Waldensian Hosiery Mills, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 20, 1949

83 N.L.R.B. 742 (N.L.R.B. 1949)

In the Matter of WALDENSIAN HOSIERY, MILLS, INC., EMPLOYER tznd
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF HOSIERY WORKERS, PETITIONER
Case No. 34-RC-60.-Decided May 20,1949
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before John J. A.
Reynolds, Jr., hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings 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 National Labor Relations Act.
2. The labor organization named below claims to represent em-
ployees of the Employer.
3. A question of representation affecting commerce exists concern-
ing certain employees of the Employer within the meaning of See-
tion 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The appropriate unit:
The Petitioner seeks a unit composed of all production and main-
tenance employees at the Employer's Pine Burr plant, excluding office
and clerical employees and supervisors. The Employer contends that
the appropriate unit should consist of all production and maintenance
workers throughout its entire operations at Valdese, North Carolina,
and, if the Board should so determine, would also include the em-
ployees of its plant at Lenoir, North Carolina.
-The Employer's operations at Valdese consist of four plants: a
seamless knitting mill, a full-fashioned knitting mill, a box plant, and
a finishing plant. The latter two operations are located in adjoining
'At the hearing, the Employer moved to dismiss the petition on the ground that a
nisnomer in the caption rendered service on it a legal nullity. The hearing officer reserved
ruling on this motion for the Board , but on his own motion amended the caption of the case
and formal documents to conform with the facts . We find that the presence of a minor
error in the caption and formal papers did not prejudice the Employer, who was not
misled thereby, and participated fully in the hearing . The Employer 's motion to dismiss
on this ground is hereby denied. Matter of LaSalle-Crittenden Preg8, Inc., 72 N. L.
R. B. 1166.
83 N. L. R. B., No. 113.
742
WALDENSIAN HOSIERY MILLS, INC. 743
buildings whereas each of the others is separately located about three-
quarters of a mile away. The Lenoir plant, located about 16 miles
from Valdese, is a seamless knitting mill. The Pine Burr plant at
Valdese, which is the only one sought by the Petitioner here, is engaged
in the production of full-fashioned hosiery to the greige stage. From
this mill the goods are sent to the finishing plant, where they are dyed,
stamped, paired, boarded, and packed for shipment. In addition to
the hosiery manufactured at its own mills, the Employer's finishing
plant also finishes goods manufactured by other concerns. The box
plant manufactures boxes not only for the Employer, but also for
other corporations in this industry located at Valdese.
Under the over-all supervision of a general superintendent, there
is a superintendent for each of the Employer's plants. Under them
are foremen for each operation. The superintendents have the power
to hire and discharge employees although such matters must be cleared
through the Employer's central personnel office for administrative pur-
poses. The plant superintendents may also reject any person hired
at the personnel office for their separate operation. The employees of
the full-fashioned plant utilize skills which differ from those employed
in the other plants. As a greater degree of skill is required in the full-
fashioned operation 2 than in any of the Employer's other operations,
there is little interchange of employees from one plant to another.
In view of the physical and administrative separation of the Pine
Burr plant, the general absence of interchange of employees, the dif-
ferences in skill required of employees in the various plants, we believe
that the employees of the full-fashioned operation at the Pine Burr
plant are an identifiable and homogeneous group possessing interests
which are distinct from those of the employees at the Employer's
other plants, such as may appropriately constitute a separate unit .3
In .determining the appropriate unit in this case, the Board has given
some consideration to the extent of the Petitioner's organization among
the Employer's employees: Our finding, however, is far from being
made solely in reliance upon such factor, but has been reached after
' The record discloses that in general the skilled employees in the full-fashioned oper-
ation require a longer period of training than do those employed in the seamless opera-
tions, and receive a higher rate of pay . A retraining period of several months would be
required to enable a seamless knitter to become a full -fashioned knitter . In the case of
loopers, seamers, inspectors , and menders , the difference in degree of skill is not so
great, but there are some differences in the operations , so that at least a short period
of retraining would be required for an employee from the seamless operations to become
proficient at similar work in the full-fashioned mill.
I In 1947 , the Board directed an election , requested by the Petitioner, among the em-
ployees of the Employer 's finishing plant . See Matter of Waidenelan Hosiery Midi, Inc.,
74 N. L. R. B. 315. The Petitioner was unsuccessful in that election . The record in this
case discloses no history of collective bargaining among the employees in any of the
plants since that time.
744 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
consideration of the various objective elements set forth above, which
we find support the appropriateness of the single-plant unit in this
case, and withbut'which this petition would necessarily be dismissed.4
We find that all production and maintenance employees at the
Employer's Pine Burr plant at Valdese, North Carolina, including
watchmen-firemen,5 but excluding office and clerical employees and all
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.'
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the
purposes of collective bargaining with the Employer, an election by
secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than
30 days from the date of this Direction, under the direction and super-
vision of the Regional Director for the Region in which this case was
heard, and subject to Sections 203.61 and 203.62 of National, Labor
Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 5, as amended, among
the employees in the unit found appropriate in paragraph numbered 4,
above, who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately
preceding the date of this Direction of Election, including employees
who did not work during said pay-roll period because they were ill or
4 See Matter of Garden State Hosiery Company , 74 N L R . B. 318, and Matter of
Waldensuan Hosiery Mills„ Inc., supra, decided before the enactment of the amended
Act. But cf . Matter of Hudson Hosiery Company , 74 N. L. R. B 250, decided on the same
date as the foregoing cases . Cf also, Matter of Hudson Hosiery Company, 77 N. L. R. B.
566, and Matter of Liberty Hosiery Mills, Inc., 75 N. L. R. B. 340, decided after the
effective date of the amended Act.
Section 9 ( c) (5) of the amended Act provides "In determining whether a unit is ap-
propriate for the purposes [of collective bargaining ] the extent to which the employees
have organized shall not be controlling ." The legislative history of the amended Act
discloses that it was not the intention of Congress that the Board should not consider the
extent of employee organization , but rather that the Board should not rely on this element
as a determining factor. For example, the House Report on this section , which orig-
inated as Section 9 (f) (3) of the House bill , said in part, "While the Board may take
into consideration the extent to which employees have organized , this evidence should have
little weight , and, as Section 9 (f) (3) provides , is not to be controlling." ( House Re-
port No. 245 on H. R. 3020, p. 37 .) Senator Taft, in an analysis of this section, char-
acterized the type of decision which it was designed to avoid as follows: "* * * the
Board has evolved numerous tests to determine appropriate units, such as community of
interest of employees involved , extent of common supervision , interchange of employees,
geographical considerations , etc., any one of which may justify the finding of a small
unit. The extent -of-organization theory has been used where all valid tests fail to give the
Union what it desires * * *" ( 93 Daily Cong Record, Senate-June 12, 1947,
p. 7002.)
5 These watchmen-firemen spend about 6 minutes of each hour in watchmen 's duties.
The balance of their time is spent in tending the boilers As these employees are primarily
production workers, devoting only an insubstantial portion of their time to watchmen's
duties, we find that they are not guards as defined in the Act, and shall include them.
Matter of Clarkton Gramwood Products Company, Inc., 76 N. L. R B. 1044.
6 Cf Matter of Johnson City Foundry and Machine Works, Inc., 75 N. L. R. B. 475.
WALDENSIAN HOSIERY MILLS, INC. 745
on vacation or temporarily laid off, 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, and also excluding em-
ployees on strike who are not entitled to reinstatement, to determine
whether or not they desire to be represented, for purposes of collective
bargaining , by American Federation of Hosiery Workers.