Lehigh River Mills, Inc.

In the Matter of LEHIGH RIVER MILLS, INC., EMPLOYER and TEXTILE WORKERS UNION OF AMERICA, C. I. 0., PETITIONER Case No.4-R-2543.Decided November 25, 1947 Messrs. Irving W. Cole nan and Milton Lowry, both of Northamp- ton, Pa., for the Employer. Messrs. Peter M. Umholtz and Norris Tibbets, both of Allentown, Pa., for the Petitioner. DECISION AND CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES Upon a petition duly filed the National Labor Relations Board on March 26, 1947, conducted a prehearing election among the employees of the Employer in the alleged appropriate unit to determine whether or not they desired to be represented by the Petitioner for the purposes of collective bargaining. At the close of the election a Tally of Ballots was furnished the parties. The Tally shows that there are approximately 97 eligible voters and that 97 ballots were cast, of which 65 were for the Petitioner 28 were against the Petitioner, and 4 were challenged. On April 1, 1947, the Employer filed with the Regional Director its objections to the election urging therein that the election be declared invalid and set aside. Thereafter, a hearing was held at Allentown, Pennsylvania, on May 22, 1947, before John H. Garver, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the llearing are free from preju- dicial error and are hereby affirmed. The Employer's request for oral argument is hereby denied inasmuch as the record, in our opinion, adequately presents the issues and positions of the parties. Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations Board makes the following : FINDINGS OF FACT I. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER Lehigh River Mills, Inc., a Pennsylvania corporation, is engaged in the manufacture of textile piece goods at its plant at Northampton, 75 N. L. R. B., No. 37. 280 LEHIGH RIVER MILLS, INC. 281 Pennsylvania. During the last half of 1946, the Employer purchased for use at this plant over $100,000 worth of raw materials, nearly all of which represented shipments from points outside the Common- wealth of Pennsylvania. During a, similar period, the Employer man- ufactured finished products valued at over $150,000, of which approxi- mately 75 percent represented shipments to points outside the Com- monwealth. The Employer admits, and we find, that it is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, claiming to represent employeees of the Employer. III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION On September 18, 1946, pursuant to a stipulation for certification upon a consent election, to which the Employer, the Petitioner, and the Board were parties, an election was conducted among the em- ployees in the unit herein involved. In that election a majority of the employees voted against representation by the Petitioner. On January 24, 1947, the Petitioner again requested recognition of the Employer as the exclusive bargaining representative of the em- ployees in the unit herein involved, and upon the Employer's refusal, filed the instant petition on January 27, 1947. We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the representation of employees of the Employer, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT We find, in substantial accord with the agreement of the parties, that all production and maintenance employees at the Northampton, Pennsylvania, plant of the Employer, excluding office and clerical employees, guards, foremen, and all or any other supervisors, con- stitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act. V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES The Employer, as already noted, filed objections to the election. In addition, it sought to invalidate the proceedings on other grounds. In the latter connection, the Employer filed, subsequent to the hearing, a "Motion to Suspend and/or Dismiss Representation Proceedings" 282 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD and a "Motion to Dismiss Representation Proceedings." We have considered the objections to the election and find that they raise no substantial or material issues regarding the conduct of the election or conduct affecting the results of the election, which was held in March of this year. The objections are therefore overruled. Similarly, we find no merit in either the contentions addressed to the validity of this proceeding or in the motions filed after the hearing. Accordingly, the contentions are hereby rejected and the motions are hereby denied. Inasmuch as the Tally shows that a majority of the valid votes counted have been cast for the Petitioner, and because the challenged ballots are insufficient in number to affect the results of the balloting, we shall certify the Petitioner as the collective bargaining representa- tive of the employees in the -unit heretofore found appropriate. CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED that Textile `Yorkers Union of America, C. I. 0., has been designated and selected by a majority of all produc- tion and maintenance employees at the Northampton, Pennsylvania, plant of Lehigh River Mills, Inc., Northampton, Pennsylvania, ex- cluding office and clerical employees, guards, foremen, and all or any other supervisors, as their representative for the purposes of collective bargaining and that, pursuant to Section 9 (a) of the Act, as amended, the said organization is the exclusive representative of all such em- ployees for the purposes of collective bargaining with respect to rates of pay, wages, hours of employment, and other conditions of em- ployment. MEMBERS MIIRDOCK and GRAY took no part in the consideration of the above Decision and Certification of Representatives.