M. Lowenstein & Sons

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 14, 1969

177 N.L.R.B. 926 (N.L.R.B. 1969)

926 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Lyman Printing and Finishing Company a Division of
M. Lowenstein & Sons and Machine Printers and
Engravers Association of the United States,
Petitioner . Case 11-RC-2837
July 14, 1969
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF
ELECTION
BY CHAIRMAN MCCULLOCK AND MEMBERS
BROWN AND ZAGORIA
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9(c) of
the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, a
hearing was held before Hearing Officer Charles M.
Williamson. The Hearing Officer's rulings made at
the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are
hereby affirmed. The Employer, the Petitioner, and
the Intervenor' have filed briefs.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the
National Labor Relations Board has delegated its
powers in connection with this case to a
three-member panel.
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board
finds:
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within
the meaning of the Act and it will effectuate the
purposes of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein.
2. The labor organization involved claims to
represent certain employees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists
concerning the representation of certain employees
of the Employer within the meaning of Section
9(c)(1) and Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The Employer is a corporation employing
approximately 3,000 production and maintenance
employees at its Lyman, South Carolina, plant
where it is engaged in the printing and finishing of
textile fabrics. The instant case involves the
Employer's Printing Division which embraces the
following departments: Engraving, Printing, Color,
Age and Soap, and Screen Printing. The Petitioner
currently represents the employees of the Engraving
Department on a departmental basis and a separate
craft unit of journeymen and apprentice machine
printers in the Printing Department. It now seeks an
election among the unrepresented employees of the
Printing Department and the employees of the Color
Department, with the apparent intent to add these
employees to and make them part of the existing
unit in the Printing Department.
The Employer contends that the unit petitioned
for was carved out to conform to the extent of
Petitioner's organization, that a two-department unit
would be unprecedented in the industry, that the
Petitioner has no experience in representing
'Textile Workers Union of America intervened in order to oppose
Petitioner ' s unit request but indicated that it did not wish to appear on the
ballot in any election which may be directed
unskilled employees and that the complete
integration of its production process requires
establishment of a production and maintenance unit
embracing all departments of the Printing Division.
The Intervenor generally supports the Employer's
position and argues that only a production and
maintenance unit, which the Regional Director
found appropriate in an earlier proceeding, would be
appropriate in this instance. The Petitioner contends
that the Print Room and the Color Shop are so
interdependent and functionally integrated that it
would be appropriate to have them represented in a
single unit.
The Printing Department, or Print Room, is
contiguous to the Color Department, but the two
departments are separated by a wall. The Color
Shop furnishes the colors or dyes which the Print
Room uses in the printed application of color in
printed patterns. All classifications sought by the
Petitioner are found in either the Print Room or the
Color Shop. Print Room classifications include, in
addition to the currently represented machine
printers and their apprentices, back tenders, gray
tenders, swing inspectors, roller inspectors, jackmen,
and plant clerical employees. Color Shop employees
are color mixers, kettlemen, spare color men, tub
washers, back gray washer operators, patch men,
strike off machine operators, and plant clerical
employees. Except for the plant clericals there
appears to be no classification common to both
departments. The Print Room employees sought
here work alongside and in close connection with the
skilled employees in the Printing Department who
are presently under contract. There is no history of
collective bargaining on behalf of the employees
sought in the petition. In the past they have voted in
a production and maintenance unit.' Departmental
seniority is generally observed in personnel actions
although certain job categories in the Print Room
have special seniority arrangements. Employees of
the Color Shop and unskilled employees of the Print
Room interchange, to a degree, with employees of
other departments of the Employer' s printing
division. Color Shop employees have their own
lunchroom and time clock.
There is a general manager in overall control of
the Employer's production and finishing operations.
Under him are superintendents of printing and
finishing . The superintendent of printing controls
separate departments of Engraving, Printing (or
Print Room) Color (or Color Shop), Age and Soap,
and Screen Printing, each department in turn having
its own separate supervision. The Print Room and
Color Shop each has a department head assisted by
a hierarchy of subordinate supervisors. The
supervisory staffs of the Print Room and Color
Shop departments have no responsibility for the
supervision or direction of each other's employees.
The terms and conditions of employment of
'Case I I -RC-227 I , not published in NLRB volumes.
177 NLRB No. 117
LYMAN PRINTING & FINISHING CO. 927
employees of the Print Room and the Color Shop
are essentially similar to those of all other
employees in the printing division and furnish no
ground for separate representation. Thus, they enjoy
the same vacations, pension plan, pay methods, shift
hours, and employee benefits provided for all
production and maintenance employees. Although
the Color Shop may be said to be an essential
adjunct to the Print Room, there are other
departments, such as the Age and Soap, which can
be said to have a close relationship to the Print
Room. Moreover, the record shows that there are
other Color Shop employees performing the same
function for the Screen Printing Department, and
since their functions, duties, and responsibilities are
essentially similar to these Color Shop employees
sought here, there is little justification for a unit
including only those Color Shop employees who
serve the Print Room.
The Petitioner does not contend that the
two-department unit sought is a homogeneous craft
unit, and on the record we find that it is not.
Instead, the Petitioner seeks the multi-departmental
unit which, it contended, it could show to be
appropriate. No case has been cited by the
Petitioner in support of such contention and
Petitioner has pointed to no bargaining history on
such basis either in other plants of the Employer or
in the industry generally. On the contrary, witnesses
long familiar with the industry testified that they
know of no instance where such a unit of Print
Room and Color Shop employees exists. The
possibility that technical advances in textile printing
may in time erase the Petitioner's traditional
constituency furnishes no proper basis for finding
appropriate a unit which, by established standards,
is inappropriate. The Board' s general policy is not
to grant multi-departmental units . In view of the
foregoing, we find that a unit of Color Shop and
unrepresented Print Room employees is
inappropriate.
Although the Petitioner did not request the
establishment of a single-departmental unit including
the machine printers and unrepresented Print Room
employees, such departmental unit would be
appropriate if the Petitioner is willing to represent
such unit and the unrepresented Print Room
employees choose to become part of such unit. The
standards applied by the Board in the Mallinckrodt
case' do not necessarily militate against the
establishment of a separate departmental unit." It is
true that the absence of a bargaining history alone is
not decisive.' But, unlike the Timber Products case,
and other similar cases , the Print Room is not so
integrated with the rest of the Employer's operations
as to suggest that a separate unit of Print Room
employees would be so unstabilizing as to justify
denial of separate representation . Moreover, it
appears that the Engraving Department and the
machine printers are already separately represented,`
and what is perhaps of greater relevancy is that
machine printing apprentices are selected from
among the back tenders and gray tenders who work
closely with the machine printers in the Print Room,
and, for all that appears, there may be a natural
progression from other classifications in the Print
Room to back tenders and gray tenders positions
and on to acknowledged craft status of the machine
printers and apprentices.
The unrepresented employees of the Print Room
and the existing craft group of machine printers
work under common supervision separate from that
of all other employees. There is no substantial
interchange on a continuing basis between Print
Room employees and employees of other
departments. The machine printers and
unrepresented Print Room employees work in close
contact and thus have a community of interest not
shared with other production workers, and they
comprise a separate functional and departmental
group of employees. The Board has found such
departmental grouping to be appropriate for
bargaining.' In such circumstances, we shall direct a
self-determination election among the employees of
the Print Room sought by the Petitioner.'
In view of the foregoing, and upon the entire
record, we shall direct a self-determination election
among the following voting group of employees:
All employees of the Printing Department, or
Print Room, of the Employer's plant at Lyman,
South Carolina, excluding journeymen and
apprentice machine printers, office clerical
employees, professional and technical employees,
all other employees, guards and supervisors as
defined in the Act.
If a majority of the employees in the voting group
above cast their ballots for the Petitioner, they will
be taken to have indicated their desire to be
included in the existing unit of journeymen and
apprentice machine printers currently represented by
the Petitioner, the Regional Director conducting the
election directed herein is instructed to issue a
certification of results of election, and the Petitioner
may bargain for such employees as part of that unit.
If a majority of them vote against the Petitioner,
they will be taken to have indicated their desire to
remain unrepresented and the Regional Director will
issue a certification of results to that effect.
3Mallinckrodt Chemical Works, 162 NLRB 387.
'E. I Dupont de Nemours & Co, 162 NLRB 413, 418-419
'Timber Products Company, 164 NLRB No. 109
'E. I Dupont de Nemours & Co., supra
'Lyman Printing and Finishing Company, Case 11-RC-2523, 1967, not
reported in the Board's printed volumes. See General Motors Corporation,
Chevrolet Forge Plant, 114 NLRB 234, see also Kimball Systems, Inc,
164 NLRB No. 33, fn 8.
'Inasmuch as the interest of the Petitioner is not clear from the record
before us we instruct the Regional Director not to proceed with the
election directed herein until he shall have first determined that the
Petitioner has made an adequate showing of interest among the employees
in the unit found to be appropriate
928 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
[Direction of Election' omitted from publication.]
'In order to assure that all eligible voters may have the opportunity to
be informed of the issues in the exercise of their statutory right to vote, all
parties to the election should have access to a list of voters and their
addresses which may be used to communicate with them . Excelsior
Underwear Inc , 156 NLRB 1236, N.L.R.8 v. Wyman-Gordon Company.
394 U.S. 759 Accordingly , it is hereby directed that an election eligibility
list, containing the names and addresses of all the eligible voters, must be
riled by the Employer with the Regional Director for Region l Iwithin 7
days of the date of this Decision and Direction of Election The list may
initially be used by the Regional Director to assist in determining an
adequate showing of interest. The Regional Director shall make the list
available to all parties to the election when he shall have determined that
an adequate showing of interest among the employees in the unit found
appropriate has been established . No extension of time to file this list shall
be granted by the Regional Director except in extraordinary circumstances
Failure to comply with this requirement shall be grounds for setting aside
the election whenever proper objections are filed.