Henry I. Siegel Co., Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 26, 1948

76 N.L.R.B. 976 (N.L.R.B. 1948)

In the Matter Of HENRY I. SIEGEL COMPANY, INC., EMPLOYER and
AMALGAMATED CLOTHING WORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO, PETITIONER
Case Yo. 9-RC-9.-Decided March 26, 1948
Mr. James H. Warren, of Fulton, Ky., for the Employer.
Mr. Edward A. Blair, of Fulton, Ky., and Mr. Harry Haberthear,
of Nashville, Tenn., for the Petitioner.
Miss Ida Lee Merchant, of Union City, Tenn., and Mr. Monroe
Wilkerson, of Fulton, Ky., for the Intervenor.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at Fulton,
Kentucky, on January 8, 1948, before' Alan A. Bruckner, 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 Board makes the following
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
Henry I. Siegel Company, Inc., a New York corporation, is engaged
in the manufacture of cotton work-clothing at one of its plants in
Fulton, Kentucky. Although the Employer owns three other plants in
the State of Tennessee, this proceeding is concerned only with the
Fulton, Kentucky, plant. During the 12-month period prior to the
hearing, the Employer purchased for use at this plant raw material
valued in excess of $50,000, of which approximately 100 percent was
received from points outside the State of Kentucky. During the same
period, the Employer sold more than $50,000 worth of finished prod-
ucts, of which approximately 99 percent was shipped to out-of-State
destinations.
The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
1 Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act, the
National Labor Relations Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a
three-man panel consisting of Board Members Houston, Reynolds, and Gray.
76 N. L. R. B., No. 139.
976
HENRY I. SIEGEL COMPANY, INC.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
977
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, Local 319, 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 QUESTIONS CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On December 16, 1946, after a consent election, the Employer and
the Intervenor entered into a collective bargaining contract for 1 year,
with provision for automatic renewal for an additional year, unless
notice was given by either party 60 days prior to such terminal date,
of a desire to terminate the agreement.
On October 10, 1947, the Petitioner advised the Employer by letter
that it represented a majority of the Employer's employees at its Ful-
ton, Kentucky, plant, and requested a conference for the purpose of
negotiating a collective bargaining contract. At this time the Em-
ployer and the Intervenor were negotiating substantial changes in thcir
contract and were contemplating the execution of a new contract. The
Employer by letter dated October 14, 1947, refused to accept the Peti-
tioner's offer to bargain and gave as its reason its presently existing
contract with the Intervenor. On October 23, 1947, the Petitioner filed
the instant petition with the Board. The Employer and the Inter-
venor admit that the contract expired on December 16, 1947, and that
no contract has been in force and effect since that date 2
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.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
We find, substantially in accordance with the agreement of the
parties at the hearing, that all production and maintenance employees
at the Employer's Fulton, Kentucky, plant, excluding all clerical em-
ployees, guards,3 professional employees, and supervisors, as defined
2 Subsequent to the hearing, all parties entered into a stipulation respecting the facts set
forth above . The stipulation , in accordance with the agreement of the parties , is hereby
made part of the record in this proceeding
3 The Employer lists two watchmen on its pay roll. These watchmen were included in
the past bargaining contract. As guards , the parties agree, and we find , that watchmen
should be excluded from the appropriate unit. Matter of C. V. Hill & Company, Inc., 76
N. L. R B , 158. While the record discloses that the watchmen perform some janitorial
work, it does not disclose that any substantial portion of their time is thus occupied
978 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
in the amended Act, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of
collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the
purposes of collective bargaining with Henry I. Siegel Company,
Inc., Fulton, Kentucky, an election 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 Ninth Region, acting in this matter as agent for the
National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Sections 203.61 and
203.62 of the National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-
Series 5, among the employees in the unit found appropriate in Sec-
tion IV, above; who were employed during the pay-roll period im-
mediately 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 also excluding em-
ployees on strike who are not entitled to reinstatement, to determine
whether they desire to be represented by Amalgamated Clothing
Workers of America, CIO, or by United Garment Workers of Amer-
ica, Local 319, A. F. L., for the purposes of collective bargaining,
or by neither.
MEMBER REYNOLDS took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Direction of Election.