W. S. Libbey Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 4, 1946

68 N.L.R.B. 456 (N.L.R.B. 1946)

In the Matter of W. S. LIBBEY COMPANY and LEWISTON INDEPENDENT
TEXTILE ASSOCIATION
Case No. 1-R-2821.-Decided June 4, 1946
Mr. John S. Mahon, of Lewiston, Me., for the Company.
Mr. Ralph E. Maybury, of Auburn, Me., for the Independent.
Mr. George Jabor, of Lewiston, Me., for the CIO.
Mr. Bernard Dunau, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon a petition duly filed by Lewiston Independent Textile Associa-
tion, herein called the Independent, alleging that a question affecting
commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of W.
S. Libbey Company, Lewiston, Maine. herein called the Company, the
National Labor Relations Board provided for an appropriate hearing
upon due notice before Robert E. Greene, Trial Examiner. The hear-
ing was held at Lewiston, Maine, on May 3, 1946. The Company, the
Independent, and the Textile Workers Union of America, CIO,
herein called the CIO, appeared and participated. At the hearing
the Trial Examiner granted a motion to intervene made by the CIO.
The CIO moved to dismiss the petition because of its prior designa-
tion as the exclusive bargaining representative. For reasons hereinafter
stated, the motion is hereby denied. All parties were afforded full op-
portunity 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.
68 N. L. R. B., No. 62.
456
W. S. LIBBEY COMPANY 457
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
W. S. Libbey Company is a Maine corporation engaged in the busi-
ness of manufacturing blankets at its plant in Lewiston, Maine. During
the calendar year 1945, the Company purchased raw materials, con-
sisting principally of cotton, wool, cotton yarn, bindings, and cartons,
valued at about $1,000,000, substantially all of which were shipped to
the plant from points outside the State of Maine. During the same period
of time, the Company shipped to points outside the State finished prod-
ucts, valued at about $2,000,000, representing substantially all its manu-
factures.
The Company admits, and we find, that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
The Lewiston Independent Textile Association is a labor organiza-
tion admitting to membership employees of the Company.
The Textile Workers Union of America is a labor organization affili-
ated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, admitting to mem-
bership employees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Company has refused to grant recognition to the Independent as
the exclusive bargaining representative of the Company's employees
until the Independent has been certified by the Board in an appropriate
unit.
As a result of a consent election held on March 16, 1944, the CIO
was designated, on March 21, 1944, the exclusive bargaining representa-
tive of the production and maintenance employees of the Company, by the
Regional Director for the First Region. A series of conferences held
between the CIO and the Company during the ensuing months cul-
minated in a collective agreement entered into on September 27, 1944.
On May 28, 1945, after a period of 8 months, the agreement was ter-
minated by the CIO, whereupon negotiations were undertaken in
order to arrive at a new contract. Efforts to agree were unsuccessful,
and negotiations were ended on October 27, 1945. After filing the re-
quired notice under the Smith-Connally Act, a strike vote conducted
by the CIO, among the employees of the Company, was decisively
458 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
defeated 164 to 14, on November 1, 1945. On December 1, 1945, the
Company orally notified the CIO that it no longer recognized it as
the bargaining representative of its employees stating that non-recognition
dated back to November 1, 1945. On December 2, 1945, the Company
confirmed its position in writing averring that non-recognition dated
back to November 2, 1945. Meanwhile, the Independent, formed during
the month of November 1945, wrote to the Company on November 20,
1945, requesting recognition as the exclusive bargaining representative
of its employees. To the date of the hearing, no recognition as a result
of this request was forthcoming.
The CIO contends that its earlier designation as the statutory
representative bars the present proceeding. We find no merit in this con-
tention. More than a year has elapsed since its previous designation,
and there is no subsisting contract to bar a determination of represen-
tatives. Accordingly, the time is propitious for an election.
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 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
IV THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
We find, in accordance with the agreement of the parties, that all
production and maintenance employees of the Company, including watch-
men, but excluding executives, overseers, foremen, second hands, de-
signers, laboratory employees, office and clerical employees, and all other
supervisory employees with authority to hire, promote, discharge, dis-
cipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or effec-
tively recommend such action, constitute a unit appropriate for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of
the Act.'
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
We shall direct that the question concerning representation which
has arisen be resolved by an election by secret ballot among 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,
1 We concur in the stipulation of the parties to exclude from the category of supervisory
employees all employees in a job classification below that of second band.
W. S. LIBBEY COMPANY 459
and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor Relations
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 W. S. Libbey Com-
pany, Lewiston, Maine, 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 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 employees in the unit
found appropriate in Section IV, above, who 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 be-
cause they were ill or on vacation or temporarily laid off, and including
employees in the armed forces of the United States who present them-
selves in person at the polls, 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, to determine whether they
desire to be represented by Lewiston Independent Textile Association
or by Textile Workers Union of America, CIO, for the purposes of
collective bargaining, or by neither.
CHAIRMAN HERZOG took no part in the consideratior of the above
Decision and Direction of Election.