Nebel Knitting Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 13, 1953

106 N.L.R.B. 114 (N.L.R.B. 1953)

1 14 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
vania, plant, excluding all other employees, guards, and super-
visors 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.]
Member Peterson, concurring:
The record in this case discloses that the bricklayers con-
stitute an identifiable, homogeneous group of craftsmen; that
there is no history of their inclusion in a broader unit; and
that the type of integration found in the National Tube case 4
does not exist here. None of the factors to which I referred in
my dissent in the Hamilton cases as bases for finding a craft
group an inappropriate unit are present. Accordingly, I agree
with my colleagues that an election should be directed for the
bricklayers.
4Footnote 1, supra.
s W. C. Hamilton and Sons, 104 NLRB 627.
NEBEL KNITTING COMPANY and AMERICAN FEDERATION
OF HOSIERY WORKERS, AFL, Petitioner. Case No. 11-
RC-496. July 13, 1953
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 Sidney J.
Barban, 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, Murdock, and Peter-
son].
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 organization involved claims to representcer-
tain employees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the
representation of certain 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 parties agree that a unit of production and maintenance
employees is appropriate, but disagree as to the composition
of the unit. The Petitioner, in opposition to the Employer, would
exclude fixers, the maintenance fixer-learner, foreman-fixers,
the foreladies in the.finishing and inspecting, mending, greige
goods inspecting, and packing departments, the head dyer, the
106 NLRB No. 11.
NEBEL KNITTING COMPANY 115
shipping clerk, the knitted work collector, the utility man, and
J. M. Berryhill, on the ground that these employees are super-
visors. It would also exclude the cafeteria employees on the
ground that they have dissimilar interests from the production
and maintenance employees. The Employer would include these
employees.
The Employer, a manufacturer of full-fashioned hosiery,
employs approximately 340 employees at its plant at Charlotte,
North Carolina. It operates its plant on a 3-shift basis with
approximately 222 employees on the first shift, 48 employees
on the second shift, and 37 employees on the third shift. Overall
supervision is vested in the plant superintendent. Except for the
positions of 3 assistant plant superintendents, which the Em-
ployer asserts were created and filled about a day before the
hearing, the Employer contends that it has no other supervisory
positions . As indicated above, the Petitioner disagrees with this
contention.
Fixers and the maintenance fixer-learner: The Employer
lists 7 employees who are classified as fixers, and 1 employee
who is classified as a maintenance fixer-learner.1 These fixers
with the exception of James H. Wrape, who is separately
discussed below, work in the knitting department on different
shifts and perform the duties typical of employees in this cate-
gory in the full-fashioned hosiery industry. Essentially, these
duties consist of the maintenance, repair, and adjustment of the
full-fashioned knitting machines, and the distribution of needles,
small parts, and work instructions to the knitters. They are
directly responsible to the plant superintendent for the quality
of work performed in the knitting department.
In the event of a machine smash or breakdown, it is the duty
of the fixers to determine whether the breakdown was caused
by the knitter or by machine failure. If the cause of the break-
down is judged to be machine failure, the knitter, who is paid
on a production-rate basis, receives a special hourly rate to
compensate for his loss of earnings during the repair of his
machine.
The fixers, moreover, enforce plant rules and regulations
and supervise the quality of the knitters' work through the
issuance of warning slips. After receiving three warning slips,
the knitter is summoned before the plant superintendent for
disciplinary action. Although the fixers' recommendations as
to the status of the knitters are subject to investigation by the
plant superintendent, it is clear that these recommendations
are given substantial weight.
The fixers have the authority to grant the knitters short
leave of absence and leave occasioned by illness on the job.
They also represent management in the first step of the griev-
ance procedure. Unlike the knitters, the fixers are paid a
1The seven fixers listed by the Employer are Arthur L. Mauldwin, Harry W. Wingate,
George G. Shivar, James H. Wrape, Charles J Hicks, Sam S Southerland, and Grady L.
Faile. The Employer asserts that Mauldwin, Wingate, and Shivar were promoted about a
day before the hearing to assistant plant superintendents. D. A. B. Williams is listed as the
maintenance fixer- learner.
322615 0 - 54 -q
1 16 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
46-hour guaranteed wage and receive paid vacations . They also
attend supervisory meetings at which other department foremen
and foreladies are present.
The maintenance fixer - learner performs the same -general
duties, has the same general authority, and receives the same
or similar guaranteed wage and paid vacation as the fixers.
Fixer James H. Wrape, unlike the other fixers, performs
his duties throughout the Employer' s plant . He is responsible
to the plant superintendent for standardizing the length and
size of the Employer's product, adjusting the knitting machines,
and making sample tests of the knitters' production. In addition
he checks with the inspecting department for imperfect work of
knitters , which may result in reduced earnings by the knitters
and has the authority to issue warning slips to them for too
many "menders " in their work. He is also responsible for
supervising the plant janitors.
As it is clear that the fixers and the maintenance fixer-
learner exercise independent judgment in the performance of
their duties and possess authority to make effective recom-
mendations concerning the status of rank- and-file employees,
we find, contrary to the Employer' s contentions , that they are
supervisors within the meaning of the Act. Accordingly, we
shall exclude them from the unit.2
The Employer' s vice president and plant superintendent
testified that a day before the hearing , 3 of the fixers were
promoted to assistant plant superintendents . Although the
Employer concedes that these 3 employees should be excluded
from the unit as supervisory employees, neither of the above
witnesses was able to testify as to what effect these prorlotions
would have on the responsibility and authority of the fixers. In
these circumstances , we find nothing in the record indicating
either that the fixers no longer possess the responsibility or
supervisory authority indicated above, or that they have in-
terests in common with the production and maintenance em-
ployees which would warrant their inclusion in the unit.i
Foreman -fixers: The Employer employs Z foreman -fixers
and 1 assistant foreman -fixer in its seaming and preboarding
departments . The foreman-fixer and the assistant foreman-
fixer in the seaming department are responsible to the plant
superintendent for the maintenance and repair of 40 machines
and for the conduct and performance of 45 employees . In addi-
tion to their maintenance duties , they have the authority to
report latenesses , absences , and effectively to recommend
changes in the status of their subordinates through the issuance
2 Silver Knit Hosiery Mills, Inc., 93 NLRB 791; Victor Hosiery Corporation, 86 NLRB 195;
Lykens Hosiery Mills, Inc., 82 NLRB 981. In a prior representation proceeding involving
the same parties (Case No. 11-RC-444), the Board on December 9, 1952, issued a Decision
and Direction of Election which provided for the inclusion in the production and maintenance
unit of the fixers and the utility man discussed below . Thereafter , the Board permitted the
withdrawal of this petition it is noted that the record in that case did not contain the evidence
relating to the fixers' and the utility man's responsibility and authority that is contained
in the present record, thereby accounting for the different results reached in each case.
3 Cf. Hudson Hosiery Company, 95 NLRB 250
NEBEL KNITTING COMPANY 117
of warning slips. The foreman - fixer in the preboarding depart-
ment repairs and adjusts preboarding machines , distributes
work , issues warning slips , and is responsible for the conduct
and performance of the 16 employees in this department. Both
foreman-fixers and the assistant foreman -fixer are paid on an
hourly rate, although the employees in their departments are
paid on a production - rate basis . They also attend supervisory
meetings called by the Employer. In view of the foregoing, we
find that the foreman -fixers and the assistant foreman-fixer
are supervisors within the meaning of the Act. Accordingly,
we shall exclude them from the unit.
Foreladies : The Employer employs foreladies in the finish-
ing and inspecting , mending, greige goods inspecting , and pack-
ing departments . Forelady Elsie Warren is responsible to the
plant superintendent for the operation of the mending depart-
ment. She directs the distribution of work to the 12 members
in this department and provides them with an equal number of
hours of work. In addition to these duties , she operates a
"vetos " or automatic latching machine on a part-time basis.
Unlike the other employees in this department who are paid on
a production- rate basis , she is paid an hourly rate.
Forelady Myrtle R. Hasty directs the operations of 40 em-
ployees in the finishing and inspecting department and regulates
the sequence in which the goods are to be inspected and mended.
She is also responsible for examining the Employer' s product
after its return fromthe dyeing room to see that the proper dye
shades have been used . Although the employees in this depart-
ment are paid on a production -rate basis , this forelady is
salaried.
Forelady Laura J. Gilliam directs the operations of 14
packers and 2 transfer girls in the packing department. She
checks the accuracy of the packers ' work by comparing the
packed goods with the shipping orders . She is paid an hourly
rate whereas her subordinates are paid on a production rate
basis.
The foready in the griege goods inspecting department4
directs the activities of the 18 employees in this department
and is responsible for the proper distribution of work to these
employees . She is also responsible for the accuracy of the
production records turned in by the various seamers . Unlike
the other employees in this department , she is paid an hourly
rate.
All the foreladies mentioned above are directly responsible
to the plant superintendent for the conduct and work perform-
ance of the employees in their respective departments ; attend
supervisory meetings; and have the authority through the use
of warning slips to effect changes in the status of the employees
4The supervisory authority exercised by Sarah R . Bean as forelady of the griege goods
inspecting department is not exercised by Mrs. Kiser , who was recently employed
1 18 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
under them . Accordingly we find that the foreladies are super-
visors within the meaning of the Act.'
The head dyer: He is responsible to the plant superintendent
for the Employer' s dyeing operations . He directs the work of
two helpers, receives a salary and paid vacation, and has the
same authority as other supervisors to issue warning slips.
He also attends supervisory meetings . We shall therefore ex-
clude him from the unit as a supervisor within the meaning of
the Act.
J. M. Berryhill, formerly the IBM tabulator and at present
unclassified , is responsible for coordinating the manufacture
of hosiery in the styles and sizes required by customers'
orders . In addition, with the assistance of several employees,
Berryhill coordinates the flow of goods through the various
processing stages in order to expedite the completion of the
finished product. Unlike the production and maintenance em-
ployees , he is salaried and directly responsible to the Em-
ployer' s vice president . Inasmuch as the record does not
sufficiently disclose the alleged supervisory authority pos-
sessed by Berryhill, we shall permit him to vote subject to
challenge in the election hereinafter directed.
The shipping clerk and the knitted work collector: The ship-
ping clerk performs the usual duties of this work classification.
He also physically assists in the loading of trucks. The knitted
work collector, with the occasional assistance of a helper,
distributes yarn to the knitters and collects the knitters'
production. He also serves as a receiving clerk. As the shipping
clerk and the knitted work collector do not have the supervisory
authority defined in the Act but have interests similar to the
production and maintenance employees , we shall, contrary to
the Petitioner' s contention , include them in the unit.'
The utility man: This employee , a former fixer , is directly
responsible to the plant superintendent for the electrical repair
and maintenance of the knitting and preboarding machines and
the air-conditioning system . Unlike the 2 employees whom he
supervises he is paid on a guaranteed 50-hour basis , receives
a paid vacation , and attends supervisory meetings . We shall
exclude him as a supervisor.?
Cafeteria employees : The Employer maintains a cafeteria
which serves meals to the first-shift employees between the
hours of 11 a.m. and 1 p.m . Employed in the cafeteria under
the direction of Mrs. Nebel, the Employer's president, are four
cafeteria employees who prepare and serve the food and drink.
These employees are included on the same factory payroll. As
cafeteria employees have sufficient interests in common with
production and maintenance employees , and no other labor
5Salant & Salant, 92 NLRB 417, 422. The record indicates that Nelly Mauny, who assists
Forelady Elsie Warren in the mending department , does not have the authority responsibly
to direct the employees in this department . Accordingly, we shall include her in the unit We
shall also include Beulah Young, the substandard inspector , and Ruby E. Moore, the order
filler , who the parties stipulated were not supervisors within the meaning of the Act
6 Wm L. Hoge & Co., Incorporated , 102 NLRB 191; Gastonia Weaving Company, 91 NLRB 899
7 General Box Company, 89 NLRB 1439, 1440.
PRODUCERS RICE MILL, INC. 119
organization is seeking their separate representation , we shall,
contrary to the Petitioner's contention , include them in the
unit. 9
We find that all production and maintenance employees at the
Employer's Charlotte, North Carolina, plant, including the
shipping clerk , the knitted work collector, and cafeteria em-
ployees , but excluding office clerical employees , painters,
nurses , truckdrivers, watchmen-firemen, fixers, the mainte-
nance fixer - learner , foreman-fixers , the assistant foreman-
fixer, the foreladies in the finishing and inspecting , mending,
greige goods inspecting , and packing departments , the head
dyer, the utility man, and all other supervisors as defined in
the Act, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collec-
tive bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
a The Alliance Manufacturing Company, 101 NLRB 112.
PRODUCERS RICE MILL, INC., AND PRODUCERS DRYER,
INC. and INTERNATIONAL UNION OF UNITED BREWERY,
FLOUR, CEREAL, SOFT DRINK AND DISTILLERY WORK-
ERS OF AMERICA, CIO, Petitioner. Case No. 32-RC-637.
July 13, 1953
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 Seymour X.
Alsher, hearing officer . The hearing officer's rulings made at
the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby
affirmed.1
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, the
Board had delegated its powers in connection with this case to
a three-member panel [Members Houston , Styles , and Peter-
son].
Upon the entire record in this case , the Board finds:
1. Both the Mill and the Dryer are farmer-owned coopera-
1 The petition as filed covered only the employees of Producers Rice Mill, Inc., herein
called the Mill. At the hearing the petition was amended to include Producers Dryer, Inc.,
herein called the Dryer, as an Employer, and the unit was amended to include the employees
of the Dryer. Both Employers objected to the amendments on thegrounds that: (1) The
Dryer had received no formal notice of the petition or of the hearing; and (2) the Petitioner
had not formally requested recognition before the hearing for the unit sought in the amended
petition. Regarding the first contention, the Dryer was represented at the hearing, and
participated fully. It presented testimony and was accorded an opportunity to be heard. As
it did not claim surprise, and made no showing of prejudice, the objection is overruled.
Arena-North, Inc., et al„ 93 NLRB 375; Imperial Garden Growers, 91 NLRB 1034. How-
ever, as noted hereafter, we shall not direct an election among the Dryer's employees.
With regard to the second contention, it is sufficient that at the hearing the Petitioner's
status as a bargaining agent for the unit sought was disputed. This objection is therefore
overruled also. Advance Pattern Company, 80 NLRB 29.
106 NLRB No. 18.