Southern Advance Bag & Paper Co., Inc.

In the Matter of SOUTHERN ADVANCE B AG & PAPER CO., INC., EMPLOYER and UNITED PAPERWORRERS OF AMERICA , CIO, PETITIONER Case No. 15-R-2222-Decided December 18, 1947 Cllr. C. C. Jessop, of New York City, for the Employer. Mr. Fred C. Pieper, of New Orleans, La., for the Petitioner. Mr. George W. Brooks, of Washington, D. C., and Mr. Mark Fisher; of Birmingham, Ala., for the Intervenors. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at Alex- andria, Louisiana, on August 19, 1947, before George H. O'Brien, hearing officer. The hearing officer 's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. The Employer's motion to dismiss is denied for reasons hereinafter stated. Upon the, entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations Board makes the following : FINDINGS OF FACT 1. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER Southern Advance Bag & Paper Co., Inc., a Maine corporation with its principal place of business in Boston , Massachusetts , is engaged in the manufacture of paper and paper bags at its Hodge, Louisiana, plant, the only plant involved in this proceeding. The Employer pur- chases annually for use at its Hodge , Louisiana, plant, raw material valued in excess of $1,500,000, of which approximately 10 percent is obtained from points outside the State of Louisiana . The products manufactured and sold by the Employer from its Hodge, Louisiana, plant amount annually to approximately $12,000,000 , of which ap- proximately 90 percent is shipped to points outside the State of Louisiana. We find that the Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. 75 N L. "R. B., No. 70. 614 SOUTHERN ADVANCE BAG & PAPER CO., INC. 615 II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED The Petitioner is a labor organization, affiliated with the Congress ,of Industrial Organizations, claiming to represent employees of the Employer. International Brotherhood of Pulp, Sulphite and Paper Mill Work- ers, and International Brotherhood of Paper Makers, herein called 1the Intervenors, are labor organizations affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, claiming to represent employees of the Employer. III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION The Intervenors contend that the present proceeding is barred by reason of an existing contract between the Intervenors and the Em- ployer. The contract in question, replacing an earlier agreement be- tween the parties,' was executed on June 30, 1947, after the filing by the Petitioner on May 19, 1947, of its petition in the instant proceeding. Accordingly, inasmuch as the filing of the petition preceded the execu- tion of the 1947 contract, that instrument cannot, under well established principles of the Board, constitute a bar to the proceeding.2 The Employer contends that the petition should be dismissed upon the ground that no evidence of the Petitioner's showing of representa- tion was introduced at the hearing. We find no merit in this con- tention. We have held that the requirement of a showing of representa- tion is but an adnunistrative expedient, adopted to enable the Board to determine for itself whether or not further proceedings are warranted, and is not subject to objection at the hearing.3 Moreover, we are administratively satisfied that the Petitioner has made an adequate showing of representation. We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the representation of employees of the Employer, within the ineaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. IV. TILE APPROPRIATE UNIT We find, substantially in accordance with the agreement of the parties, that all production and maintenance employees of the Em- ' The earlier agreement, negotiated in 1945, was a 1-yeas exclusive baigaming agree- ment subject to automatic renewal in the absence of 30 clays' notice, and extended with modifications to June 30, 1947 2 See Matter of Consolidated Steel Corporation of Texas, 74 N L R 13 204, Mattei of Go, dan lP Callender et at, d/b/a Kohlman Bros & Sugarman Company, 74 N L R B 381 I See Matter of 0 D Jennings & Company, 68 N L R B 516, Matter of Embassy Meno- faetw ing Company, 71 N. L It B. 430 Foi reasons stated above, the Intervenors' request to be allowed to introduce evidence relating to the Board's administrative handling of the petition and the Petitioner's showing of representation was properly denied by the hearing officer in the piesent instance. 616 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD ployer at its Hodge, Louisiana, plant, excluding supervisors, office em- ployees, clerical employees, porters, watchmen, pulpwood cutters, and haulers, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 '(b) of the Act. DIRECTION OF ELECTION 4 As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Southern Advance Bag & Paper Co., Inc., Hodge, Louisiana, an election by secret ballot shall be con- ducted 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 Fifteenth Region, and subject to Sections 203.61 and 203.62 of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regu- lations-Series 5, among the 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 because they were ill or on vacation or temporarily laid off, 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 United Paperworkers of America, CIO, or by International Brotherhood of Pulp, Sulphite and Paper Mill Workers, AFL, and International Brotherhood of Papermakers, AFL, for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by neither. 4 Any participant in the election herein may, upon its prompt request to, and approval thereof by, the Regional Director, have its name removed from the ballot.