Textile Workers Union of America

National Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsAug 24, 1962

138 N.L.R.B. 269 (N.L.R.B. 1962)

TEXTILE WORKERS UNION OF AMERICA 269 'Textile Workers Union of America and Federation of Textile Representatives . Case No. 11-RC-1655. August 24, 1962 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 Martin L. Ball, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. Upon the entire record, the Board i finds : 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. 2. The labor organization named below claims to represent certain employees of the Employer. 3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa- tion of certain employees of the Employer, within the meaning of Sec- tion 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.' 4. The following employees of the Employer constitute a unit appro- priate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act: All International representatives on the payroll of the Textile Workers Union of America (TWUA) (as distinguished from its locals and their joint boards) who serve as joint board managers (also referred to as business managers and as joint board directors), business agents, administrative personnel, administrative assistants to industry directors, and organizers 9 but excluding all similarly classified employees working exclusively in Canada,4 and professional i 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 Leedom , Fanning, and Brown]. 'We find no merit in the contentions raised by the Employer that the International representatives involved herein who perform the duties of joint board managers and of administrative personnel are managerial employees not entitled to the privileges and pro- tection of the Act, or for other reasons should not be considered its employees. The Board had considered and rejected similar contentions with respect to business agents and managers in International Ladies' Garment Workers' Union, 131 NLRB 111 and 137 NLRB 748, and with respect to organizers and negotiators in Air Line Pilots Asso- .etatidn, International , 97 NLRB 929, and in American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industt tal Organizations , 120 NLRB 969 . Nor do we find any merit in the contention that these International representatives are in a position to influence policy by reason of their service, when elected , as delegates of subordinate bodies at the International con- vention of the Employer and for that reason should not be considered employees under the Act Similar contentions were raised and found without merit in International Ladies' Garment Workers ' Union, 131 NLRB 111. 3Including so-called temporary organizers who are engaged for the duration of specific projects which extend over petiods of several months to several years, with the date of termination uncertain . See Lloyd A . Fry Roofing Company and Volney Felt Mills, Divi- sion thereof, 121 NLRB 1433, 1437. 4 See Detroit it Canada Tuadnel Corporation, 83 NLRB 727 , 732; cf. West India Fruit and Steamship Company , Inc, 130 NLRB 343, 361, overruling this case in other respects 138 NLRB No. 30. 270 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD and technical employees,' secretarial, clerical, mailing and shipping employees, and all supervisors 6 as defined in the Act. [Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.] 5 The parties stipulated to exclude as professional or technical the following categories: attorney, research director and his assistant, time-study specialists, employees in publicity and public relations including those in publication of the monthly periodical, the educa- tional director and his assistant, field auditors, administrators of the pension fund, the administrative assistant to the president, and the legislative representative. 9 The parties agreed that the following are supervisors: the two general officers of the Employer (president and secretary-treasurer), members of the executive committee (all vice presidents and administrative vice presidents), all regional directors and industry directors. Also excluded as supervisors are the two supervisory administrative personnel otherwise referred to as supervisory assistants and administrative assistants to a regional director, who, in their primary duty of supervising and directing organizational activities on behalf of the regional director, responsibly direct the work of International repre- sentatives involved within the meaning of the Act. Baltimore Gas and Electric Company I and Utility Workers Union of America, AFL-CIO, Petitioner. Case No. 5-RC-3724. August 24, 1962 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 Louis S. Wallerstein, 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 Leedom, Fanning, and Brown]. Upon the entire record in this case, the- Board finds : 2 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. 2. The labor organization involved claims 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 Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act. 4. The Employer is a Maryland corporation engaged as a public utility in supplying electric, gas, and steam services in and around Baltimore, Maryland. All but six of the Company's employees work within a 25-mile radius of its headquarters in Baltimore. The Em- ployer has had no collective--bargaining history with any labor organization. 1 The name of the Employer appears as amended at the hearing 2 The Employer has requested oral argument. This request is hereby denied because the record and the briefs adequately present the issues and the positions of the parties 138 NLRB No. 33.