Natona Mills, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Nov 16, 1951

97 N.L.R.B. 11 (N.L.R.B. 1951)

NATONA MILLS, INC. 11
and maintenance unit currently represented by the Petitioner, and
the Petitioner may bargain for such employees as part of the existing
unit.5
There remains for consideration the question whether the hour
timekeeper should be excluded from the time checkers' group as
desired by the Petitioner. The Employer does not take any position
on this issue. As noted above, this employee does all his work in
the payroll office. His duties include checking time cards against
time-clock cards and punching the appropriate data on cards for the
cost accounting department. As the hour timekeeper is located in
the payroll office and does not regularly associate with the time
checkers or other employees in the production departments, we shall
exclude him from the voting group.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this
volume.]
Arcade Manufacturing Division of Rockwell Manufacturing Company , 96 NLRB 116;
Westinghouse Electric Corporation ( Sturtevant Division ) supra , Goodman Manufactur-
ing Company, 93 NLRB 1001.
NATONA MILLS, INC. and LOCAL 401, INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF
TEAMSTERS, CHAUFFEURS, WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS OF AMERICA,
AFL, PETITIONER. Case No. 4-KC-1204. November 16,1951
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 Ramey Donovan, hearing
officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free
from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.'
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, the Board has
delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member
panel [Members Houston, Reynolds, and Styles].
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 organizations, involved claim to represent certain
employees of the Employer.
3. For several years, the Employer has recognized the Petitioner
as the bargaining representative of the receiving clerk and two truck'
'At the hearing , the Employer moved to dismiss the petition on the grounds of (1)
contract bar, and ( 2) the inappropriateness of the unit. Branch A-23, Levers Auxiliary
Section of the Amalgamated Lace Operatives of America, herein called the Intervenor,
joined in the Employer's motion to dismiss on the ground of the inappropriateness of the
unit. For the reasons stated in paragraphs numbered 3 and 4, infra, the motion is denied.
97 NLRB No. 5.
12 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
drivers, who comprise three of the six employees sought by the Peti-
tioner herein. The Employer contends that its existing contract with
the Petitioner, which extends to July 15, 1952, operates as a bar to an
election among the employees covered' by that contract.2 We do not
agree. As the Petitioner is here asserting its majority status and
requesting Board certification, its current agreement with the Em-
ployer cannot bar a present election 3
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.
4. The appropriate unit :
The Petitioner seeks a unit of the receiving clerk and two truck
drivers, whom it currently represents, plus two packers and a stores
clerk, who have been represented by the Intervenor, at the Employer's
Dallas, Pennsylvania, plant. The Employer and the Intervenor con-
tend that the requested unit is inappropriate because of the inclusion
of the packers and stores clerk.
The Employer is engaged in the manufacture of textile products,
such as allover laces, tricot fabrics, and camouflage nettings, at its
Dallas plant. It employs a total of approximately 400 persons. Since
about 1948, the Employer has recognized the Petitioner as the repre-
sentative of its truck drivers and receiving clerk. The Intervenor has
continuously represented almost all the remaining production and
maintenance employees, including the packers and stores clerk, since
about 1947.-'
The two truck drivers and receiving clerk work under the immediate
supervision of the head shipping clerk. The truck drivers spend most
of their time driving the Employer's two trucks. When driving work
is not available, they load and unload trucks and assist in packing
duties .5 The receiving clerk is engaged mainly in clerical work, such
as preparing bills of lading and receiving slips. Occasionally, he also
helps load and unload trucks. The parties apparently are in agree-
ment that at least a unit of the truck drivers and the receiving clerk is
appropriate.
2 The remaining three employees requested by the Petitioner are covered by an existing
contract between the Intervenor and the Employer . However, neither of the latter parties
asserts that contract as a bar to an election among those employees
3 See Acme -Evans Company, Inc., 90 NLRB 2107 , and cases cited therein.
' Following a union-shop authorization election , an authorization was issued to the
Intervenor on July 25, 1951, covering in general the employees in the unit previously
represented by it ( 4-UA-2471 ). However, because of the pendency of the instant petition,
the packers and stores clerk did not vote in that election.
6 The Employer 's receiving clerk testified that one or the other of the truck drivers
has, in the past, devoted up to two-thirds of his time to assisting the packers The head
shipping clerk testified that the truck drivers assist in packing about 1 or 2 hours a day
NATONA MILLS, INC. 13
As to the disputed categories, the two packers also serve under the
immediate supervision of the head shipping clerk. They work in a
large room which is adjacent to the loading platform and in which
other production operations, such as inspecting and mending, are
conducted. The packers receive merchandise from the thread-draw-
ing department, where it has been wrapped, and they prepare the
merchandise for either outside shipment or stock storage. Their
duties include checking merchandise against customers' orders, pack-
ing and weighing it, and carrying the finished packages, on hand
trucks, to the loading platform. They also devote between 15 and
30' minutes at the end of each day to loading and unloading trucks
at the loading platform. In addition to the truck drivers, 'employees
from other plant departments frequently assist the packers when
the latter have a backlog of work. If a packer is absent, an employee
from another plant department is assigned to his work. Occasionally,
packers are transferred to other production operations in 'the plant
and employees in other plant departments are transferred to packing
duties. Unlike the truck drivers and receiving clerk, the packers
receive employment benefits, such as vacation pay and seniority rights,
similar to those of most of the plant employees.
The stores clerk works under the joint tupervision of the office
manager and tricot foreman. He operates an electric lift truck on
which he handles large packages of yarn and chemicals in the ship-
ping department and throughout the plant. About two-thirds of his
time is spent in helping to load and unload trucks and storing mer-
chandise. The rest of his time is devoted to keeping stock records
which show the kind and amount of materials on hand and the loca-
tion of these materials. In the absence of the stores clerk, and on
other occasions, a maintenance machinist operates the lift truck. The
stores clerk, like the packers, receives employment benefits similar to
those of most of the plant employees.
In view of the interchange of the packers and stores clerk with
other production and maintenance employees, their past representa-
tion as part of the production and maintenance unit, and the sub-
stantial identity of their working conditions with the plant em-
ployees, we believe that the packers and stores clerk lack a sufficient
community of interest with the truck drivers and receiving clerk to
warrant their inclusion in the units We shall, therefore, exclude the
packers and stores clerk from the unit.
6 See Westinghouse Electric Corporation, 84 NLRB 213; General Electric Company, 89
NLRB 726, 741; Chicago Pneumatic Tool Company , Inc, 89 NLRB 799. Cf. Arnold Hof-
man & Co ., Incorporated, 91 NLRB 1371.
14 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
We find that the truck drivers and receiving clerk at the Em-
ployer's Dallas, Pennsylvania, plant, excluding packers, stores clerk,
and all other employees, 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 in this
volume.]
COAL CREEK COAL COMPANY aatd JOSEPH GRANT, FRANK BLATNICK,
BEE BLY, WILLARD HUGHES, ARNIE ADAIR, RAWLINS THACKER,
ALFRED POWELL, ROBERT VAN WAGONER, JOHN HIMMELBERGER,
MAuRICE FORBUSH, ELMER LE MARR, FLOYD GOLDING. Case No.
00-CA-485. November 19,1951
Decision and Order
On May 7, 1951, Trial Examiner Howard Myers issued his Inter-
mediate Report in the above-entitled proceeding finding that the
Respondent had engaged in and was engaging in certain unfair labor
practices in violation of Section 8 (a) (1), (2), and (3) of the Labor
Management Relations Act, as amended, and recommending that the
Respondent cease and desist therefrom and take certain affirmative
action, as set forth in the copy of the Intermediate Report attached
hereto. The Trial Examiner also found that the Respondent had
not engaged in certain unfair labor practices in violation of Section
8 (a) (3) of the Act and consequently recommended dismissal of the
allegation of the complaint alleging the discriminatory discharge of
Joseph Grant.' Thereafter the Respondent filed exceptions to the
Intermediate Report and a supporting brief. The General Counsel
filed exceptions with respect to certain back-pay recommendations in
the Intermediate Report, and a supporting brief. The Respondent
has requested oral argument. This request is denied inasmuch as
the record and briefs, in our opinion, adequately present the issues and
the positions of the parties.
The Board has considered the Intermediate Report, the exceptions
and briefs, and the entire record in the case, and hereby adopts the
.findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the Trial Examiner,
with the following additions and modifications.2
1 Because no exception has been filed to the ruling of the Trial Examiner recommending
dismissal of the 8 (a) (3) allegation as to Joseph Grant, we do not pass upon the merit
,of that ruling.
2 We make the following correction of minor misstatements of fact appearing in the
Intermediate Report which do not affect the ultimate conclusions.
At page 6. Robert Van Wagoner testified that Campbell, on Saturday, requested the
employees to come to the mine Sunday night, before the Board election on Monday, and
that some of the employees, including himself, did so.
'97 NLRB No. 3.