility date, shall receive their vacation pay immediately.
Employees receiving vacation pay shall also receive from the Employer a state-
ment of their earnings covering the period in which vacation pay was computed.
1224 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
INSURANCE BENEFITS
Article XIV
A. Insurance Coverage: The Employer shall, from ------------ __-_______
provide the following insurance benefits for its employees, at its sole expense :
1. Life Insurance: $1500. ($1500. additional if death is due to accident).
2. Dismemberment Benefits: (The amount to vary with the extent of the injury
but principal sum to be $1500).
3. Hospitalization: Limit 31 days for employee and members of his family
during any one continuous period of disability. $8 daily with $100 special
benefits. (This becomes payable only if the employee is actually admitted to a.
regular hospital and remains there for 18 hours or longer).
4. Sickness and. Accident Benefits: $20.00 per week. Maximum 26 weeks
for any one continuous period of disability. Maximum for female disability
arising from one pregnancy : 10 weeks. Sickness benefit is payable from the
8th day of disability; accident benefit is payable from the first day. (These
benefits cover non-occupational accidents and diseases not already covered nor
payment made, by Workmen's Compensation).
5. Surgical Benefits: Coverage providing surgical benefits with $150, maximum,
for employees and members of his family.
B. Any dispute over a claim for any of the foregoing benefits may be treated
as a grievance by either the Employer or the Union shall be decided under
the arbitration provisions of the Agreement between the parties, on the basis
of the prevailing practice in providing group insurance benefits of this character
in the textile industry.
C. The Insurance Certificate to be furnished to employees shall'state of its
fact that the insurance benefits are pursuant to and in accordance with the
Agreement between the Textile Workers Union of America, CIO and the
Employer.
TERMINATION
Article XV
THIS AGREEMENT shall continue in full force and effect until--------------,
and for one year terms thereafter, unless written notice of termination shall
be mailed by either party to the other at least sixty (60) days prior to the end
of the then current terms, in which event this Agreement shall terminate at the
end of the then current term.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,' the parties, hereto, by their duly authorized repre-
sentatives, have set their hands and seals as of the day and year first above
written. -
Appendix B
NOTICE TO ALL EMPLOYEES :
The wages, hours of work, and other working conditions prevailing in the
plant of Denison Cotton Mill Company, Denison, Texas, are as follows :
Rule 1
The Company does not guarantee to furnish any particular hours of work to
its employees, but will schedule work in accordance with the Company's pro-
duction requirements. Any employee who works more than forty (40) hours
in one weekly pay period is paid time and one-half his prevailing hourly wages
for the excess hours worked. Overtime is not paid on overtime earnings.
DENISON COTTON MILLS COMPANY 1225
- -An employee who works seven consecutive days in any weekly pay period is
paid double time for the seventh consecutive day worked.
The work week begins at 12: 01 a. in. Monday morning.
The scheduled shift hours are as follows :
First Shift_____________________________ 6: 30 a. m. to 2: 30 p. in.
Second Shift____--------------------------- 2: 30 p. in. to 10: 30 p. m.
This schedule of shift hours will remain in effect until- notice of change is
made by Management and posted in writing in the plant.
Rule 2
S'hift transfers are made by the Company according to the length of service
of the employee in the particular job classification to be filled. Promotions in-
volving a change in job classification are made by the Company according to its
judgment of the ability of the employee involved. The Company reserves the
right to transfer any employee to any other duties in accordance with its judg-
ment of the necessities of its business. When an employee assigned to a regular
job is temporarily transferred to another job during any period when the em-
ployee's regular shift and full job are running, the Company pays the higher of
the regular or4emporary job rates when the move is considered to be beyond
the control of the employee. If a curtailment of working force is necessary,
those employees meeting production and quality standards are laid off in accord-
ance with their accumulated job seniority in the classifications to be curtailed.
When an employee is transferred from one job classification to a higher job
classification, he continues to accumulate seniority in his old classification.
Such accumulated seniority is taken into account in the event of _a forced reduc-
tion as "accumulated job seniority."
4
Rule 3
If an employee has any complaint concerning his working conditions, he shall
within two (2) days from the happening of the event out of which the complaint
arises, present a statement of his complaint in writing to the Superintendent.
The Superintendent will, within two (2) days, give the employee a written an-
swer to thg.complaint. If any conferences or adjustments between the Company
and the employee are required, a representative of the Union, on his own time,
may be requested by the employee to assist him, and may be present at any
adjustment or settlement of the complaint.
Rule 4
The Denison Cotton Mill Company does not discriminate against any person
because of his membership or non-membership in any church, fraternal organiza-
tion, labor union, or other club or organization.
Rule 5
Subject to Rule 4, the Denison Cotton Mill Company reserves the right to
terminate the employment of any person in either a supervisory or non -super-
visory capacity at any time according to its judgment . Any employee is free to
resign at any time with or without notice.
Rule 6
In addition to the general power to -terminate the employment of any person
for reasons satisfactory to the Company, the following specific rules will apply
1226 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
to the conduct of all employees and for violation of these rules, an employee may
be discharged or otherwise disciplined :
1. Theft.
2. Sabotage.
3. Gambling.
4. Immoral conduct, breach of peace, or criminal conduct on the part of
any employee in or out of the plant.
5. Deliberately creating hazards of fire.
6. Violation of safety or health requirements.
7. Reporting to work under the influence of intoxicants, or the use of
intoxicants on Company premises.
8. Habitual tardiness.
9. Unsatisfactory attendance.
10. Refusal to follow instructions.
11. Inability or refusal to meet production standards.
12. Inability or refusal to meet quality standards.
13. The use of Company time for other than Company business without prior
approval.
14. The use of profane, abusive or indecent- language, gesture, drawing or
writing by any employee while on the premises.
15. Unauthorized circulation of handbills, circulars or petitions, or solicita-
tion of funds on Company time.
16. Neglect of duty:,
Rule,7
The foregoing rules will remain in effect for a period of one (1) year from
the date hereof, unless changed by mutual agreement of the parties.
ACCEPTED for Denison Cotton Mill Company :
------------------------------
(Title)
ACCEPTED for Textile Workers Union of America and its Local Union No. 1087,
both organizations being affiliated with the CIO, as exclusive bargaining agency
for employees of Denison Cotton Mill Company, in accordance with certificate of
National Labor Relations Board, dated November 4, 1949..
(Title)
(Title)
Appendix C
AGREEMENT
AGREEMENT entered into this ------ day of ----------------, 1950, by and
Denison Cotton Mill Company Incorporated (hereinafter called the "Employer"),
party of the first part ; and TEXTILE WORKERS UNION OF AMERICA, CIO,
(hereinafter referred to as the "UNION"), party to the second part,
WITNESSETH
In consideration of the mutual covenants herein contained, the parties hereto
agree as follows :
DENISON COTTON MILLS COMPANY 1227
RECOGNITION AND UNION SECURITY
Article II
(a) Recognition: The Employer hereby recognizes the Union as the exclusive
bargaining agency for all of its employees as set forth in the National Labor
Relations Board certification certificate dated November 4, 1949. The Union
shall bargain collectively with respect to wages, hours of work and other working
conditions.
(b) Check-Off: Upon the filing with the office of the Employer of a written
request for such deduction, signed by the individual employee, the Employer
will, pursuant to its terms, during the full term of this Agreement and any
extension or renewal thereof, deduct weekly from the wages of each employee
who is a inember of the Union, Union membership dues,, including initiation
fees, in such amounts as shall be fixed pursuant to the By-Laws of the Local and
the Constitution of the Union. The total amount so deducted during each month
shall be remitted to the Union or its designee, not later than the 10th day of
the succeeding month. The form of such written requests for the deduction of
dues shall be as set forth in Exhibit "B" appended to this Agreement.
(c) Bulletin Boards: The Employer agrees that it will provide space on its
existing bulletin boards for the purpose of the posting of official union business.
Before such notice is posted it will be cleared through the plant manager or his
designee. All notices will be signed by the Local Union President.
(d) Access to Premises: For the purpose of helping to settle, grievances, a
representative of the Union may visit such departments as the grievance con-
cerns during the working hours. However, in any event the Unionrepresentative
will make application for such visit to the Company's office before such visits and
the representative may be accompanied on such visits by a representative of the
Company.
DISCHARGE AND DISCIPLINE
Article III
The employer in the conduct of its business shall have the power to discipline
or discharge an employee for cause.
WAGES
Article IV
(a) Mmimuni. Wage: Eighty-nine cents (890) per hour shall be the minimum
for all employees.
(b) Wage Schedule: The hourly rates, base rates and expected piece rate
earnings for piece rates workers which are effective during this Agreement, are
set forth in a Schedule marked "A," attached hereto and made a part hereof.
Any changes affected in Schedule "A" through negotiations, shall be reduced to
writing and attached to Schedule' "A" as an amendment hereto.
(c) Transfers: Employees who are temporarily transferred to work on jobs
other than their regular jobs, shall receive the rates of pay applicable thereto,
or their regular rates, whichever is higher. When an employee requests a trans-
fer to a lower paid job he shall receive the rate of the job.
(d) Wage Revision: Either party to this Agreement may propose to the other
at any time adjustments in rates of pay or wages by giving the other party written
notice of the adjustments desired ; whereupon the parties will meet promptly
for discussion and will endeavor in good faith to reach an agreement. If agree-
ment is reached within fifteen (15) days from the service of the written notice
1228 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
aforesaid then either party may demand arbitration of the issue or issues as
provided in Article IX of this Agreement ; provided that disagreements with
respect to proposed general wage increases, or general wage decreases, shall
not be subject to arbitration except by mutual consent. ( It is agreed that the
Union and those it represents shall have the right to strike with respect to non-
arbitrable wage issues and in the event of such occurrence, this Agreement shall
continue-in full force and'effect.
Request for a revision under this section shall be in writing and shall be mailed
or delivered to the other party not less than sixty (60) days prior to the requested
revision date. Upon the giving of such written notice, the parties shall immedi-
ately negotiate the request and if they are unable to agree within fifteen (15)
days after the receipt thereof, either party may request arbitration of the dispute
under the provisions of Article IX of this Agreement.
(e) Shift Premium: A premium of not less than five (5) per cent shall be paid
to all employees for all time worked during the second shift hours. A premium
of not less than ten (10) percent shall be paid to all employees for all time worked
during third shift hours.
(f) Reporting Pay:
1. Employees reporting for work on their regularly scheduled shift, or at the
request of the Employer, without at least sixteen (16) hours' prior notice that
their services will not be needed, and who are not put to ;work, shall be paid
four (4) hours' pay for reporting.
(g) Piece Rate Provisions:
1. The minimum guaranteed wage for all piece rate jobs shall be shown in
Schedule "A" and piece rates shall lie so set that the average workers shall earn
twenty (20%) per cent above the guaranteed day rate.
2. Piece rates for each different type of construction in each piece work occu-
pation shall yield not less than expected earnings for the job, or portion of the
job affected.
3. No new piece rates shall be set unless changes are made in materials,
machine or equipment, methods or conditions. Improved motions and processes
introduced by employees or increased skill shall not result in changes in rates.
The Employer will indicate to the Union the reason for proposing changes in
_ipiece rates. No-changes may be made-except-by-mutual agreement.oT=arliitr"ation
as hereinbefore provided.
4. When the Company puts'a job on piece rate the employees earnings-shall
be same as the hourly rate or better than those existing on the job. The employee
shall suffer no loss of pay during such a period.
(h) Wage Information: Upon the request of the Union, the Employer agrees
to submit the low, high and average hourly earnings, exclusive of overtime and
bonus payments, or piece and incentive rate employees by job classification and
the number of employees in each job classification. Such requests shall not be
made more frequently than once each quarter.
The Employer will provide the Union, and keep up to date, a list of all rates,
classifications and job descriptions in effect in the mill.
The Employer will post and keep up to date a list of all piece rates in effect,
at the mill.
(1) Payment of Wages. Payment of wages shall be made on the job on Em-
ployer time not later than Friday afternoon of each week, and shall be in cash
or pay check, with recognition for legitimate deductions, including Union dues
and initiation fees.
DENISON COTTON MILLS COMPANY
WORK LOADS AND WORK ASSIGNMENTS
Article V
1229
Changes in work assignments may be made by the Employer for the purpose
of insuring the efficient operation of the mill and obtaining and maintaining
reasonable work loads.
All new work loads shall have adequate fatigue allowance figured in them.
The present work loads in the plant shall be subject to review through the griev-
ance and arbitration procedure of this contract.
All changes in work assignments shall be described as belonging in one of the
following three classes :
(1) Routine Changes: Routine changes are those which result from alternations
in construction of existing jobs and require no change in methods, machinery
or equipment.
(2) Technological Changes: Technological changes are those which result
from changes in equipment or machines used on the job
(3) Other Changes: All other changes are those which are neither routine nor
technological in character.
(a) Routine Changes: The Employer shall have the right to institute routine
changes as conditions require. Whenever requested by the Union there shall be
discussion of such changes between the Union and management representatives.
If any differences shall develop between the parties with respect to routine changes
and which are not settled by mutual agreement, such differences shall be submitted
for final and binding decision to arbitration, as hereinafter provided in this
Agreement. The Employer shall notify the Shop Steward in advance of any
routine change. The Employer will furnish all information which is necessary to
a complete understanding of the proposed change.
(b) Technological Changes: Management shall first inform the Union of the
fact that a change is to be made, of the approximate date of its installation, the
nature thereof, proposed duties and job assignment, and the expected earnings on
a mutually agreed upon form. The parties shall meet and discuss the proposal at
least two (2) weeks before the day fixed for the institution of such change. The
Employer will furnish all information which is necessary to a complete under-
standing of the proposed change.
The Employer may install the proposed change for a trial period of four (4)
weeks which may be extended by mutual agreement . During such trial period,
the employees shall be paid no less than their previous average hourly earnings
for the previous quarter, as established by the Social Security records. In the
event final agreement during or subsequent to the trial period results in higher
rates of pay, the employees shall be paid retroactively to the date of assignment
to the job. Within fifteen (15) days of the expiration of the trial period, the
Union if dissatisfied , may present a written statement of its grievances, and if the
same shall not be satisfactorily adjusted by negotiations between the parties
within five (5) days thereafter, the matter may be submitted by the Union to
arbitration for final and binding decision.
(c) Other Changes : There shall be no changes in established work assignments
unless mutually agreed upon or made in accordance with the following procedure:
The Employer or the Union may request changes in established work assignments
which are neither routine nor technological in character, and, if within fifteen
(15) days after negotiation between the parties , upon such request, the parties
shall be unable to agree, the matter may be submitted to arbitration by either
party hereto for final and binding decision as to the proposed change and appli-
1230 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
cable rates of pay. The Employer will furnish all information which is necessary
to a complete understanding of the proposed change. -
(d) Earnings Guarantee: The average hourly earnings of any group of employ-
ees affected by a new or changed work assignment shall not be reduced below the
average hourly earnings of the group on the old work assignment.
HOURS OF WORK AND OVERTIME
A. Hours of Work: The regular hours of work per shift shall be eight (8)
consecutive hours per day, and forty (40) hours per week Monday through Friday
inclusive. Each employee shall be permitted to work on his job if it runs unless
otherwise specifically provided herein.
Changes in the present starting time and closing time of shifts shall be made by
management through the posting of notices in the mill , however , management will
furnish the Union with a copy of such notice. -
B. Overtime : Overtime shall be governed by the following provisions :
1. Excess Hours: All hours worked in excess of eight ( 8) in any one day, all
hours worked in excess of any regularly scheduled shift of less than eight (8)
hours by employees so scheduled , and all hours worked in excess of forty (40) in
any one week without pyramiding, however, shall be paid for at the rate of time
and one-half.
2. Work on the Sixth Consecutive Day: Time and one-half will be paid for
work performed on the sixth consecutive day. If an employee misses on one of
the five preceding days because no work is available or because of sickness, it
shall be counted as a day worked for the purpose of computing overtime pay on
the sixth consecutive day.
3. Sunday Work : Twice the regular rates of pay shall be paid for all work per-
formed on Sundays.
C. Overtime not to be Pyramided : Where particular work falls within two or
more overtime classifications, only the highest single overtime rate shall be paid.
PAID HOLIDAYS
Article VII
New Years Day, National Memorial Day, Fourth of July, Labor Day, Armistice
Day, Thanksgiving Day, and Christmas Day are paid holidays even though they
fall on an unscheduled work day. If any of the above-mentioned holidays shall
tall on a Sunday, the succeeding Monday shall be deemed the holiday.
Holiday pay shall be eight (8) hours at the employees' average straight time
hourly earnings for the week in which the holiday occurs, or, if the employee
does not work during such week, then for the most recent week prior to the
holiday during which he worked.
An employee who works on one of these paid holidays shall be paid at the
rate of one and one-half his regular rate for all hours worked in addition to
his holiday pay.
ADJUSTMENT OF GRIEVANCES
Article VIII
A. Procedure: Should any employee have any grievance, an earnest effort shall
be made to adjust such grievance immediately in the following manner :
'(1) Step No. 1: Between the Shop Steward and the Immediate Supervisor,
with the aggrieved employee at the employee's discretion.
(2) Step No. 2: Between the Shop Steward and the Department Overseer
with the aggrieved employee at the employee's discretion. If not adjusted at this
DENISON COTTON MILLS COMPANY 1231
step, the Shop Steward or the employee,shall reduce the Grievance. to writing and
submit it to the General Shop Committee.
(3) Step No. 3: Between the General Shop Committee and the Plant Super-
intendent, and the aggrieved employee and Union Business Agent in their dis-
cretion ; provided that the General Shop Committee shall have submitted a
written statement of the grievance to the Employer at least forty-eight (48)
hours prior to the grievance meeting. The Plant Superintendent shall reduce
his answer to writing and deliver it to the Committee within five (5) days.
(4) Step No. 4: Between a representative of the Union and a representative
of executive management, with the General Shop Committee in its discretion.
(5) Step No. 5: If the grievance shall not have been adjusted by the above
procedure either party may submit it to arbitration in accordance with Article
IX hereof.
(B) Grievance Meetings: The Plant Superintendent shall meet with the Gen-
eral Shop Committee at least twice per month on regularly scheduled days
which may be changed by mutual consent, but which are hereby tentatively set
for the First Monday and Third Monday at Two o'clock p. in. for the purpose
of adjusting grievances. The Employer's representative of executive manage-
ment shall meet with the Union's representative and the Grievance Committee
upon request and reasonable notice.
The Employer agrees to pay for time actually lost by Shop Stewards, the Gen-
eral Shop Committee, and the aggrieved employees in attending grievance meet-
ings, arbitration hearings, and contract negotiations.
ARBITRATION
Article IX
Arbitration shall be handled by the American Arbitration Association and
subject to their rules and provisions for arbitration. The arbitration shall be
confined to the issue involved.
SENIORITY
Article X
A. Definition and Purpose: Seniority is the length of an employees' service
with the Employer, dating from the first day of last hire unless otherwise spe-
cifically provided herein ; the purpose of which is to provide a declared policy
of right of preference measured by such length of service.
B. Definition of Departments: For the purpose of this Agreement, the Employ-
er's departments are as follows :
1. Opening Room
2. Card Room
3: Spinning Room
4. Weave Room
5. Yard and Shop
C. Seniority Rosters: The Employer shall post and maintain on the bulletin
board in each department an up-to-date seniority roster for the department ;
showing thereon the names of each employee in the order of seniority standing.
Copies of all seniority rosters shall be furnished to the General Shop Committee
and Union Business Manager on the first day of the months of January, April,
July, and October of each year.
D. Top Seniority: Members of the General Shop Committee shall have the
seniority in their respective departments for the purposes of lay-off, displacement
1232 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
and recall only. Shop Stewards shall have top seniority in the particular shift
of the department in which they serve for the purposes of lay-off displacement
and recall only.
E. Lay-Offs and Displacements : Seniority shall prevail within departments in
all cases of lay-off and in all cases of displacements incident to a lay-off or
reduction in the working force, provided the employee can qualify to perform
the work. The Employer shall not, however, question the qualifications of any
employee for any job classification for which the employee has previously
qualified.
F. Recalls: Seniority shall prevail within departments in all cases of recall
following lay-off, provided the employee can qualify to perform the work.
However, -under no circumstances shall the Employer question the qualifications
of any laid-off employee for any job classification for which the employee has
previously qualified.
Laid-off employees shall have preference over new employees in any depart-
went in the plant, on the basis of seniority, even though they have not accrued
seniority in the particular department. , ' '
G. Job Vacancies: Whenever a job vacancy (including new jobs) arises, notice
thereon shall be posted and maintained on the bulletin boards in the department
for a period of three (3) full working days. Such notice shall show the date
of posting, the title and number of the job, location, shift hours and rates of
pay, and a copy of same shall be furnished to the Departmental Shop Steward
at the time of the posting. Any employee of the department shall have the right
to bid for the job within the bidding period by giving written bid to the Imme-
diate Supervisor and the Department Shop Steward on forms furnished by the
Shop Steward. The employee so bidding who has greatest seniority and can
quality to perform the work shall be given the job immediately. Any employee
who is assigned to a job which is not similar or of the same type as he has
previously operated satisfactorily shall be on trial for a.period of four (4) weeks
unless a shorter trial period is agreed upon, and during such trial period the
employee's old job shall not be posted for bid However, the employee may
elect to return to his old job during the trial period and in such event the trial
assignment shall again be posted for bid as above provided. During all the time
the job is temporarily vacant, it shall be filled in accordance with the provisions
of this Agreement which govern the filling of temporary vacancies.
H. Temporary Vacancies: Whenever a temporary vacancy arises it shall be
offered to the available spare employee of the department and shift who has
greatest seniority and is qualified to perform the Work. If the vacancy is
declined it shall be offered in the order of seniority standing to the other qualified
and available spare employees on the shift. Should none of such employees
desire the vacancy, the Employer may then require that it be filled by the avail-
able qualified spare employee on the shift with least seniority. Any employee
rho is assigned to a temporary vacancy on his shift is entitled to remain on
the assignment so long as it is temporarily vacant and the employee is qualified
to perform the work, provided, however, that no qualified employee with greater
seniority shall be sent out while a spare employee with less seniority fills a
temporary vacancy.
1. Permanent Transfers: Permanent transfers from one department to an-
other will be made only by mutual consent between the employee affected and
the Employer, while in the presence of the Departmental Shop Steward. Such
transferred employee will retain his old job and seniority in he department
from which he was transferred for four (4) weeks, during which time he may
e'ect to return to his old job or may be returned by the Employer, in which case
his seniority status would not be affected. If the transferred employee remains
DENISON COTTON MILLS COMPANY 1233
in the department to which transferred, his seniority rating in the new depart-
ment shall date as of the date of the transfer.
J. Temporary, Transfers: Temporary transfers from one job to.another,shall
be made only with the consent of the employee involved, given in the presence
of the Department Shop Steward, and shall not extend beyond four (4) weeks'
unless by agreement of the General Shop Committee.
K. Transfers Out of Bargaining Unit: If Transfers are to be made outside the
bargaining unit, they shall not be restricted by seniority, nor made the subject
of a grievance. Seniority shall be retained and accumulated for any employee
who has been transferred outside the bargaining unit, for a period of thirty (30)
days from the date of his transfer, for the purpose of determining his competency
by management, or for the purpose of his election to return to his former job.
L. Notice to Union: Each week the Employer shall furnish the Union Business
Manager and the General Shop Committee notices of all new employees, quits,
discharges, lay-offs, re-calls, leaves of absence, and the reasons therefor.
LEAVES OF ABSENCE
Article XI
Leaves of absence, without loss of seniority, for appropriate periods, subject
to extension upon reasonable request, will be granted to employees in case of
illness, pregnancy, or injury. Leaves of absence without loss of seniority will
be granted to any employee selected or elected to act as representative of the
Union. Leaves of absence may be granted by the Employer for other reasons.
The refusal to grant a leave of absence for the above specified or other reasons,
or discrimination between employees in the grant or refusal of leaves of absence,
shall be granted to the grievance procedure and arbitration clauses of this Agree-
ment. In order to avoid unnecessary grievances, the Employer agrees to notify
the Union in writing once a week of any leaves of absence requested by and
granted to employees during the preceding week and of all extensions.
EMPLOYMENT AND SENIORITY OF VETERANS
Article XII
1. Employee Veterans: Any employee, who left his employment subsequent
to May 1, 1940, to perform training or service in the land or naval or their auxili-
ary services or the merchant marine of the United States, hereinafter referred
to as `fmilitay service," shall be deemed an employee on leave of absence and
shall accumulate seniority credit.
2. Provided application is made within ninety (90) days after being relieved
from military service or if unable to work by reason of physical disability within
ninety (90) days from the time his disability ends, and he has not received a dis-
honorable discharge, he shall be restored to his former job or a job of like status
and pay on the basis of his accumulated seniority, and shall be subject to the
terms and conditions of this Agreement.
VACATIONS AND VACATION PAY
Article XIII
A. Qualifications for and Ecotent of Vacations: Each employee of the Employer
with seniority on June 1, ____, and on June 1st of each succeeding contract year,
hereinafter called the "eligibility date" :
1. Who has been employed by the Employer for one (1) year or more but
less than three years, immediately prior thereto, shall receive a vacation of one
1234 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR' RELATIONS BOARD
(1) week with vacation pay equal to two (2%) per cent of his or her total
annual earnings for the full year immediately prior to the eligibility date, or
forty (40) hours' pay at their average straight time earnings, whichever is
greater;
2. Who has been employed by the Employer for three (3) years but less than
five years, immediately prior to the eligibility date, shall receive a vacation of
one (1) week with vacation pay equal to three (3%) percent of his of her total
annual earnings for the full year immediately prior to the eligibility date, or
sixty (60) hours' pay at their average straight time earnings, whichever is
greater;
3. Who has been employed by the Employer for five (5) years but less than
ten (10) years immediately prior to the eligibility date shall receive a vacation
of two (2) weeks with vacation pay equal to four (4%)'percent of his or her
total earnings for the full year immediately prior to the eligibility date, or
eighty (80) hours' pay at their average straight time earnings, whichever-is
greater;
4. Who has been employed by the Employer for ten (10) years or more im-
mediately prior to the eligibility date shall receive a vacation of two (2) weeks
with vacation pay equal to six (6%) percent of his or her total earnings for the
full year immediately prior to the eligibility date, or one hundred and twenty
(120) hours' pay at their average straight time earnings, whichever is greater;
and
5. Who has been employed'by the Employer for three (3) months or more but
less than one (1) year immediately prior to the eligibility date shall receive two
(2%) percent of his or her total earnings for the period of employment as
vacation pay.
B. Vacation Period: Vacations shall be scheduled during the period' between
June 15 and September 30. The vacation schedule shall be determined by the
Employees receiving vacation pay shall also receive from the Employer a state-
C. Payment of Vacation Pay: Vacation pay shall be paid to the employee (in
addition to his or her regular earnings) during the week prior to the beginning
of his or her vacation period. Employees who qualify for vacation and/or
vacation pay hereunder, but whose employment is terminated for any reason
on or after the eligibility date, shall receive their vacation pay immediately.
Employees receiving vacation pay shall also receive from the Employer a state-
ment of their earnings covering the period of which vacation pay was computed.
INSURANCE BENEFITS
Article XIV
A. Insurance Coverage: The Employer shall, from -------------------- pro-
vide the following insurance benefits for its employees, at its expense :
1. Life Insurance: $1500. ($1500 additional if death is due to accident)
2. Dismemberment Benefits: (The amount to vary with the extent of the injury,
but principal sum to be $1500)
3. Hospitalization: Limit 31 days for employee and members of his family
during any one continuous period of disability. $8 daily with $100 special
benefits. (This becomes payable only if the employee is actually admitted to a
regular hospital and remains there for 18 hours or longer).
4. Sickness and Accident Benefits: $20.00 per week. Maximum 26 weeks for
any one continuous period of disability. Maximum, for female disability arising
from one pregnancy ; 10 weeks. Sickness benefit is payable from the 8th day of
DENISON COTTON MILLS COMPANY 1235
disability; accident benefit is payable from the first day. (These benefits cover
non-occupational accidents and diseases not already covered nor payment made,
by Workmen's Compensation).
15. Surgical Benefits: Coverage providing surgical benefits with $150. maxi-
mum for employees and members of his family.
B. Any dispute over a claim for any of the foregoing benefits may be treated
as a grievance by either the Employer or the Union and shall be decided under
the arbitration provisions of this Agreement between the parties, on the basis
of the prevailing practice in providing group insurance benefits of this character
in the textile industry.
C. The Insurance Certificate to be furnished to employees shall state on its
fact that the insurance benefits are pursuant to and in accordance with the
Agreement between the Textile Workers Union of America, CIO, and the
Employer.
TERMINATION
-Article XV
THIS AGREEMENT shall continue in full force and effect until --------------------
and for one year terms thereafter, unless written notice of termination shall be
mailed by either party to the other at least sixty (60) days prior to the end of the
then current term, in which event this Agreement shall terminate at the end of the
then current term.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto, by their duly authorized representa-
tives, have set their hands and seals as of the day and year first above written.
By -------------------------------------
Its -------------------------------------
TExTILE WORKERS UNION OF AMERICA, CIO.
By -------------------------------------
Its -------------------------------------
WITNESS:
------------------------------
------------------------------
------------------------------
------------------------------
------------------------------
SCHEDULE "A"
WAGE RATES DENISON COTTON MILL
Card Room:
Sweeper------------------- $0.89 Card Stripers-------------- $0.93
Oiler---------------------- .92 Drawing Hauler------------ . 89
Waste Man---------------- .89 Drawing Frame Tender----- .93
Opening Room Man--------- .91 Slubber Frame Tender------ '. 91
Picker Tender-------------- .95 Card Grinder-------------- 1.08
Card Tenders-------------- '.93 Fixer ---------------------- 1.08
' Guarantee, increase to be ground into piece i ates
1236 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Spinning : ,
S'veeper___________________ $0.80 Tail-up Girl________________ $0.93
-.Zievatoi' Operator ---------- :89 Head Winder Doffer -------- .95
Filling Rover______________ .89 Spinners____________________ 1.93
Roving Hauler_____________ . 89 Spinning Fixer_____________ 1.035
Winder Doffer_____________ .89 Winder Fixer ------------- 1.035
Oilers______________________ .91 Twister Doffers & Tenders_ . 975
Winder Tender______________ . 93 Spinning Doffers ----------- '. 94
Warping, Slashing & Drawing in :
Beam Hauler______________ .89 Warper Tenders ------------ 11.01
Size Maker________________ .89 Harness Mender____________ 1.97
Slasher Tender_____________ 1.04 Tying-in Machine Operator_- 1 1. 04
Slasher Tender Helper______ -.92 Tying-in Machine Helper___- 1. 98
Warper Creelers ----------- '. 91
Weaving :
Sweeper------------------- 89 Filling Roller--------------- 2. 90
Elevator Man______________ .89 Oilers ---------------------- 2 93
Quill Cleaner______________ .89 Smash Hand---------------- 2.94
Loom Cleaner______________ .89 Warp Man------------------ 2. 95
Time Keepers-------------- .89 Battery Hand_______________ 2. 89
Studer Loom Fixers_________ .945 Weavers-------------------- 2.93
Cloth Doffer________________ .92 Loom Fixers________________ 2 1. 15
Cloth Room :
Stitch Man__________________ .93 Bale Press Man -------------- .94
Roll Sewer____________ .93 Assistant Grader____________ . 90
Folder Operator------------- .94 Cloth Grader________________ . 965
Wide Cloth Inspector -------- .96 Lead Man Grader ------------ . 99
Yard Gang:
Laborers-------------------- .89 Lead Men___________________ 1.00
- Appendix D
Registered Mail
Return Receipt Requested
[Copy]
JANUARY 18, 1951.
Mr. CAMPBELL GILLESPIE,
Gillespie d Gillespie Law Firm,
210 M. d P. Bank Building, Sherman, Texas.
DEAR MR. GILLESPIE :
I am at this time requesting a meeting between your client, the Denison
Cotton Mill, and the Textile Workers Union of America, 010, for Friday,
January 26, at 3: 00 p. m. at the usual place in Denison.
The purpose of this meeting is to negotiate a contract between your client
and the union.
Very truly yours,
WAYNE L. DERNONCOURT,
Representative.
hs.
' Guarantee, increase to be ground into piece rates.
2 Increase to be ground into piece i ates.
DENISON COTTON MILLS COMPANY 1237
JANUARY 22, 1951.
Mr. WAYNE L. DERNONCOURT,
Representative, Textile Workers' Union of America,
1010 Corinth St., Dallas, Texas.
DEAR MB. DEBNONCOUBT :
This -will acknowledge receipt of your letter on January 18th requesting a
meeting between the Denison Cotton Mill and the Textile Workers Union of
America for Friday, January 26th at 3: 00 P. M.
We regret that we will be unable to meet with you at that time. We will
advise you of a date when we will be able to meet with you as soon after the
26th as it can be arranged.
Yours truly,
chgj/ss.
cc to : Mr. W. B. Munson, III.
By:
GILLESPIE & GILLESPIE.
JANUARY 27,1951.
Mr. CAMPBELL GILLESPIE,
Gillespie & Gillespie Laie Office,
210 M & P Bank Building, Sherman, Texas.
DEAR MR . GILLESPIE :
Enclosed please find copy of stipulation which we talked about over, the
phone this morning.
Sincerely yours,
WAYNE L. DERNONCOURT,
Representative.
hs.
encl.
STIPULATION
Due to action on wage price control by the government dated January 25,
it is agreed between the Denison Cotton Mill, Denison, Texas and the Textile
Workers Union of America, CIO, that the following will apply to both parties.
1. The Company and Union agree that they will submit to the proper govern-
mental agency all issues of the dispute now in progress at the Company's plant
in Denison, Texas and that both parties agree that they will abide by the
decision of the governmental agency. '
2. That all benefits if and when given by the governmental agency shall
be retroactive to the day the employees return to work.
3. That all striking employees will return to work on their jobs and with
full seniority, and that conditions in the plant will be status quo as to the
day of the strike.
4. The issues that the government does not take jurisdiction over will be
bargained out by the parties, or either party may take whatever action is
necessary.
956209-52-vol. 97-79
1238 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
[Copy]
JANUARY 29, 1951. -
Mr. WAYNE L. DERNONCOURT,
Representative, Textile Workers Union of America,
1010 Corinth Street, Dallas, Texas. -
DEAR MR. DERNONCOURT :
This will acknowledge receipt of your letter of January 27th enclosing proposed
stipulation which you read to me over the telephone on January 27th. We have
advised Mr. Munson of the nature of the proposed stipulation, and will give you
an answer as soon as Mr. Munson and I can arrive at a conclusion.
Yours truly,
By:
GILLESPIE & GILLESPIE.
chgj/ss. -
cc : Mr . W. B. Munson , III, Denison Cotton Mill Co., Denison , Texas.
FEBRUARY 1, 1951.
Mr. WAYNE L. DERNONCOURT,
Representative , Textile Workers' Union of America
1010 Corinth Street, Dallas, Texas.
DEAR MR. DERNONCOURT:
Mr. Munson and the writer have conferred with reference to your proposal
that all matters at issue between the Denison Cotton Mill Company and the
Textile Workers' Union be submitted to a government agency for arbitration.
We feel that the matters in controversy are not properly subject to arbitration,
therefore decline to make the agreement which you requested.
We have further discussed the question of _ additional negotiation meetings
and believe that at the present time, a meeting between the parties would not
serve any useful purpose.
Yours truly,
By:
GILLESPIE & GILLESPIE.
chgj/ss.
cc : Mr. W. B. Munson, III, Denison Cotton Mill Co., Denison, Texas.
Registered Mail
Return Receipt Requested
[Copy]
FEBRUARY 28, 1951.
Mr. CAMPBELL H. GILLESPIE,
Attorney at Law,
210 M d P Building, Sherman, 'Texas.
DEAR MR. GILLESPIE :
Inasmuch as Mr. Wayne L. Dernoncourt has been transferred from the state
and I am now in charge , I suggest that a meeting between your client, Denison
Cotton Mill, and representatives of the Union be held for the purpose of making an
attempt to negotiate and effectuate a mutually satisfactory collective bargaining
agreement.
I further suggest that such a meeting be held on March 8 or 9, 1951, at the
usual meeting place, 3011/2 Woodard Street, Denison, Texas, at a reasonable hour.
Kindly advise by return mail if the above suggestions are acceptable and if
the suggested dates are not satisfactory, the Union representatives stand ready
to meet on any other dates upon two or three days prior notice.
DENISON COTTON MILLS COMPANY 1239
,In view of the seriousness of present world developments, it seems such a
shame that either of us would allow ourselves to become blinded by our _own
prejudices and animosities to the extent that the manpower and production
potential of the Denison Cotton Mill be lost at such a time of.crisis.
Very truly yours,
• TEXTILE WORKERS UNION OF AMERICA, CIO,
GRANT L. WILLIAMS,
. Texas Representative.
hs.
cc: Mr . Emil Rieve , Mr. James W. Bamford, Local 1087, TWUA.
MARCH 1, 1951.
Mr. GRANT L. WILLIAMS,
Representative , Textile Workers Union of America,
-1010 Corinth Street , Dallas 2, Texas.
DEAR MR. WILLIAMS :
We have your letter of February 28th suggesting -a-meeting-with Denison
Cotton Mills on March 8th or 9th.
. We are forwarding copy of your letter to Mr. Munson, the Vice-President of
the Mill, and will take the matter of a possible meeting up with him. - -
If you will review the correspondence with Mr. Dernoncourt, you will notice
that we advised Mr. Dernoncourt that unless there was some indication of a
desire to compromise on the part of the Textile Workers, we did not see that
'anything could be accomplished by meeting. We assume from the tone of your
letter that having reviewed-Mr. Dernoncourt's correspondence, you feel that
something may be accomplished by meeting
Yours truly,
GILLESPIE & GILLESPIE.
By
chgJ/ss.
cc : Mr. W. B. Munson, III, Denison Cotton Mill Co., Denison, Texas.
Appendix E
NoTICE TO ALL EMPLOYEES
Pursuant to the recommendations of a Trial Examiner of the National Labor
Relations Board, and in order to effectuate the policies of the National Labor
Relations Act, we hereby notify our employees that :
WE WILL NOT refuse to bargain collectively with TEXTILE WoRKERS UNION
OF AMERICA, CIO, as the exclusive representative of all our employees in
the appropriate unit described below.
WE WILL NOT inform our employees that we will never sign a contract with
the afore-mentioned union, unlawfully solicit striking employees to return to
work, threaten economic reprisals or promise benefits designed to coerce
employees on strike into returning to work.
WE WILL NOT in any manner interfere with, restrain, or coerce our em-
ployees in the exercise of their right to self-organization, to form labor
organizations, to join or assist TEXTILE WORKERS UNION OF AMERICA, CIO,
or any other labor organization, to bargain collectively through representa-
tives of their own choosing and to engage in other concerted activities for
the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection as
guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act, or to refrain from any or all of such
1240 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
activities except to the extent that such right may be affected by an agree-
ment requiring membership in a labor organization as a condition of employ-
ment as authorized in Section 8 (a) (3) of the Act.
WE WILL bargain collectively upon request with TEXTILE WORKERS UNIoN
of AMERICA , CIO, as the exclusive representative of all our employees in the
bargaining unit described below, and, if an understanding is reached, we
will embody suc1 understanding in a signed agreement.
The bargaining unit is :
All production and maintenance employees, exclusive of office clerical
employees, guards, professional employees, and supervisory employees.
DENISON COTTON MILL COMPANY,
Employer.
By --------------------- - --------I
(Representative ) ( Title)
Dated ------------------
This notice must remain posted for 60 days from the date hereof, and must
not be altered, defaced, or covered by any other material.
LEVER BROTHERS COMPANY and UNITED GAS, COKE AND CHEMICAL
WORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO, PETITIONER. Case No. 1-RC-93224.
January 24,1952
Supplemental Decision and Order .
On September 25, 1951, the Board issued its Decision and Order in
the above-captioned matter 11 in which it found that a valid and sub-
sisting agreement between the Employer and Local 116, International
Chemical Workers of America, AFL, the Intervenor, was a bar to
the petition filed in this case, and dismissed the proceedings.2
On October 4, 1951, the Petitioner filed its motion for reconsider-
ation, alleging error in the Board's decision and particularly pointing
out that the contract which was held by the Board to be a bar con-
tained an unlawful union-security provision which under Board de-
cisions prevented it from serving as a bar.
The Board 3 has reexamined the record in this case, the Petitioner's
motion for reconsideration, the several supplements thereto, and the
196 NLRB 448.
2 Having found that the existing contract barred the petition , the Board did not pass
directly upon the appropriateness of the unit requested by the Petitioner.
3 Pursuant to the provisions of Section 8 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act, the
Board has delegated its powers in connection with this proceeding to a three -memoer panel
(Chairman Herzog and Members Houston and Murdock ]. The Petitioner 's request for
reconsideration of the case by the full Board is hereby denied.
97 NLRB No. 188.