J. Halpern Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 27, 1954

108 N.L.R.B. 1142 (N.L.R.B. 1954)

1 142 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
biles requiring repair , and assigns work to available mechan-
ics. The record discloses that the service manager does not
have authority to hire or discharge and that any recommenda-
tions he might make would be afforded the same weight as the
recommendations of other service department employees. In
these circumstances , we find , contrary to the Petitioners'
contention , thatthe service manager does notpossess the super-
visory authority defined in the Act.' Accordingly, we will
include him in the unit.
We find that all service department employees at the Em-
ployer's Paducah, Kentucky, establishment, including me-
chanics, helpers, the parts manager, the wash and lubrication
man, and the service manager , but excluding office clericals,
the salesman , guards , and supervisors as defined in the Act,
constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective
bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
9Cf. Win. J. Silva Company, 85 NLRB 573, 575. The record discloses that F. L. Babb, the
proprietor of the establishment, is the sole person exercising supervisory authority.
JULIUS HALPERN, ALFRED HALPERN, GEORGE HALPERN,
IRVING HALPERN AND BERNARD HALPERN, PARTNERS
d/b/a J. HALPERN COMPANY and TEXTILE WORKERS
UNION OF AMERICA, CIO, Petitioner . Case No.6-RC-1363.
May 27, 1954
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND CERTIFICATION OF
REPRESENTATIVES
Pursuant to a Decision and Direction of Election ,' an elec-
tion by secret ballot was conducted on March 18 , 1954, under
the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the
Sixth Region among the employees in the unit found appropriate
by the Board. Upon conclusion of the election, a tally of ballots
was furnished the parties . It appears from the record that of
approximately 130 eligible voters, 121 cast ballots , of which
53 were for the Petitioner , 40 were for the Intervenor 2 and 28
were challenged.
As the challenged ballots were sufficient in number to affect
the results of the election , the Regional Director investigated
the challenges , and on April 15, 1954 , issued and duly served
upon the parties his report on challenges , in which he recom-
mended that the challenges to 16 of the ballots be sustained,
iNot reported in printed volumes of Board Decisions and Orders.
2 International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen& Helpers of America,
Local 872, AFL.
108 NLRB No. 158.
J. HALPERN COMPANY 1143
and that the challenges to 6 be overruled , but that the latter
ballots not be opened and counted on the ground that they, to-
gether with the challenged ballots of 2 employees who are the
subject of pending unfair labor practice charges, and 4 chal-
lenged ballots involving an unresolved question of fact, were
insufficient to affect the results of the election.
The Intervenor , on April 23 , 1954 , filed exceptions to the
Regional Director ' s report with respect to 7 of the 16 sus-
tained challenges . These were the challenges to the ballots of
Louise Wieseckel , Irene Resnik , Joanne Gerra , Virginia Lorenz,
Loretta Kelly , Alraune Migadonna , and Dolores Hill. The
Regional Director found, based upon the agreement of the
parties, that these 7 individuals commenced employment sub-
sequent to the February 20, 1954 , eligibility date, that they
were ineligible to vote . The Intervenor ' s exception to this find-
ing is based upon the allegation that these individuals were
hired by the Employer before February 20, 1954 , to report to
work on specific dates subsequent thereto . The Intervenor urges
that they should be permitted to participate in the election be-
cause : ( 1) The hiring of seasonal employees begins in mid-
February of each year and reaches a full complement in the
fall ; ( 2) seasonal employees carry seniority and recall priv-
ileges; and ( 3) the bargaining unit is composed of both regular
and seasonal employees . The Intervenor therefore requests
that the Board direct the Regional Director to conduct a hearing
upon the factual issues raised in its exceptions.
The Board ' s well-established election rules require that, in
order to be eligible to vote, an individual must be employed and
working on the established eligibility date, unless that individual
was absent for one of the reasons specified in the direction of
election .3 In the present instance the seven named individuals
were not absent for one of those specified reasons . Therefore,
assuming without deciding , that the facts claimed by the Inter-
venor with respect to their employment are correct, we find in
view of their admitted nonworking status on the eligibility date
that these individuals were ineligible to vote. Accordingly, the
challenges to their ballots were properly sustained.
As no exceptions were taken to the remaining findings and
recommendations of the Regional Director , and as the challenged
ballots other than the 16 sustained by the Regional Director are
insufficient to affect the results of the election,4 we find it un-
necessary to rule upon their validity.
Accordingly , as the majority of the validballots were cast in
favor of the Petitioner , we will certify it as the representative
of the employees in the appropriate unit.
3See General Chemical Works, 67 NLRB 174. Also see Associated Business Service. 107
NLRB 219; The Goldenberg Company, 77 NLRB 335, 339; Remington Rand, Inc., 74 NLRB
447, 449.
4As we have sustained the challenges to 16 of the 28 challenged ballots, the maximum
number of valid votes cast including the 12 other challenged ballots would be 105 , of which
the Petitioner received 53.
1144 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
[The Board certified the Textile Workers Union of America,
CIO, as the designated collective-bargaining representative of
all production and maintenance employees of the New Eagle,
Pennsylvania, plant of the Employer, excluding the maintenance
mechanics, office and plant clerical employees, professional
employees, guards, the production floorlady, the packing, fold-
ing, shipping, and receiving supervisors, the supervisor of the
cutting room and patternmaker, and all other supervisors as
defined in the Act.]
COLE-GUNN HOSIERY MILLS, INC. and AMERICAN FEDERA-
TION OF HOSIERY WORKERS, AFL, Petitioner . Case No.
11-RC-596. May 27, 1954
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND CERTIFICATION OF
REPRESENTATIVES
Pursuant to a Decision and Direction of Election,' issued on
March 1, 1954, in the above proceeding, an election by secret
ballot was conducted on March 17, 1954, under the direction and
supervision of the Regional Director for the. Eleventh Region.
At the conclusion of the election, the parties were furnished
with a tally of ballots which shows that, of approximately 70
eligible voters, 73 cast ballots, of which 34 were for and 33
were against the Petitioner, and 6 were challenged.
As the challenged ballots were sufficient in number to
affect the results of the election, the Regional Director, pur-
suant to the Board's Rules and Regulations, conducted an inves-
tigation and, on Marc: 25, 1954, issued and served upon the
parties a report on challenged ballots. On April 7, 1954, the
Employer filed exceptions to the Regional Director's report.
Upon the basis of the entire record in this case, the Board
makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
In his report, the Regional Director found that Charlie E.
Guthrie, Tommie Johnson, Roy Page, and Owen Paschal,
challenged as fixers, were fixers. He further found that W. B.
English and W. M. Hooper, challenged as watchmen, were
watchmen. As the Board, in ' its Decision and Direction of
Election, specifically excluded both fixers and watchmen from
the appropriate unit, he therefore recommended that the chal-
lenges to their ballots be sustained and that the Petitioner be
certified as the exclusive bargaining representative of the
employees in the unit found appropriate.
'Cole-Gunn Hosiery Mills, Inc., 11-RC-596, March 1, 1954. not reported in printed volumes
of Board Decisions and Orders.
108 NLRB No. 155.