Gurney Manufacturing Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jan 28, 1947

72 N.L.R.B. 311 (N.L.R.B. 1947)

In the Matter of GURNEY MANUFACTURING COMPANY AND JEWEL
FABRICS COMPANY, EMPLOYERS and TEXTILE WORKERS UNION OF
AMERICA, CIO, PETITIONER
Case No. 10-R-2077.-Decided January 28, 1947
Mr. Bernard J. Seff, of Baltimore , Md., for the Employers.
Messrs. Houston B. Troupe, Lloyd H. Davis, and C. D. Boart field,
of Birmingham , Ala., for the Petitioner.
Mr. Melvin J. YVelles, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
Upon a petition duly filed, the National Labor Relations Board on
September 27, 1946, conducted a prehearing election among employees
of the Employers in the alleged appropriate unit to determine whether
or not they desired to be represented by the Petitioner for the purposes
of collective bargaining. At the close of the election a Tally of
Ballots was furnished the parties. The Tally of Ballots shows the
following :
Approximate number of eligible voters ----------------------- 240
Void ballots--------------------------- -------------- 0
Votes cast for Petitioner ------------------------------------ 99
Votes cast against Petitioner-------------------- -- 66
Valid votes counted---------------------------------------- 165
Challenged ballots---------------------------- -------------- 46
Valid votes counted plus challenged ballots ------------------- 211
Thereafter, hearing on the case was held at Prattville, Alabama,
before M. A. Prowell, 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 the case, the National Labor Relations
Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYERS
Gurney Manufacturing Company, herein called Gurney, is an Ala-
bama corporation with its principal office and place of business at
72 N. L. R. B., No 61.
311
I
312 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Prattville, Alabama, where it is engaged in the manufacture of yarn.
At the time of the hearing, Gurney had been in operation less than 1
year. On the basis of its operations until the hearing, it was esti-
mated that its annual purchases would amount in value to approxi-
mately $250,000, of which 50 percent would be received from points
outside the State of Alabama, and that its annual production would
amount in value to approximately $500,000, of which more than 90
percent would be shipped to points outside the State.
Jewel Fabrics Company, herein called Jewel, is a North Carolina
co-partnership authorized to do business in the State of Alabama.
It is engaged in the weaving of cloth at its plant in Prattville,
Alabama. At the time of the hearing, Jewel had also been in operation
less than 1 year. On the basis of its operations until the hearing, it
appears that each week it purchases inaterials valued in excess of
$50,000, of which approximately 70 percent is shipped to it from points
outside,the State of Alabama, and that each week it produces knit
goods valued in excess, of $75,000, all of which is shipped to points
outside the State.
The Employers admit and we find that they are engaged in com-
merce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress of
Industrial Organizations, claiming to represent employees of the
Employers.
III. TFIE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Employers refuse to recognize the Petitioner as the exclusive
bargaining representative of employees of the Employers until the
Petitioner has been certified by the Board in an appropriate unit.
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning
the representation of employees of the Employers, within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
lv. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Petitioner seeks a unit of all production and maintenance em-
ployees of Gurney and Jewel, including fixers, section oxen, and card
grinders, but excluding executives, office and clerical employees, and
all supervisory employees. The Employers contend, however, that
the employees of Jewel and the employees of Gurney should constitute
separate units, or, in the alternative, that the employees of the two
companies be permitted to determine themselves by separate "Globe"
elections whether or not they wish to be represented in a single unit;
the Employers contend further that fixers, section men, and card
GURNEY MANUFACTURING COMPANY 313
grinders should be excluded from any unit or units as supervisory
employees?
As indicated above, Gurney is a corporation and Jewel a co-partner-
ship. Of the three principal co-partners of Jewel, one is president
and one is,vice president of Gurney. Gurney and Jewel have one
general superintendent who maintains a single office, and controls the
operations of both companies. He formulates and effectuates per-
sonnel policy for both Gurney and Jewel. Gurney and Jewel jointly
occupy two buildings in Prattville, Alabama; Gurney utilizes the two
upper floors of the buildings, and Jewel the ground floors of the build-
ings which it rents from Gurney.2 All personnel records for both
companies are maintained in the general superintendent's office. Pay
checks for both companies originate in one office, although they are
drawn on separate accounts. Moreover, Gurney and Jewel have a
common office force, maintenance crew, machine shop, and receiving
and shipping departments. In addition, Jewel uses a portion of
Gurney's products. There is little or no interchange of employees
between Gurney and Jewel, and the machines of each company require
a different skill. However, employees of both companies receive the
same treatment and are paid on a comparable basis. Under all the
circumstances, we find that the employees of both Gurney and Jewel'
constitute a single appropriate unnt.3
There remains for consideration the question of the inclusion of
fixers, section men, and card grinders, all of whom, contrary to the
Petitioner's desire, the Employers would exclude as supervisory em-
ployees. Uncontroverted testimony adduced at the hearing indicates
1At the election, the Employers challenged the ballots of the following per sous, on the
ground that they are Jewel employees Vivian Al. Callanhan, Audrey DeRamus. Sanfoid
Kelly, Velma J Edwards, Rena Powell, Cynthia Gibbons, Irene Smith, Enunette H. Barber,
RuVon Funderburk, Houston Price Aaron Collier, Olen H Dowd, Carol Fell, Rose Ellen
Henry, Marron Seamon, James L Moncrief, Katie Louise Fuller, Cov Webb, Jay Briggs.
Rudolph Esco, Paul Tatum, Adelaide S Walter, Leo Bush, Allen P Keeton, 0 Y. Sins, Mac
Post, Alex L Moncrief
The Employees also challenged the ballots of the following employees, on the ground
that, as section men, card grinders, and fixers, they have supervisory status Sam Thomp-
kins, Dave Dennis, Eugene Tatum (section men) , E W Weems, Benjamin B Fleming,
J C Downing (card guiders) and C L Hnckabv, James A. Melton. F B Collier. Robert
Anshan, Emmett Montgomery, J C Solley, Coy Webb, and Jay Briggs (fixers ) It should
be noted that Webb and Briggs, the last two named employees, were also challenged on the
ground that they are employees of Jewel
Although Johnnie Thornton was challenged on the grounds that he is an employee of
Jewel and a fixer, it was stipulated at the hearing that lie is merely a trainee fixer , having
no supervisory authority whatever Thus the Employer withdrew one of the grounds
for the challenge to the ballot of this employee
• In addition to the above there were six other challenges The ballots of Lillie Middle-
brooks, Elizabeth Duncan, Tommie Green. Jadie Sides, and Nelder Mullins were challenged
by a Board agent because their names did not appear on the list-of eligibles furnished, and
the ballot of Grace Huckabee was challenged by the Petitioner on the ground that she
was no longer an employee of the Emploiers at the time of the election
2 A small part of the ground floor of one of the buildings is occupied by Gurney
3 Matter of Branick Manufacturing Company , 54 N L R B 979 , Matte) of Aaron
Ferer t Sons , Inc, and Wiping Materials , Inc, 53 N L. R. B. 770.
314 DECISTONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
that all these employees have authority to recommend discharge, and
that such recommendations have been made and followed.4 The fixers,
section n'ien and card grinders are all regarded by the production and
maintenance employees as "bosses." Although they do manual work,
the fixers and the section men spend approximately 75 percent of their
time in supervision, and the card grinders spend approximately 25
percent of their time in supervision. On the average, each fixer and
section man supervises 16 employees, and each card grinder supervises
8. The 3 classifications are all hourly paid, like the production and
maintenance employees, but all are paid at a higher rate than the men
whom they supervise. In addition, fixers, section men, and card
grinders attend special supervisors' meetings, while the rank and file
employees do not. We are convinced that all 3 groups of employees
are supervisory within the meaning of our customary definition, and
we shall exclude them from the unit hereinafter found appropriate.
We find that all production and maintenance employees of the
Employers, including Johnnie Thornton,' but excluding office and
clerical employees, fixers, section men, card grinders, executives, and
all other supervisory employees with authority to hire, promote, dis-
charge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of em-
ployees, or effectively recommend such action, constitute a unit ap-
propriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the mean-
ing of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
The Employers question the propriety of the prehearing election
because Jewel expects in the near future to double or triple the 65
employees it had at the time of the hearing. But we have determined
that a single unit of employees of Jewel and Gurney is appropriate.
And no contention is made that there will be any increase in the
number of approximately 200 employees Gurney engaged at the time
of the prehearing election. Thus, even if the number of Jewel em-
ployees engaged at the time of the hearing should triple, the incre-
ment will be less than half the total complement of approximately
240 employees at Jewel and Gurney at the time of the prehearing
election. We are of the opinion, therefore, that the holding of the
prehearing election was proper because it was conducted among a
representative group of employees in the appropriate unit.,,
Of the 46 challenged ballots, 14 were cast by fixers, section meal
and card grinders, whom we have excluded from the appropriate unit
as supervisory; and 26 were cast by employees of Jewel (excluding
4 Cf. Matter of Thomaston Cotton-Mills, Griffin Division , 66 N L. R. B 731.
See footnote 1, supra.
See Matter of Tyler Fixture Corporation, 67 N L R. B 945.
GURNEY MANUFACTURING COMPANY 315
2 fixers who voted), whom we have determined to include in the unit.
Accordingly, we hereby sustain the challenges to the ballots of the
14 fixers, section men and card grinders, namely: C. L. Huckaby,
James A. Melton, E. W. Weems, Sam Thompkins, Dave Dennis, F.
B. Collier, Benjamin B. Fleming, Robert Ausban, Emmett Mont-
gomery, J. C. Downing, J. C. Solley, Eugene Tatum, Coy Webb, and
Jay Briggs; and we hereby overrule the challenges to the ballots of
the 26 Jewel employees (excluding fixers Coy Webb and Jay Briggs),
namely Vivian M. Callanhan, Audrey DeRamus, Sanford Kelly,
Velma J. Edwards, Rena Powell, Cynthia Gibbons, Irene Smith,
Emmette H. Barber, RuVon Funderburk, Houston Price, Aaron Col-
lier, Oren H. Dowd, Carol Fell, Rose Ellen Henry, Marion Seamon,.
James L. Moncrief, O. Y. Sims, Mac Post, Alex L. Moncrief, Katie,
Louise Fuller, Johnnie Thornton, Rudolph Esco, Paul Tatum, Ade-
laide S. Walter, Leo Bush, and Allen P. Keeton.
But we deem it unnecessary to direct the opening and counting of
the ballots of the 26 Jewel employees which we have determined to
be valid, or to pass upon the validity of the 6 remaining challenged
ballots. For the Petitioner has received a majority of all valid votes,
counted plus the 26 valid and 6 undetermined challenged ballots (99,
out of 197). We shall, therefore, certify the Petitioner as the collec-
tive bargaining representative of the employees in the appropriate
unit.
CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
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, and pursuant to Section 20.54 of National Labor Rela-
tions Board Rules and Regulations-Series 4,
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED that Textile Workers Union of America, CIO,
has been designated and selected by a majority of all production and,
maintenance employees of Gurney Manufacturing Company and
Jewel Fabrics Company, Prattville, Alabama, including Johnnie
Thornton, but excluding office and clerical employees, executives, fixers,,
section men, card grinders. and all other supervisory employees with,
authority to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect
changes in the status of employees, or effectively recommend such
action, as their representative for the purposes of collective bargain-
ing and that, pursuant to Section 9 (a) of the Act, the said organization
is the exclusive representative of all such employees for the purposes,
of collective bargaining with respect to rates of pay, wages, hours of,
employment, and other conditions of employment.