The Fleisher Shoe Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Oct 23, 1945

64 N.L.R.B. 428 (N.L.R.B. 1945)

In the Matter of THE FLEISHER SIIOE COMPANY and UNITED SHOE
WORKERS OF AMERICA , CIO, LOCAL 89
Case No. 1-R-613.-Decided October 23, 1945
Mr. Vernon C. Stoneman , of Boston , Mass., for the Company.
Mr. George Fecteau, of Manchester, N. H., for the Union.
Mrs. Augusta Spaulding , of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon petition duly filed by United Shoe Workers of America,
CIO, Local 89, herein called the Union, alleging that a question af-
fecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of em-
ployees of The Fleisher Shoe Company, Goffs Falls, New Hampshire,
herein called the Company , the National Labor Relations Board pro-
vided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice before Samuel G.
Zack, Trial Examiner. Said hearing was held at Manchester, New
Hampshire, on September 11, 1945. The Company and the Union
appeared, participated, and were afforded full opportunity to be heard,
to examine and cross -examine witnesses , and to introduce evidence
bearing on the issues . The Trial Examiner '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.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
The Fleisher Shoe Company is engaged in the manufacture of
women's novelty shoes at Goffs Falls , New Hampshire . Over 40 per-
cent of the raw materials used by the Company is shipped to it from
points outside the State of New Hampshire . The Company sells prod-
ucts valued in excess of $1,500,000 annually, over 90 percent of which
is shipped to points outside the State of New Hampshire.
The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
64 N. L . R B, No. 79.
428
THE FLEISHER SHOE COMPANY 429
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
United Shoe Workers of America, Local 89, is a labor organization
affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, admitting
to membership employees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On August 8, 1945, the Union notified the Company of its claim
to represent a majority of the Company's employees and asked for a
bargaining conference. The Company refused to recognize the
Union until the Union was first certified by the Board.
A statement prepared by a Field Examiner and other evidence in-
troduced at the hearing indicate that the Union represents a majority
of employees in the unit hereinafter found appropriate.'
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning
the representation of employees of the Company within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) and Section*ection ^ (6) and (7) of the Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The parties agree, and we find, that all production and maintenance
employees of the Company, excluding clerical employees, executives,
foremen, and all other supervisory employees, constitute an appro-
priate bargaining unit.
The Company and the Union disagree with respect to the status
of Everett Gadbois, Bessie Wiseman, Lydia Dupont, Elinor Myers,
and Armand Desautels. The Union contends that they are super-
visory employees and should be excluded from the unit. The Com-
pany contends that they exercise no supervisory authority and should
be included in the unit. Gadbois, Wiseman, and Dupont are engaged
in carrying raw material to production workers and removing such
material after processing and transferring the same to other opera-
tors. When necessary, all three employees perform production work
1 The Union submitted to the Field Examiner 150 dues records and membership applica-
tion cards , all of which bear dates subsequent to April 17, 1945, with the exception of 9
cards. At the hearing the Union presented to the Trial Examiner 22 additional membership
application cards, 21 of which were dated in August 1945. The total new showing is there-
fore 171.
There are approximately 270 employees in the appropriate unit.
The Company contends that the showing of representation made by the Union is
insu fficient to justify an election at this time inasmuch as less than a year has elapsed
since a prior election was held among the Company's employees. Pursuant to a Decision
and Direction of Election issued by the Boaid in a prior representation proceeding (Hatter
of Fleischer Shoe Company, 60 N. L R B 1259), an election by secret ballot was conducted
among the Company's employees on April 17, 1945. Among 257 valid votes cast in the
election, 128 were for, and 129 against, the Union Approximately 6 months have now
elapsed since the election . The Union has submitted new evidence of its present majority
representation among the Company 's employees Since the previous election did not result
in the selection of a bargaining representative , we believe that the new Union showing
of majority designation warrants an election at this time to effectuate the policies of
the Act. See Matter of Columbia Aircraft Corporation , 60 N. L. R B. 257.
430 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
in their departments. They neither supervise nor inspect any work
produced by production workers. They are hourly paid employees.
They have no authority to recommend hire or discharge, nor to change
the status of any employees. Myers is employed in the packing
room. She traces odd single shoes throughout the plant and also
works in the department, packing shoes into cartons. She is an
hourly paid employee, and so far as the record discloses has no super-
visory authority under our definition of the term. Desautels is an
hourly paid maintenance employee who works with his hands. The
record does not disclose any details of his employment or his author-
ity over other employees in the department. So far as the record
discloses, Desautels is not a supervisory employee under our defini-
tion of the term. We deem Gadbois, Wiseman, Dupont, Myers, and
Desautels non-supervisory employees and included in the bargaining
unit. 0
We find that all production and maintenance employees of the
Company, excluding clerical employees, executives, foremen, and all
other supervisory employees with authority to hire, promote, dis-
charge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of employ-
ees, or effectively recommend such action, constitute a unit appropriate
for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Sec-
tion 9 (b) of the Act.
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
We shall direct that the question concerning representation which
has arisen be resolved by means of an election by secret ballot among
the 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 Direction.
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 Relations
Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor Rela-
tions Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3, as amended, it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with The Fleisher Shoe
Company, Goffs Falls, New Hampshire, an election by secret ballot
shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than thirty (30)
days from the date of this Direction, under the direction and super-
vision of the Regional Director for the First 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
the employees in the unit found appropriate in Section IV, above, who
THE FLEISHER SHOE COMPANY 431
were employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding 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 employees in the armed forces of the United
States who present themselves in person at the polls, but excluding
any 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 or not they desire to be represented by United Shoe Workers
of America, CIO, Local 89, for the purposes of collective bargaining.
MR. GERARD D. REILLY took no part in the consideration of the
above Decision and Direction of Election.