Betsy Ross Throwing Co.

In the Matter of BETSY Ross THROWING COMPANY, EMPLOYER and' TEXTILE WORKERS UNION OF AMERICA, C. I. 0., PETITIONER Case No. 4-RC-50I.-Decided October 18, 1949 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before Julius Topol,. 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 National Labor- Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member panel [Chairman Herzog and Members Houston and Murdock]. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds: 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the- National Labor Relations Act. 2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain em- ployees of the Employer. 3. The question concerning representation : The Employer is engaged in the throwing of rayon yarns, almost entirely for Park Silk Company, Lebanon, Pennsylvania. It for-- merly processed part of this yarn at its own plant at Dickson City,. Pennsylvania,' and sent part of it to other plants for processing. On June 9, 1949, it closed its plant "until further notice" and laid off its employees, but retained a bookkeeper, the plant superintendent, and a forelady.2 Since then the Employer has been sending all yarn else- where for processing. - In July 1949, the Employer placed newspaper advertisements for employees, and also requested referral of job applicants from, the- United States Employment Service. Although the Employer main- tained at the hearing that it sought only three employees to make test runs for a short period on new machines, the Employer did not indi- cate in the advertisement, in its request to the United States Employ- ment Service, or in discussions with job applicants, that the jobs were ' The Employer concedes the Board's jurisdiction in this proceeding. 2 The parties stipulated that all three should be excluded from the unit sought herein. 86 N. L. R. B., No. 82. 589 -590 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD temporary. On the contrary, the Employer's superintendent stated to three employees who applied for reinstatement that the Employer desired that they reduce their wage rate from 85 to 70 cents an hour, and that it would then hire a few employees at a time. When these employees declined to work at the lower rate, the superintendent told them that they would be willing to return to work at the reduced wage scale when their unemployment insurance benefits were exhausted, and, further, that if they would not work at the lower rate, other employees would. On August 10, 1949, the Employer's president summoned the employees to a meeting, at which he announced that-the -plant might be reopened if the employees would accept a lower wage rate. When they refused, he told the employees at the meeting, as the superintendent had told applicants for reemployment, that they would be willing to return to work when they were no longer receiving -unemployment insurance payments. The Employer's president testified at the hearing that when the employees refused at the August meeting to accept his proposed lower wage scale, he decided he could operate more profitably by having -yarn processed at other plants.3 The Employer moved to dismiss this proceeding on the ground that its plant was closed permanently, and that there is therefore no question concerning representation. The Petitioner, however, maintains that operations at the Employer's plant have merely been temporarily suspended, and that an immediate election should therefore be directed. Under all the circumstances herein, we are unable to determine -whether the Employer's operations have been permanently discon- tinued, or only temporarily suspended pending establishment of a wage scale satisfactory to the Employer. Accordingly, in view of the possibility that the Employer's operations may be resumed, we find that a question affecting commerce exists within the meaning of "Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. The Em- ployer's motion it dismiss is therefore denied. However, in view of the fact that the Employer, at the time of the hearing, had no em- ployees currently employed, we shall direct an election contingent upon a determination by the Regional Director for the Fourth Region that the Employer has resumed operations.4 4. The appropriate unit : We find, in accordance with the agreement of the parties, that all production and maintenance employees of the Employer, at its Dick- son City, Pennsylvania, plant, excluding office clerical employees, 3 The Employer's president also testified that machinery dealers knew that the plant equipment was for sale, although it had not been listed for sale because of adverse market conditions for used machinery. 4 Matter of Vancouver Plywood f Veneer Company, 79 N. L. R. B. 708. BETSY ROSS THROWING COMPANY 591 foremen, and all other supervisors, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section :0 (b) of the Act. DIRECTION OF ELECTION As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives f or the purposes of collective bargaining with the Employer, an election by secret ballot shall be conducted at such time as the Regional Director finds that the Employer has resumed its yarn processing operations at its Dickson City, Pennsylvania, plant, under the direction and super- vision of the Regional Director for the Region in which this case was heard, and subject to Sections 203.61 and 203.62 of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations, among the employees in, the unit found appropriate in paragraph numbered 4, above, who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of the election, 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, and also excluding employees on strike who -are not entitled to reinstatement, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented, for purposes of collective bargaining, by Textile Workers Union of America, C. I. O.