Dickson-Jenkins Manufacturing Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 1, 1948

76 N.L.R.B. 449 (N.L.R.B. 1948)

In the Matter of DICKSON-JENKINS MANUFACTURING COMPANY, EM-
PLOYER and AMALGAMATED CLOTHING WORKERS OF AMERICA, C. I. 0.,
PETITIONER
Case No. 16-R D91Y7.Decided March 1, 1948
Mr. George Lambert and Mrs. Alda Mae Cornuaud, both of Dallas,
Tex., for the Petitioner.
Mr. L. N. D. Wells, Jr., of Mullinace, Wells, Barbaria and Ball, of
Dallas, Tex., and Miss Emily Jordan, of San Antonio, Tex., and Mrs.
Mollie Farquhar, of Fort Worth, Tex., for the Intervenor.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at Fort
Worth, Texas, on December 5,1947, before Charles Y. Latimer, hearing
officer. The hearing officers' rulings made at the hearing are free from
prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations
Board' makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
The Dickson-Jenkins Manufacturing Company, a Texas corpora-
tion, is engaged in the manufacture of work and play clothes at its
factory in Fort Worth, Texas. The Employer annually purchases raw
materials valued in excess of $1,000,000, of which the major portion
represents shipments from points outside the State of Texas. The
Employer annually sells to points outside the State manufactured
products valued in excess of $800,000.
The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
'Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act, the
Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-man panel consisting
of the undersigned Board Members [Houston, Murdock, and Gray].
76 N. L. R. B., No. 65.
449
450 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress
of Industrial Organizations, claiming to represent employees of the
Employer.
-United Garment Workers of America, herein called the Intervenor,
is a labor organization affiliated with the American Federation of
Labor, claiming to represent employees of the Employer.
Ili. TILE QUESTION CONCERINING Rl''PRESENTATION
The Employer refuses to recognize either the Petitioner or the In-
tervenor as the exclusive bargaining representative of employees of
the Employer until the Petitioner or the Intervenor has been certi-
fied by the Board in an appropriate unit.
We find that a question affecting commerce exists concerning the
representation of employees of the Employer, within the meaning of
Section.9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.2
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
We find, in substantial agreement with the parties, that all seam
openers, pressers, cutters, cutters' helpers, bundle boys, service help,
operators, and slipping clerks, excluding office and clerical employees,
foremen, foreladles, and supervisors, constitute a unit appropriate
for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of See-
i ion 9 (b) of the Act.3
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the
purposes of collective bargaining with Dickson-Jenkins Manufactur-
ing Conmpany, an election by secret ballot shall be conducted as early
as possible, but not later than thirty (30) clays from the date of this
At the lieaiing the Intervenor cooled to dismiss the petition on two grounds (1) The
Iuterenor, which had been certified by the Boa id in 1944 (Matte) of Dickson-Jenkins
11laauifactnrinq Company, 57 N L R B 1095), alleged that the Employer was guilty of
un'aui lahoi practices in refusing to baigain with it since February 1947, and argued that
the l,etition should be dismissed An unfair labor piactice pioceeding (Case No 16-C-1575)
brought by the intervenor, based on such alleged ierusal to haigaiii, was administratively
dismissed by the Regional Director on June 20, 1947, and no appeal has been taken We,
therefoie, flail the Intervener's contention to be without merit See platter of Johnson
Fninatne Concpana/, 73 N I. B B 1112 (2) The Intervenoi further claimed that the
Petitioner's showing of interest was stale, and that there had been a 15 Percent per month
t ui n-Pier in eniploi nient we find these contentions to be without merit for reasons stated
in Matte) of 0 D Jcnnings and Company, 68 N L It B 516, and in Matter of Natchez
hla,dwood Company. 71 IN L'R' B 24
% This in the Caine unit established by the Board in Matter of,Diekson-Jen*ins Manufac-
tniirr,Compang , 57 N L R B 1095 Testimony at the hearing established that the Em-
plo2 ci,'s Opel ations have not changed substantially since then.
DICKSON-TENKINS MANUFACTURING COMPANY 451
Direction, under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director
for the Sixteenth Region, and subject to Sections 203.61 and 203.62 of
National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 5,
among the employees in the unit found appropriate in Section IV,
above, who were employed during 'the pay-roll period immediately
preceding the date of this Direction, including employees who did
not work during said pay-roll period because they were ill or on
vacation or temporarily laid off, but excluding those employees who
have since quit or been discharged for cause and have not been rehired
or reinstated prior to the date of the election, and any employees on
strike who are not entitled to reinstatement, to determine whether
they desire to be represented by Amalgamated Clothing Workers of
America, C. I. 0., or by United Garment Workers of America, A. F. L.,
for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by neither.
781902-48-i of 76--30