Technical Tape Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 3, 1955

111 N.L.R.B. 845 (N.L.R.B. 1955)

TECHNICAL TAPE CORPORATION 845
been begun. At that time the foundry employees consisted primarily
of maintenance employees. The personnel director testified that many
occupational classifications would be added to the foundry classifica-
tions then employed, and that all employees at the aviation plant would
be offered employment at the foundry and would carry their seniority
with them.
On October 15, 1954, the date of the hearing, 13 patternmakers had
been employed at the foundry, 7 metal and 6 wood. The schedule for
hiring additional patternmakers is approximately 8 each month until
June 1955, when a total of 80 patternmakers, 10 wood and 70 metal,
will be attained. On this basis we believe that the working force of
patternmakers which will be employed when the election directed
herein is held, will be a substantial and representative segment of the
employees to be employed in the unit. We, therefore, see no reason
for departing from the Board's usual policy of directing an immediate
election.3
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
3 See Hollywood Maxwell Co ., 97 NLRB 70
TECHNICAL TAPE CORPORATION and UNITED GAS, COKE AND CHEMICAL
WORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO, PETITIONER., CaSe NO . 4-RC-3510.
March 3, 1955
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 Bernard Samoff, hearing
officer. The hearing officer's ruling 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 organizations involved claim to represent certain em-
ployees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9
(c) (1) and Section2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The Petitioner seeks to represent in a separate unit the produc-
tion and maintenance employees of the Employer's Old Bridge, New
Jersey, plant. The Employer, Technical Tape Corporation, agrees
1 The hearing officer referred to the Board the motion of Local 552, International
Brotherhood of Papermakers , AFL, herein called the Intervenor , to dismiss the petition
on the ground that the unit requested therein is inappropriate. For the reasons stated in
paragraph numbered 4, above , the motion is hereby denied.
111 NLRB No. 139.
846 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
that the unit requested is appropriate. The Intervenor contends that
an appropriate unit should include the employees of both W. Ralston
& Co., Inc., herein called Ralston, and Technical Tape Corporation,
herein also called Technical Tape.
Technical Tape is a New York corporation engaged in the manufac-
ture of pressure sensitive tapes. At its Old Bridge, New Jersey, plant,
it has been processing, since about May 15, 1954, magnetic tape. It
also is in the process of constructing machinery for the purpose of
manufacturing abrasive materials. Ralston, a New York corporation,
is engaged in the manufacture of water proofing papers, and related
products, with plants in New York City and Old Bridge, New Jersey.
About 25 percent of Ralston's products is saturation paper which is
further processed by Technical Tape. Ralston's production and main-
tenance employees have been represented by the Intervenor under a
recently expired collective-bargaining agreement.
The record shows factors supporting the appropriateness of the
unit sought by the Petitioner. Thus, the two companies are separate
corporate entities. There is no integration of their operations; their
products are different; their plants are under the supervision of sepa-
rate plant managers; the production is done in different buildings; and
they maintain separate accounting systems, separate bank accounts,
separate payrolls, and separate sales forces. There has, in the past,
been some interchange of personnel, but only on a sporadic and oc-
casional basis.
On the other hand, certain other factors support the appropriateness
of a multicompany unit, as contended by the Intervenor. Control and
management of both corporations are vested in the same majority
stockholders and top officers. The Old Bridge plant is owned by Ral-
ston and the buildings used by Technical Tape are leased by the latter.
Both companies use the same machine shop, where their employees
work side by side, and the same boilerhouse. They also maintain com-
mon shipping and receiving arrangements and a centralized purchas-
ing department. Final decisions on labor policies are made by the
president of Technical Tape who is also the president of Ralston.
When Technical Tape started operations, some of its personnel were
recruited from Ralston's employees who retained their seniority priv-
ileges with respect to vacations. Although there is no bargaining
history on a multicompany basis, the Intervenor has handled some
grievances for Technical Tape's employees. Accordingly, we find that
the two companies constitute a single employer within the meaning
of Section 2 (2) of the Act.
In view of the foregoing facts and on the entire record, we are of
the opinion that the employees of Technical Tape, may either consti-
tute a separate unit, or be joined to the unit of Ralston employees
presently represented by the Intervenor, depending upon their desires.
TECHNICAL TAPE CORPORATION 847
We shall make no final unit determination until we have first ascer-
tained the desires of these employees as expressed in the election di-
rected herein?
We shall direct an election among the following employees : All
production and maintenance employees of Technical Tape Corpora-
tion at its Old Bridge, New Jersey, plant, excluding office clerical em-
ployees, technical employees, engineers, guards, and supervisors as
defined in the Act.
If a majority of the employees in the above voting group select the
Petitioner, they will be taken to have indicated their desire to consti-
tute a separate appropriate unit and the Regional Director conducting
the election is instructed to issue a certification of representatives to
the Petitioner for such unit, which the Board, under such circum-
stances, finds to be appropriate for the purposes of collective bargain-
ing. On the other hand, if a majority of the employees in the voting
group vote for the Intervenor, they will be taken to have indicated
their desire to become part of the existing unit currently represented
by the Intervenor, and the Regional Director will issue a certification
of results of election to that effect.
5. Contrary to the Petitioner, the Intervenor contends that the
petition is premature because the operations of Technical Tape are in
the process of expansion. Technical Tape takes no position with re-
spect to this contention.
The record shows that there are at present 14 employees in the mag-
netic tape department. The facilities of that department would per-
mit the hiring of seven additional employees. However, no such in-
crease of personnel is planned by Technical Tape. The abrasive
department is still in the experimental stage and will remain in that
stage for at least another 4 months when it is hoped that production
of finished products may be initiated. There are approximately 26
employees in that department, predominantly machinists and mill-
wrights who are engaged in the construction of the abrasive depart-
ment machinery. Once that work has been completed, the company
intends to discharge about half the present labor force and retain those
employees who will be able to operate the machinery. At a future
date, if sales should warrant, the employee complement in the abrasive
department may be increased to a total of from 15 to 60 employees,
in which case some new employee classifications may be added. As
the present work force is representative and any future expansion is
speculative, we find no merit in the Intervenor's contention. We shall
therefore direct an immediate election.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
2 Clay d Bailey Manufacturing Company and Morgan Foundry Company , 106 NLRB 210