Scripto Manufacturing Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jan 7, 1946

65 N.L.R.B. 222 (N.L.R.B. 1946)

In the Matter of SCRIPTO MANUFACTURING COMPANY and FEDERAL
LABOR UNION No. 23803, AFFILIATED WITH THE AMERICAN FEDERA-
TION OF LABOR
In the Matter of SCRIPTO MANUFACTURING COMPANY and UNITED
STEELWORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO
Cases Nos. 10-R-1567 and 10-R-1610, respectively.Decided
January 7, 19.46
Mr. Ernest P. Rogers, of Atlanta, Ga., for the Company.
Miss Carmen Lucia and Mr. TV. Paul Smart, both of Atlanta, Ga.,
for the AFL.
Messrs. R. E. Thomas and Oscar R. Thomas, of Atlanta, Ga., for
the CIO.
Mr. A. Sumner Lawrence, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon petitions duly filed by Federal Labor Union No. 23803, affil-
iated with the American Federation of Labor, herein called the AFL, '
and by United Steelworkers of America, CIO, herein called the CIO,
alleging that questions affecting commerce had arisen concerning the
representation of employees of Scripto Manufacturing Company,
Atlanta, Georgia, herein called the Company, the National Labor
Relations Board provided for air appropriate hearing upon due notice
before Paul S. Kuelthau, Trial Examiner. The hearing was held
at Atlanta, Georgia, on September 11, 1945. The Company, the AFL,
and the CIO appeared and participated. All parties were afforded
full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses,
and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues. The Trial Exam-
iner's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error
and are hereby affirmed. All parties were afforded opportunity to
file briefs with the Board.
The name of the AFL, although described in the petition as "American Federation of
Labor," was amended at the hearing to include the name of the Federal local hereinabove
referred to
65 N. L R. B., No. 45.
222
SCRIPTO MANUFACTURING COMPANY 223
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Scripto Manufacturing Company, a Georgia corporation, is engaged
in the manufacture of pencils at Atlanta, Georgia. During an average
year, the Company's purchases of raw materials and supplies exceed
$300,000 in value, of which 90 percent is shipped to it from points out-
side the State of Georgia. The sales of the Company during an aver-
age year exceed $650,000 in value, of which 90 percent represents ship-
ments to points outside the State of Georgia.
The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
Federal Labor Union No. 23803 is a labor organization, affiliated
with the American Federation of Labor, admitting to membership
employees of the Company.
United Steelworkers of America is a labor organization, affiliated
with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, admitting to member-
ship employees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTIONS CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Company has refused to grant recognition to the AFL or the
CIO as the exclusive bargaining representative of certain employees
of the Company, unless and until certified by the Board in an appro-
priate unit.
A statement of a Board agent, introduced into evidence at the hear-
ing, together with a statement by the Trial Examiner, indicates that
the AFL and the CIO each represents a substantial number of employ-
ees in the unit hereinafter found appropriate?
We find that questions affecting commerce have arisen concerning
the representation of employees of the Company, within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
2 The Field Examiner reported that the AFL had submitted 265 cards from among 215
employees in the unit claimed appropriate by the AFL, and that the cards are dated be-
tween May 1944 and August 1, 1945, including 3 undated , and that the CIO had sub-
mitted 180 cards from among 270 employees in the unit claimed appropriate by the CIO,
and that the cards are elated between 'larch 1, 1944, and July 3, 1945, including
14 undated
At the healing the Trial Examiner stated that the CIO had submitted 37 additional
cards dated between January and September 1945, including 2 undated
679100-46-vol 65-16
224 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The AFL seeks a unit of production employees, excluding mainte-
nance employees, office and clerical employees, employees of the engi-
neering department, employees of the receiving and shipping depart-
ments, guards or watchmen, and supervisory employees. The CIO
contends that the appropriate unit should consist of both production
and maintenance employees, excluding office and clerical employees,
employees of the engineering department, guards or watchmen, and
supervisory employees .3 The Company takes no position with respect
to the appropriate unit.
A comparison of the units proposed by the AFL and the CIO,
respectively, reveals that the only controversy with respect to the
appropriate unit concerns the question of including or excluding main-
tenance employees 4 and employees of the shipping and receiving
departments. So far as the maintenance employees are concerned,
while the Board has on occasion found appropriate units of produc-
tion employees apart from maintenance employees, it has customarily
done so only where the maintenance employees have been claimed or
represented by craft labor organizations, or, in the absence of craft
representation, where there has been organization by a rival union
upon the basis of a broader plant-wide bargaining unit.° In the pres-
ent instance, however, there is no craft labor organization presently
representing or claiming to represent the skilled maintenance employ-
ees apart from the production employees, and the CIO claims and ap-
parently has organized both the production and maintenance em-
ployees of the Company. Under these circumstances, we find that an
over-all unit of production and maintenance employees as distin-
guished from a unit limited to production employees, will best pre-
serve the right of the Company's employees to bargain collectively
and otherwise serve to effectuate the purposes of the Act. Since it
appears that the employees of the shipping and receiving departments
have substantial interests in common with the production and mainte-
nance employees, we shall include them in the unit hereinafter found
appropriate.
We find that all production and maintenance employees of the
Company, including employees of the receiving and shipping clepart-
s'I'lie production and maintenance unit claimed by the CIO is substantially identical
with a unit previously found appropriate by the Board in an earlier proceeding affecting
the Company s employees and subsequently used as the basis for collective bargaining
negotiations with the Company and in proceedings before the National War Labor Board.
"Maintenance employees are skilled multiciaft employees engaged in the repair or main-
tenance of the plant's machinery and equipment.
Employees of the receiving and shipping depaitments are relatively unskilled em-
plm ees whose duties and skills are similar to those of production employees.
° See Matter of Monsanto Chemical Company, 53 N L R B 784, Matter of Tobacco
By-Products & Chemical Corporation, 64 N L R. B. 252
SCRIPTO MANUFACTURING COMPANY 225
ments, but exc4Iding office and clerical employees, employees of the
engineering department, guards or watchmen, and all supervisory
employees with authority to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or
otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or effectively rec-
ommend such action, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes
of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the
Act.
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REFRESENTATI\ Ea
We shall direct that the question concerning representation which
has arisen be resolved by an election by secret ballot among employees
in the appropriate unit who were employed during the pay-roll
period immediately preceding the date of the Direction of Election
herein, subject to the limitations and additions set forth in the Direc-
tion.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National
Labor Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Rela-
tions Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor
Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3, as amended, it is
hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain represen-
tatives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Scripto Manu-
facturing Company, Atlanta, Georgia, an election by secret ballot
shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than sixty (60)
days from the date of this Direction, under the direction and super-
vision of the Regional Director for the Tenth Region, acting in this
matter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject
to Article III, Sections 10 and 11, of said Rules and Regulations,
among employees in the unit found appropriate in Section IV, above,
who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately preced-
ing 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, and including employes in the armed forces of
the United States who present themselves in person at the polls, 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, to determine whether they desire to be represented by
Federal Labor Union No. 23803, affiliated with the American Federa-
tion of Labor, or by United Steelworkers of America, affiliated with
the Congress of Industrial Organizations, for the purposes of
collective bargaining, or by neither.