Jordan-Rogers Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Feb 10, 1954

107 N.L.R.B. 1136 (N.L.R.B. 1954)

1 136 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
JORDAN-ROGERS COMPANY and UNITED RUBBER, CORK,
LINOLEUM AND PLASTIC WORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO,
Petitioner. Case No. 21-RC-3338. February 10, 1954
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 Floyd C.
Brewer, 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
employees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the
representation of employees of the Employer within the
meaning of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The Employer is engaged in the manufacture of plastic
garden hose . Both parties stipulate as to the scope of the
unit , but are in disagreement as to the inclusion of extruder
operators who the Employer contends are supervisors.
The Employer has approximately 41 employees. Under the
plant superintendent is a strawboss who is in charge of the 3
shifts and is present during the day shift, but more than
occasionally visits the other shifts. His primary function is
"consolidating " the extruder operators , acting as scheduler
and expediter. Both the plant manager and the strawboss are
engaged in production work . Below the strawboss are approxi-
mately 7 extruder operators who assign employees to various
jobs and have authority to adjust minor grievances relating to
working conditions. Although they may not hire or discharge
employees, or effectively recommend such action, they may
call employees to work when shifts are short due to absences.
While engaging in production work themselves, they direct the
coiling, tying , coupling , and packaging operations so as to
maintain an even operation on their shift. Frequently the
extruder operators are the only persons in the plant with the
authority to direct employees, and such is the situation on the
second and third shifts more than half the time. The Employer
stated that it intends to place these operators on a salary.
From the foregoing facts, we find that the extruder operators
responsibly direct the employees on the shifts, and are there-
fore, supervisors. Accordingly, we exclude them from the
unit.
We find that the following unit is appropriate for the purposes
of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of
the Act:
All production, maintenance, shipping, and receiving em-
ployees at the Employer's plant located at Orange, California,
but excluding office clerical employees, extruder operators,
107 NLRB No. 238.
STOKELY-VAN CAMP, INC. 1 137
professional employees , guards, and supervisors as defined in
the Act.
5. The Employer contends that an election should not be
directed at this time because it anticipates expanding its opera-
tions. To improve production and eliminate certain seasonal
aspects of its business , the Employer intends to alter its
manufacturing process and to manufacture additional products.
At the time of the hearing the Employer had purchased machin-
ery for the new operations, but was unable to state the number
or classification of employees it expected to employ in the
expanded business. In view of these facts , we are of the opinion
that the substantial number of employees now employed should
not be deprived of an opportunity to express their desires as to
a bargaining representative because of the contemplated
changes in operations. We find that a determination of repre-
sentatives at this time is not premature , and we shall direct
an immediate election.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication. I
STOKELY-VAN CAMP, INC. and UNITED STEELWORKERS
OF AMERICA, CIO, Petitioner. Case No. 35-RC-813. Febru-
ary 11, 1954
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION, ORDER, AND CERTIFICATION
OF REPRESENTATIVES
On February 1, 1953, the Board issued its Decision and Direc-
tion of Election herein1 finding appropriate a unit of production
and maintenance employees, including yiner station and seasonal
employees 2 at the Employer's Greenwood, Indiana, plant, and
directing the election to be held at or about the time of the
employment peak of the next canning season on a date to be
determined by the Regional Director. Thereafter, the Employer
filed motions: (1) On June 8, 1953, to require the Regional
Director to comply with the Board's Decision and hold the
election in September or October rather than on June 16 as
determined by the Regional Director; and (2) June 15, 1953, to
correct the unit determination by excluding viner station
employees and Mexican and British West Indies nationals
from the unit. On June 16, the Board denied the Employer's
first motion and the election proceeded on that date as
scheduled. Following the election, the parties were furnished a
tally of ballots. The tally showed that of approximately 115
eligible voters, 94 cast ballots, of which 55 were for, and 12
against , the Petitioner, 26 were challenged and 1 ballot was
void.
1102 NLRB 1259.
2lncluded among the seasonal employees were Mexican and British West Indies nationals.
107 NLRB No. 239.