Utica Knitting Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 22, 1940

23 N.L.R.B. 55 (N.L.R.B. 1940)

In the Matter of UTICA KNITTING COMPANY and TEXTILE WORKERS
FEDERAL , LABOR UNION #21500, A. F. OF L.
Case No. R-1716.-Decided April V, 1940
Knitwear Manufacturing Industry-Investigation of Representatives: contro-
versy concerning representation of employees : on September 24, 1938, T. W. U. A.
certified by Board as exclusive representative of the employees after an election
in which T. W. U. A. and Local 21500 appeared on ballot ; on November 2, 1938,
Company and T. W. U. A. entered into an exclusive preferential-hiring contract
to remain in effect until December 1, 11)30, and thereafter from year to year
unless notice of desire to change or terminate given by either contracting party
60 days prior to the yearly expiration pariod; contract provided for discipline
by Company of members of T. W U. A for failure to pay dues or other obliga-
tions ; during August or September 1939 Local 21500 informed Company orally
that it claimed to represent a majority; September 30, 1939, last day on which,
requisite notice to prevent automatic renewal of contract could be given ; no,
notice given by either party ; on October 24, 1939, Local 21500 wrote Company
'Maiming a majority and asking that the contract not be renewed ; on November
1, 1939, Local 21500 filed the petition herein; Local 21500 showed that between
July and October 1939, 125 employees had signed "negative" cards protesting
being represented by T. W. U. A., 77 employees had signed "negative" cards ancc
applications for membership in Local 21500, 13 employees had signed applications,
for membership in Local 21500, and 15 employees, although members of Local)
21500, could see no need for signing either type of card; T. W. U. A. claimed 262
dues-paying members in January 1940 of the 450 employees in twit-Contract:
no bar to investigation: divergent views of Board members: (1) (Smith) al-
though in general has grave doubt as to wisdom of relying on such evidence as
"negative" cards in absence of adequate explanation accounting for the use
of such a device, those cards plus the further showing of affirmative designa-
tion of Local 21500 by a substantial number of employees are suf -Rent to
warrant a new determination of representatives in view of the fact that under
the contract members of T. W. U. A. were subject to discipline by the Company
for failure to pay dues or obligations to T W U. A, all newly hired employees
were required to become members of T. W. U. A., and more than a year had,
elapsed since the certification of T. W. U. A. by the Board; (2) (Leiserson, con-
curring) real dispute as to representation exists on the facts of case; (3) (Ma&
den, dissenting) In the interest of the stability of collective bargaining agreements
the Board should not at this time make a new determination of representatives
where as here, (1) only an oral claim of majority had been presented to the Com-
pany by Local 21500 prior to the renewal date of the contract; (2) it was not until:
after the contract had been renewed that Local 21500 filed its petition; and
(3) the showing of representation by Local 21500 does not create a substantial)
doubt concerning T. W. U. A's majority at the time contract was renewed-
Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining: production and maintenance em'
ployees, excluding clerical and supervisory employees; stipulation as to-Electioas
Ordered
23 N L. R B. No. 4.
55
56 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Mr. Albert P. Wheatley and Mr. John C. McRee, for the Board.
Mr. R. E. Jones, of Anniston, Ala., for the Company.
Mr. S. E. Roper, of Birmingham, Ala., Mr. C. M. Fox, and Mr. Her-
bert Thatcher, of Washington, D. C., for Local 21500.
Mr. R. H. Brazzell, of Nashville, Tenn., and Mr. Isadore Katz, of
New York City, for the T. W. U. A.
Mr. Louis Cokin, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On November 1, 1939, Textile Workers Federal Labor Union
_#21500, herein called Local 21500, filed with the Regional Director
for the Tenth Region (Atlanta, Georgia) a petition alleging that a
question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation
of employees of Utica Knitting Company, Anniston, Alabama, herein
called the Company, and requesting an investigation and certification
of representatives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act. On January 22,
1940, the National Labor Relations Board, herein called the Board,
acting pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the Act and Article III, Section 3,
of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2,
ordered an investigation and authorized the Regional Director to con-
duct it and to provide for an appropriate hearing upon due notice.
On January 28, 1940, Local 21500 filed an amended petition with the
Regional Director.
On January 29, 1940, the Regional Director issued,a notice of hear-
ing, copies of which were duly served upon the Company, Local 21500,
and upon Textile Workers Union of America, herein called the
T. W. U. A., a labor organization claiming to represent employees
directly affected by the investigation. Pursuant to the notice, a hear-
ing was held on February 8, 1940, at Anniston, Alabama, before Albert
L. Lohm, the Trial Examiner duly designated by the Board. The
Board, the Company, Local 21500, and the T. W. U. A. were repre-
sented by counsel and participated in the hearing: Full opportunity
to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce
evidence bearing on the issues was afforded all parties.
At the commencement of the hearing, the T. W. U. A. filed a motion
to intervene in the proceedings, and Local 21500 moved to amend its
amended petition. The motions were granted. At the commencement
of and during the hearing, counsel for the T. W. U. A. moved to dis-
miss the amended petition. The Trial Examiner reserved ruling
UTICA KNITTING COMPANY 57
thereon. The motions are hereby denied . At the hearing the Trial
Examiner excluded membership cards and other evidence as to rep-
resentation offered by Local 21500 . The Board finds that this ruling
was erroneous . The ruling is hereby reversed and Rejected Peti-
tioner's Exhibits Nos. 1 -A 1 to 1-A 94 and 1-B are hereby incorpo-
rated into and made part of the record . During the course of the
hearing the Trial Examiner made several rulings on other motions
and on objections to the admission of evidence . The Board has re-
viewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner and finds that no prejudicial
errors were committed . The rulings are hereby affirmed.
On February 13, 1940, the T. W. U. A. requested oral argument
before the Board. On February 23, 1940, the T. W. U. A. filed a brief.
Pursuant to notice duly served upon all the parties , a hearing for
the purpose of oral argument was held before the Board on Febru-
ary 29, 1940, at Washington , D. C. The T. W. U. A. and Local 21500
were represented by counsel and participated in the argument.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Utica Knitting Company is a New York corporation operating nine
mills; eight located in the State of New York and the ninth at Annis-
ton, Alabama. The plants are engaged in the manufacture, sale, and
distribution of knit underwear and knit outerwear, such as sweaters
and bathing suits. In 1939 the Company produced 4 per cent of all
the knitwear goods produced in the United States.
This proceeding is concerned solely with the employees of the
Anniston mill. It normally employs about 500 workers. In 1939 it
produced approximately 215,000 dozen garments of the value oii ap-
proximately $650,000. These operations involved the use of approxi-
mately 1,300 000 pounds of yarn, 75 per cent of which came from
outside the State of Alabama. Ninety-five per cent of the goods pro-
duced in the Anniston plant are sold and distributed outside the State
of Alabama.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
Textile Workers Federal Labor Union #21500 is a labor organiza-
tion affiliated with the American Federation of Labor. It admits to
membership the employees of the Company at its Anniston mill,
excluding clerical and supervisory employees.
Textile Workers Union of America is a labor organization affiliated
with the Congress of Industrial Organizations. It admits to mem-
bership employees of the Company at its Anniston mill, excluding
clerical and supervisory employees.
Z8 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On October 1, 1937, the Company and the T. W. U. A. executed a
collective agreement for a period of one year. By the terms of the
contract the Company recognized the T. W. U. A. as exclusive
representative of the employees at the Anniston mill.
On September 24, 1938, the Board certified the T. W. U. A. as ex-
clusive representative of these employees after an election in which
the T. W. U. A. and Local 21500 appeared on the ballot. The
T. W. U. A. polled 249 votes to 199 votes for Local 21500.1
On November 2, 1938, the Company and the T. W. U. A. entered
into a further collective agreement. By its terms, the Company
agreed to recognize the T. W. U. A. as exclusive representative of the
Anniston mill employees, prefer members of the T. W. U. A. in
hiring, and discipline members of the T. W. U. A. for failure to pay
dues or other obligations. The contract was to remain in effect until
December 1, 1939, and thereafter from year to year unless either
party thereto by 60 days' notice prior to the expiration of any year
period advised the other of a desire to change or terminate it.
During August or September 1939 Local 21500 informed the Com-
pany orally that it claimed a majority.
September 30, 1939, was the last day on which the Company or
the T. W. U. A. could give the other the requisite notice for prevent-
ing the automatic renewal of their contract. Neither party gave the
required notice.
On October 24, 1939, Local 21500 wrote to the Company, claiming
to represent a majority and requesting that the existing contract be
not extended pending a decision by the Board on a petition to be
filed by Local 21500. The Company informed Local 21500 that the
contract had renewed itself automatically on October 1, 1939, to last
until December 1940. It likewise so informed its employees.
The T. W. U. A. takes the view that there can be no question con-
cerning representation during the life of the renewed contract.
Local 21500 insists that the contract is no bar to an immediate election
because there is a substantial doubt as to whether the T. W. U. A.
represented a majority of the employees at the time of the renewal
,of the agreement.
For reasons hereinafter stated in the separate opinions of Mr.
Smith and Mr. Leiserson, a majority of the Board finds that a ques-
tion concerning representation of employees of the Company has
arisen.
' Matter of Utica Knitting Company and American Federation of Labor, Local 21500,
8 N L. R. B. 783
UTICA KNITTING COMPANY 59
IV. THE EFFECT OF 7HE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION 'UPON
COMMERCE
We find that the question concerning representation which has
arisen, occurring in connection with the operations of the Company
described in Section I above, has a close, intimate, and substantial
relation to trade, traffic, and commerce among the several States, and
tends to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce
and the free flow of commerce.
V. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Company, Local 21500, and the T. W. U. A. agreed at the
hearing that the appropriate unit should consist of all production and
maintenance employees at the Company's Anniston plant, excluding
supervisory and clerical employees. We see no reason for departing
from such unit.
We find that all the production and maintenance employees at the
Company's Anniston plant, excluding supervisory and clerical em-
ployees, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective
bargaining, and that said unit will insure to employees of the
Company the full benefit of their right to self-organization and to
collective bargaining and otherwise effectuate the policies of the Act.
VI. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
There are approximately 450 employees in the appropriate unit.
Local 21500 showed that between July and October 1939, (1) 125
employees had signed so-called "negative" cards protesting being
represented by the T. W. U. A.; (2) 77 employees had signed "nega-
tive" cards and applications for membership in Local 21500; (3) 13
employees had signed applications for membership in Local 21500;
and (4) 15 employees, although members of Local 21500, could see
no need for signing either type of card.
The treasurer of the T. W. U. A. testified from the books of the
T. W. U. A. that it had 262 dues-paying members in January 1940.
We find that the question concerning representation can be best re-
solved by means of an election by secret ballot.
Those eligible to vote in the election shall be employees in the
appropriate unit who were employed by the Company during the
pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of our Direction of
Election, including employees who did not work during such pay-roll
period because they were ill or on vacation and employees who were
then or have since been temporarily laid off, but excluding those
employees who have since quit or been discharged for cause.
60 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and upon the entire
record in the case, the Board makes the following :
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. A question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the repre-
sentation of employees of Utica Knitting Company, at its Anniston,
Alabama, plant, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2
(6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act.
2. All the production and maintenance employees at the Com-
pany's Anniston plant, excluding supervisory and clerical employees,
constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargain-
ing, within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the National Labor
Relations Act.
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 Rela-
tions Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 8, of National Labor
Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, it is
hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation authorized by the Board
to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining
with Utica Knitting Company, at its Anniston, Alabama, plant, 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 supervision of the Regional Director for the Tenth
Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National Labor Rela-
tions Board, and subject to Article III, Section 9, of said Rules and
Regulations, among all production and maintenance employees at
the Company's Anniston plant, who were employed during the pay-
roll period next preceding the date of this Direction, including em-
ployees who did not Work during such pay-roll period because they
were ill or on vacation and employees who were then or have since
been temporarily laid off, but excluding supervisory and clerical em-
ployees and employees who have since quit or been discharged for
cause, to determine whether they desire to be represented by Textile
Workers Federal Labor Union #21500, affiliated with the American
Federation of Labor, or by Textile Workers Union of America,
affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining, or by neither.
MR. EDWIN S. SMITH , concurring :
I have grave doubts as to the significance of the so-called "nega-
tive" cards and question seriously the wisdom of relying upon them
UTICA KNITTING' COMPANY 61
as affording sufficient ground for making a new determination of
representatives, in the absence of factors which adequately account
for workers expressing their desires in this negative way. To give
unqualified sanction to such a departure from the normal and cus-
tomary practice of unions in securing designations carries implica-
tions at variance with the policies of the Act, for it would tend to
encourage a rival union to seek to destroy the majority representa-
tion of an established bargaining representative, without itself being
designated as such representative, thereby possibly severing the col-
lective bargaining process altogether.2
I am of the opinion, however, that with the further showing made
by Local 21500 that it had been designated as bargaining representa-
tive by 105 employees, there is sufficient to warrant our making a new
determination of representatives under the circumstances of this case,
in view of the fact that under both the original and the renewed
agreement members of the T. W. U. A. were subject to discipline by
the Company for failure to pay dues or other obligations and all
newly hired employees were required to become members of the
T. W. U. A. The automatic renewal of the agreement on September
30, 1939, should not bar a determination of representatives at this
time, even though the T. W. U. A. may have had a majority when
the contract was renewed. The T. W. U. A. has functioned as ex-
clusive bargaining representative for more than a. year and I believe
the purposes of the Act will best be effectuated by now giving the
employees a chance to change representatives if they so desire.-'
2 In a previous case presenting a comparable situation , I held in a dissenting opinion
that cards of a similar character were sufficient to create a doubt as to the majority repre-
sentation of the contracting union at the time the contract in that case was extended.
Matter of Ameican Hair & Felt Company and Jute, Hair, and Felt Workers Local #163
(United Furniture Workers of America , C. 1 0 ), 15 N L R. B 572 Further considera-
tion of the matter, however , has led me to modify the view there expressed It may be
noted that at the oral argument counsel for Local 21500 , while contendin g that the "nega-
tive" cards were sufficient in the instant case, expressed doubt concerning the device of
"negate--e' cards as mans of obtaining a new determination of representatives
3 See my dissenting opinions in Matter of Aineiican Hair if Felt Company and Jute, Hair,
and Felt Work ers, Local #163 (United Furniture Workers of America, C 1 0 ), 15 N L.
R. B 572, and Matter of The National' Sugar Refining Company of New Jersey, L I City
Refinery and Local 1 ; ,6, Sugar Refinery Workers, International Longshoremen's Ass'n,
10'N L R B. 1410.
As to the effect of selection by the employees of a new statutory representative on an
outstandin g collective agreement , I said in Matter of Pacific Greyhound Lines and Brother-
hood of Railroad Trainmen , 22 N. L. R B 111.
I am of the opinion that the selection by employees of a new statutory representa-
tive and the certification of that representative in proceedings under Section 9 (c)
result merely in the termination by operation of law of the outstanding collective con-
tract or its terms where they conflict with action by the certified representative as
representative , and not in a termination of all substantive terms of the contract other-
wise valid.
62 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
MR. WILLIAM M. LEISERSON , concurring:
It is clear that there is a real dispute as to representation here,
and I am of the opinion that it is the duty of the Board to direct
an election so that the dispute may be settled in accordance with the
provisions of the Act.
CHAIRMAN MADDEN, dissenting :
Although Local 21500 appears to have been cognizant of the renewal
clause in the contract, the only step taken by it prior to September
30 was to make to the Company an oral claim to represent a majority
of the employees.' It was not until after the contract had been
renewed that Local 21500 on October 24 informed the Company that
it intended to file a petition and requested the Company not to
renew the contract. On November 1 the petition was filed. In view
of the fact that prior to the renewal date of the contract only an oral
claim of majority, without more, had been presented to the Company
by Local 21500, that it was not until after the contract had been re-
newed that a petition was filed, and that the showing of representa-
tion made by Local 21500 does not create a substantial doubt con-
cerning the T. W. U. A.'s majority at the time the contract was
renewed, I am of the opinion that as a matter of policy under the Act
and in the interest of the stability of collective bargaining agreements
the Board should not, in the circumstances here presented, make a
new determination of representatives at this time 5
* Cf Matter of Colonial Fibre Company, Inc. and Cohoes Knit Goods Workers Union No.
2151 1j, A F. of L, 0 N. L R B 658.
r, Matter of Bon Ton Curtain Company and American Federation of Labor, Federal
Union, 20 N . L B B 462, Matter of American Hair it Felt Company and Jute, Hair,
and Felt Workers Local #163 ( United Furniture Workers of America , C 1. 0.), 15 N L.
R. B 572 ; Matter of The Nat . onal Sugar Refining Company of New Jersey , L. I. City Re-
finery and Local 1)76, Sugar Refinery Wor/,e,s, International Longshoremen's Ass'n., 10
N. L R. B. 1410.