Dwight Manufacturing Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 9, 1936

1 N.L.R.B. 309 (N.L.R.B. 1936)

In the Matter of DWIGHT MANUFACTURING COMPANY and LocAL
No. 1878, UNITED TEXTILE WORKERS OF AMERICA
Case No. R-9-Decided March 9, 1936
Cotton Textile Industry-Interference, Restraint or Coercion: expressed oppo-
sition to labor organization, threats of retaliatory action ; surveillance of union
meetings and activities-Discrimination : discharge-Company-Dominated Union:
domination and control of administration ; discrimination in favor of ; financial
or other support-Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining: production em-
ployees-Election Ordered: question affecting commerce : confusion and unrest
among employees-controversy concerning representation of employees : request
by substantial number in appropriate unit ; rival organizations ; substantial doubt
as to majority status.
Mr. Thomas I. Emerson and Mr. Walter G. Cooper, Jr., for the
Board.
Goodhue c0 Lusk, of Gadsden, Ala., for the Company.
Mr. W. G. Rains, of Gadsden, Ala., for Local No. 1878.
Mr. Borden Burr, of Birmingham, Ala., for Dwight Employees
Association, and for certain individual employees, intervenors.
DECISION
STATEMENT OF CASE
On November 4, 1935, Local No. 1878, United Textile Workers of
America (hereinafter called Local No. 1878), filed with the Regional
Director for the Tenth Region a petition for an investigation and
certification of representatives pursuant to Section 9, subdivision
(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, approved July 5, 1935.
The petition stated that Local No. 1878 represented 1600 out of
1800 production employees of the Dwight Manufacturing Company
(hereinafter called the Company) ; that the "Dwight Mutual Aid
Association" (the correct name is Dwight Employees Association)
also claimed to represent such employees; that the Company dis-
puted the claim of Local No. 1878 to a majority; and that a question
affecting commerce concerning representation had arisen.
On November 14, 1935, the Board, acting pursuant to Section 9,
subdivision (c) of the Act and Article III, Section 3 of National
Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 1, author-
ized the Regional Director to conduct an investigation and to pro-
vide for an appropriate hearing upon due notice. Pursuant to such
309
310 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
authorization, the Regional Director on December 5, 1935, issued
and duly served upon the parties a notice setting a hearing at
Gadsden, Alabama, for December 19, 1935. By an amended notice
of hearing issued December 18, 1935, the hearing was postponed
to January 2, 1936, at the same place.
The hearing was held on January 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7, 1936, before
Charles W. Bergman, Trial Examiner duly designated by order of
the Board. Full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-
examine witnesses and to introduce evidence bearing upon the issues
,was afforded to all parties.
Local No. 1878 appeared by counsel and participated in the-hear-
ing. The Company appeared specially and filed a motion to dis-
miss the proceedings, based upon constitutional and other objections
to the jurisdiction of the Board. The Trial Examiner overruled
this motion. Thereupon the Company filed an answer, including
allegations in the nature of a plea to the jurisdiction, but took no
further active part in the proceedings. The plea to the jurisdiction,
after the introduction of evidence by counsel for the Board, was
overruled by the Trial Examiner.
The Dwight Employees Association (hereinafter called the Asso-
ciation ) likewise appeared specially . Counsel for the Association also
filed a motion to intervene on behalf of eight individual employees,
which motion was granted. Counsel for the Association and the
eight individual employees filed a joint answer and motion to dis-
miss the proceedings based upon constitutional grounds. The mo-
tion was denied. Thereafter counsel for the Association and the
eight intervenors participated in the hearing on the merits.
On January 23, 1936, counsel for the Company and counsel for
,the Association and the eight individual employees appeared and
argued orally before the Board in Washington.
The various rulings of the Trial Examiner upon the foregoing
motions and the plea are hereby affirmed.
Upon the record in the case, the stenographic transcript of the
hearing, and all the evidence including oral testimony, documents
and other evidence offered and received at the hearing, the Board
makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The Dwight Manufacturing Company is incorporated in Mas-
sachusetts, with its principal office in Boston, Massachusetts, and
owns and operates a textile mill at Gadsden, Alabama. It em-
ploys at this mill approximately 2,190 employees, operating upon
three shifts.
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 311
2. The Company manufactures khakis, drills, sheetings, satteens,
osnaburgs and other textile products.
3. In manufacturing the aforesaid products the Company con-
sumes approximately 1400 to 1500 bales of cotton a week. This cot-
ton is bought on a delivered basis, mostly from the local offices of
merchants who have branch offices throughout the cotton producing
states, and in smaller amounts from local merchants in Gadsden.
Approximately 15 to 17 per cent. is shipped to Gadsden from out-
side the State of Alabama.
4. In addition to cotton, the Company uses raw materials obtained
from different sources, as follows :
(a) Cotton strip, consumed at the rate of 150 bales a week, is ob-
tained half from sources outside of Alabama and half from Alabama.
(b) All the coal used is obtained from Alabama.
(c) Starches, of which about 20 carloads a year are used, are
obtained from Illinois.
(d) Tallow, used at the rate of 120 barrels a year, is obtained
from Illinois.
(e) Burlap, to the extent of 5 or 6 carloads a year, is all im-
ported from places outside the United States.
(f) Paper, of which the mill consumes about 6 carloads a year,
is obtained half from Alabama and half from outside of Alabama.
(g) Machinery and machine supplies are obtained mostly from
Massachusetts.
(h) Oil, of which about 150 barrels a year are consumed, is all
obtained from outside of Alabama.
5. Cotton shipped to the mill is unloaded and placed in the ware-
house. From there it is sent to the opening room and put through
the operations of carding, spinning, weaving and intermediate proc-
esses. It normally requires about three weeks for a bale of cotton
entering the opening room to emerge in the form of woven fabric.
6. The mill produces about one and a quarter million yards of
cloth per week, having an average value of twelve cents a yard.
7. All sales of the products of the mill are made through Minot,
Hooper & Co., a commission house located in New York City, with
branch offices in Boston, Massachusetts, Chicago, Illinois, on the
Pacific Coast and all over the world. When Minot, Hooper & Co.
makes a sale it notifies the Company, which ships f. o. b. mill to the
buyer or to the destination directed by the buyer.
8. Ninety per cent. of all products sold by the Company are shipped
to points outside the State of Alabama. Shipments are made to vir-
tually every state in the United States, the principal ones being New
York, Ohio, Massachusetts, Missouri and Illinois. Six to seven per
cent. of the products are exported to points in foreign countries.
97571-36-vol i-21
312 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
9. The principal products of the mill are disposed of as follows :
(a) Khaki and drills are shipped mainly to points in New York
and Ohio and to the cities of Baltimore, Philadelphia, St. Louis and
Chicago. At these points the fabric is manufactured into uniforms,
clothing, overalls and similar articles, which are in turn distributed
all over the country.
(b) Drills to be used as shoe linings are shipped to the shoe manu-
facturing centers of the country, principally St. Louis and Boston.
(c) Sheeting, produced in the gray at the mill, is shipped to New
England, New York, Missouri and North Carolina for finishing.
(d) Auto tire fabric is shipped mainly to Akron, Ohio. Twelve
to fifteen per cent. of this product is delivered to a plant located in
Gadsden, Alabama.
(e) Osnaburgs, used mostly in the manufacture of bags, are shipped
mainly to New Orleans, Chicago and points in the Middle West.
10. Sixty per cent. of the goods produced are manufactured upon
special order; the remainder for stock. Under normal conditions
there is a continuous flow of shipments from the mill to points in
states other than Alabama.
11. Minot, Hooper & Co. advertise the products of the Dwight
Manufacturing Company in trade journals which circulate through-
out the cotton producing and cotton consuming states.
12. The market for the products of the mill embraces the whole
of the textile field that uses the type of goods which the mill pro-
duces. The mill competes for markets with virtually every textile
mill in the United States which produces the same type of fabric.
It-competes with more than a hundred such mills located in the
Southern states.
13. The wages, hours and working conditions of employees in com-
peting mills affect the business of the Company.
14. A strike occurred in the mill in 1934 which lasted from July
12 to the end of September. In its later stages this strike was merged
with the general textile strike of September, 1934. During the period
of the strike the mill was closed; there were no operations and no
shipments were made ; nor did the mill make any sales or receive
any orders for goods.
15. The aforesaid operations of the Company constitute a continu-
ous flow of trade, traffic and commerce among the several States, and
between the State of Alabama and foreign countries.
16. Local No. 1878 is a labor organization formed among the em-
ployees of the mill in the spring of 1933. It is a regularly constituted
Local of the United Textile Workers of America, affiliated with the
American Federation of Labor. '
17. In September, 1934 about 1300 employees, out of some 1500
then working in the mill, were members of Local No. 1878.
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 313
18. From September, 1934 until the date of the hearing before the
Trial Examiner, the Company, through its representatives and
agents, has actively discouraged membership in Local No. 1878 by
discharging employees for membership or activity in Local No. 1878,
by warning and threatening employees against joining or remaining
members of Local No. 1878, by watching meetings of Local No. 1878,
and by other means. No charge that the Company has engaged or is
engaging in unfair labor practices with respect to the foregoing
matters has been filed with the Board.
19. At the time of the hearing, Local No. 1878 was not functioning
openly among the employees then working in the mill, but carried
on all its activities with respect to such employees in secret. It still
carried approximately 1300 employees on its books as members in
good standing but few of these had paid dues to date and none
attended meetings of the Local.
20. Witnesses testified at the hearing that shortly after the passage
of the National Labor Relations Act the Local authorized its presi-
dent to appoint a secret committee to make a survey of the sentiment
among the employees in the plant with regard to holding an election
for the selection of representatives under Section 9 (c) of the Act;
that a committee of nine members was appointed and did make such
a secret survey ; that out of 1500 to 1600 employees who were ap-
proached, an overwhelming number desired that such an election be
held and expressed their wish that they be represented in collective
bargaining by Local No. 1878. Although some of this testimony is
not entirely credible or convincing, it is sufficient to show that a sub-
stantial number of employees desire an opportunity to select repre-
sentatives under Section 9 (c) of the Act.
21. The Dwight Employees Association was formed among the
production employees of the mill in the fall of 1934.
22. At the time of the hearing about 2,122 employees presently
employed in the mill were carried as members of the Association.
During the progress of the hearing somewhat over 2000 employees
signed a petition stating that they wished the Association to repre-
sent them in dealings with the Company, that they did not wish
Local No. 1878 to represent them, and that they did not wish an
election.
23. The Association is dominated and controlled by the Company
through the second-hands employed by the Company, who hold the
important offices in the Association, solicit membership, collect dues
and payments for the sick benefit fund, and otherwise actively par-
ticipate in its affairs. The Company has consistently favored the
Association by furnishing and equipping a meeting place, providing
athletic facilities, permitting solicitation of membership and collec-
tion of dues in the mill during working hours, and the like. The
314 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Company through its agents and representatives has threatened
employees with discharge or other discrimination for failure to join
the Association and has otherwise exerted pressure to encourage
membership in the Association. No charge that the Company has
engaged in or is engaging in unfair labor practices with respect torn,
the foregoing matters has been filed with the Board.
24. The employees have not had the opportunity to make a free
choice of representatives for collective bargaining with the Company
and the present active membership in Local No. 1878 and the Associa-
tion does not represent the actual sentiment of the employees in the
mill.
25. A question has arisen concerning the representation of em-
ployees in the mill. This question tends to lead to labor disputes
burdening and obstructing commerce and the free flow of commerce!
26. No question has been raised with respect to the appropriate
bargaining unit. The production employees in the mill, that is,
all the employees except the clerical and supervisory force (second-
hands being included as supervisory), constitute a unit appropriate
for the purposes of collective bargaining.
27. The question affecting commerce concerning the representation
of the employees of the Company can be settled by a secret ballot
conducted by the Board in accordance with Section 9 (c) of the
National Labor Relations Act.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Upon the basis of the above findings, the following conclusions
of law are made by the Board :
1. The production employees of the Dwight Manufacturing Com-
pany-that is, all the employees except the clerical and supervisory
force (second-hands being included as supervisory) -constitute an
appropriate unit for the purposes of collective bargaining, within the
meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
2. A question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the repre-
sentation of the production employees of the Dwight Manufacturing
Company, within the meaning of Section 9 (c)' of the Act.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National
Labor Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, approved July 5, 1935, and pursuant to Article III,
Section 8 of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regula-
tions-Series 1, it is _
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation authorized by the
Board in this case, an election by secret ballot shall be conducted
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 315
under the direction and supervision of Charles N. Feidelson, Re-
gional Director for the Tenth Region, acting in this matter as the
agent of the National Labor Relations Board and subject to Article
III, Section 9 of said Rules and Regulations , among the production
employees in the Gadsden mill of the Dwight Manufacturing Com-
pany, except the clerical and supervisory force (second -hands being
included as supervisory), on the payroll of the Company on the
date of the last payment of wages immediately preceding the date
of this Direction , to determine whether they desire to be represented
for the purposes of collective bargaining by the Dwight Employees
Association or Local No. 1878, United Textile Workers of America,
said election to be held within ten ( 10) days after the production
by the Dwight Manufacturing Company of its payroll lists in ac-
cordance with the subpoena issued by the Board on March 9th,
1936.
[SAME TITLE ]
AMENDED DIRECTION OF ELECTION
March 16, 1936
By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National
Labor Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Rela-
tions Act, approved July 5, 1935, and pursuant to Article III, Sec-
tion 8 of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-
Series 1, it is
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation authorized by the
Board in this case, an election by secret ballot shall be conducted
under the direction and supervision of Charles N. Feidelson, Re-
gional Director for the Tenth Region, acting in this matter as the
agent of the National Labor Relations Board and subject to Article
III, Section 9 of said Rules and Regulations , among the production
employees in the Gadsden mill of the Dwight Manufacturing Com-
pany, except the clerical and supervisory force (second-hands being
included as supervisory ), on the payroll of the Company on the date
of the last payment of wages immediately preceding the date of this
Direction , to determine whether they desire to be represented for the
purposes of collective bargaining by the Dwight Employees Asso-
ciation or Local No. 1878, United Textile Workers of America, said
election to be held within ten (10 ) days after the production by the
Dwight Manufacturing Company of its payroll lists in accordance
with the subpoena issued by the Board on March 14, 1936.
MR. SMITH took no part in the consideration of the above Amended
Direction of Election.