George F. Brasfield and Co., Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Feb 27, 1947

72 N.L.R.B. 944 (N.L.R.B. 1947)

In the Matter of GEORGE F. BRASFIELD AND COMPANY, INCORPORATED
(BLANKET DIVISION,' EMPLOYER and AMALGAMATED CLOTHING
WORKERS OF AMERICA, C. I. 0., PETITIONER
Case No. 5-R-2597.-Decided Februarij N7,1947_
Messrs. J. Gordon Bohannan and George F. Brasfield , of Petersburg,
Va., for the Employer.
Mr. T. D. du Cuennois , of Richmond , Va., for the Petitioner.
Mr. Nathan Hamburger , of Baltimore , Md., for the Intervenor.
Mr. Frank H. Blumenthal , of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at Peters-
burg, Virginia, on November 4, 1946, before Sidney J. Barban, hear-
ing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free
from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations
Board makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
George F. Brasfield and Company, Incorporated, a Virginia cor-
poration, is engaged in the manufacture of tablecloths and blankets at
two plants, respectively, both of which are located in Petersburg,
Virginia. The Blanket Division, the sole plant involved in this pro-
ceeding, which is located at 1221 Commerce Street, commenced opera-
tions in January 1946. It has since made purchases of raw materials,
consisting of wool cloth and wire valued in excess of $10,000, of which
more than 50 percent has been shipped from points outside the Com-
monwealth of Virginia. During the same period, the Division has
manufactured finished products valued in excess of $20,000, of which
more than 50 percent has been shipped to points outside the Common-
wealth of Virginia.
1 Name corrected at hearing.
72 N. L. R. B., No. 162.
944
GEORGE F. BRASFIELD AND COMPANY, INCORPORATED 945
The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. -
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress of
Industrial Organizations, claiming to represent employees of the
Employer.
International Ladies Garment Workers Union, herein called the
Intervenor, is a labor organization affiliated with the American Fed-
eration of Labor, claiming to represent employees of the Employer.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Employer refuses to recognize the Petitioner as the exclusive
bargaining representative of employees of the Employer until the
Petitioner has been certified by the Board in an appropriate unit.
On June 22, 1943, following a consent election, the Intervenor was
designated by the Regional Director as the exclusive bargaining rep-
resentative of all production and maintenance employees of the Em-
ployer's tablecloth plant,' which was then the only plant operated by
the Employer. On October 15, 1943, after certain proceedings before
the War Labor Board, a 1-year contract was signed by the Employer
and the Intervenor, covering the employees of the tablecloth plant.
This contract was subsequently renewed for 1-year terms by the par-
ties, in substantially the same form, until October 15, 1946, when a
phrase was inserted in a new 1-year agreement, specifying that the
plant covered was that "located at the corner of South and High
Streets." This phrase was apparently added in order to avoid con-
fusion with the Blanket Division, which had been established in J anu-
ary 1946 about one-half to three-fourths of a mile distant from South
and High Streets, the location of the tablecloth plant.
The Intervenor claims that its 1946 contract with the Employer
applies to the employees of the newly established Blanket Division and
therefore constitutes a bar to an election among these workers. But
the Blanket Division is a new plant, composed of employees who have
never had an opportunity to express their desires with respect to rep-
resentation for the purposes of collective bargaining. Moreover, the
Intervenor's first contracts with the Employer were entered into before
the new plant was opened, and the latest and existing contract was
specifically worded to apply only to employees of the old tablecloth
plant. In these circumstances, the 1946 contract between the Em-
ployer and the Intervenor cannot serve to preclude a current determi-
2 Case No. 5=R-1291.
946 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
nation of representatives for the employees of the Blanket Division.3
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning
the representation of employees of the Employer, within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
lv. TIIE APPROPRIATE UNIT
All parties agree that a Iuiit Hof all production and maintenance
workers of the Blanket Division, excluding the production and receiv-
ing clerks 4 and all other clericals, the guard, and all supervisory em-
ployees, is appropriate. They disagree, however, with respect to the
watchmen and "utility" Ivan.
Watchmen: The Petitioner would exclude the three watchmen as
supervisory employees, while the Intervenor would include them.
The Employer indicated its opinion that they should be excluded.
These watchmen are neither armed nor uniformed, and work at night
when the plant is normally not in operation. Their usual and normal
duties are to make rounds of the plant in order to protect it against
fire, theft, and other hazards. It was testified at the hearing that if a
watchman ,observed an "infraction of rules" by, an employee working
overtime, he would report the incident to the superintendent or the
plant guard. However, it is clear that the watchmen have no duty or
authority to approach the employees either to ask their names or to
request them to stop their activity, and hence are not monitorial. And
it is also clear that they are not supervisory personnel. We shall
include them in the appropriate unit as custodial employees.
"Utility?' mwtn: There was some dispute regarding a "utility" man,5
the Employer indicating a desire to exclude him from the unit, while
the Petitioner and Intervenor would include him. The record shows
that he is a "handy-man" who performs general maintenance duties.
We shall include him.
We find that all production and maintenance employees of the
Employer's Blanket Division, including the watchmen and the "util-
ity" man, but excluding the guard, the production and receiving clerks
and all other clerical employees, and all supervisory employees with
authority to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect
changes in the status of employees, or effectively recommend such
action, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective
bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
3 Matters of Dohrmann Hotel Supply Company, 71 N. L . R. B. 699, and cases cited ;
Matter of Chicago Flexible Shaft Company, 60 N. L. R. B. 848; Matter of Hiram Swank's
Sons, 54 N L R B. 1401.
* Ethel D Myrick and John Moore, respectively.
a Hugh A. Andrews.
GEORGE F. BRASFIELD AND COMPANY, INCORPORATED 947
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the
purposes of collective bargaining with George F. Brasfield and Com-
pany, Incorporated (Blanket Division), Petersburg, Virginia, an elec-
tion by secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not
later than thirty (30) days from the date of this Direction, under the
direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Fifth Re-
gion, acting in this matter as agent for the National Labor Relations
Board, and subject to Sections 203.55 and 203.56, of National Labor
Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 4, among the em-
ployees in the unit found appropriate in Section IV, above, who were
employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date
of this Direction, including employees who did not work during said
pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation or temporarily
laid off, and including employees in the armed forces of the United
States who present themselves in person at the polls, 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,
to determine whether they desire to be represented by Amalgamated
Clothing Workers of America, C. I. 0., or by International Ladies
Garment Workers Union, A. F. L., for the purposes of collective bar-
gaining, or by neither.