Fox Manufacturing Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 31, 1955

112 N.L.R.B. 977 (N.L.R.B. 1955)

FOX MANUFACTURING COMPANY 977
and shall dismiss it without prejudice to the filing of a new petition
when the Employer has a representative and substantial working
force.3
[The Board dismissed the petition.]
s Individual Drinking Cup Co., Inc., 101 NLRB 1751; A. 0. Smith Corporation, Air Frame
Component Division, 100 NLRB 1879.
Fox Manufacturing Company and United Furniture Workers of
America, CIO, Petitioner. Case No. 10-RC-2994. May 31, 1955
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Frank E. Hamilton,
Jr., hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing
are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.'
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the
Act'
2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain em-
ployees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9
(c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The parties are in substantial agreement as to the unit except that
the Petitioner would exclude 6 individuals as supervisors and 3 watch-
men as guards , all of whom the Employer would include as employees.
Holding, called the "assistant upholstery foreman," is the senior
upholsterer working under the supervision of the upholstery depart-
ment foreman. Taylor, called the "assistant cutting room forelady,"
is a full-time cutter working under the direction of the cutting room
foreman. Sawyer, called the "car loading foreman," is a full-time
worker and No. 1 carloader working under the supervision of the ship-
ping department foreman. Hester, called the "assistant finishing
room foreman," is a utility man, who, under the direction of the finish-
ing department foreman, mixes and supplies materials for the plant
operation and performs repair work. Gray, called the "finishing
1 We find no merit in the Employer 's contentions that : (1) The Board should determine
the authenticity of the Petitioner 's showing of interest by verifying the authorization
cards submitted ; and (2 ) the unfair labor practice charges pending against it must be
waived not only by the charging party, the Petitioner , but also by the alleged discriminatee.
The Board has consistently held that the showing of interest and the compliance with its
waiver requirements are administrative matters not litigable by the parties. Charles A.
Krause Milling Co., 97 NLRB 536 at 587 ; Wells Dairies Cooperative, 109 NLRB 1450.
Moreover, we are administratively satisfied as to the adequacy of the showing of interest
and as to the propriety of the waiver.
2 Jonesboro Grain Drying Cooperative , 110 NLRB 481.
112 NLRB No. 128.
'978 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
room foreman," works in the separately located table department,
which is also under the supervision of the finishing department fore-
man. He supplies frames to the assembly employees and performs
production work. Although Gray has the duty to see that the stand-
ard of quality is maintained, the record shows that his direction of
employees is "slight' 'and that he makes no work assignments without
first consulting the finishing department foreman.
Unlike the admitted supervisors, the above five individuals, despite
their titles, do not attend supervisors' meetings and are not salaried.
Although they may substitute for their departmental foreman in the
absence of the latter, the record shows that they do so only on in-
frequent and sporadic occasions. Under the circumstances, we find
that these persons are not supervisors, but are employees within the
meaning of the Act, and we shall therefore include them in the unit.'
Gosnell, called the "machine shop foreman," is the "boss mechanic"
over four employees, whose work he directs. He has the authority
to select nten for a job and if an employee "went sour," his recommen-
dation in this respect would be given serious consideration. He also
attends supervisors' mneetings. As Gosnell effectively recoii-iniends
concerning the status of employees and also responsibly directs them,
we find, under all the circumstances, that he is a supervisor within the
meaning of the Act and therefore exclude him from the unit.'
The 3 watchmen work on shifts 24 hours a day. At night and at
other times when the plant is not in operation, they are charged with
keeping out unauthorized persons, and regularly make the customary
rounds of the plant. During the day when the plant is in operation,
the watchman on that shift, works in the boilerroom, but, in addition,
he makes rounds before and after the shift. In these circumstances,
as the watchmen perform guard duties part of their time, we find that
they are guards within the meaning of the Act and exclude them from
the un it.5
Accordingly, we find that all production and maintenance employees
at the Employer's Rome, Georgia, plant, including the assistant finish-
ing room foreman, finishing room foreman of the table department,
assistant upholstery foreman, assistant cutting room forelady, and
carloading foreman ; but excluding watchmen, guards, office executives,
sales personnel, professional employees, the machine shop foreman, and
all other supervisors as defined in the Act, constitute a unit appropriate
for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Sec-
tion 9 (b) of the Act.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
311elms Motor P:xpoess, Inc, 107 NLRB 132 at 135, Coca-Cola Bottling Company of
Tulsa. Oklahoma, 85 NLltlt 606 at 608
a Seashore Tiansportahon Coanpany, 95 NLRB 1296 at 1298
5Geaeial Fiesta Company, Distribution Tiansfo?mei Department, 110 NLRB 922.