Phillips-Jones Corp.

PHILLIPS-JONES CORPORATION 153 employees such as we normally find may constitute separate 'bargain- ing units s We-find, therefore, that the units sought'by the Petitioner are -inappropriate, and we shall order-that the petitions be dismissed .9 Order Upon the entire record in this case, the National Labor Relations Board'hereby orders that the petitions herein be, and they.hereby are, dismissed. 8 See Sunshine Biscuits, Inc.. 94 NLRB 770; American Viscose Corporation, Sylvania Division, 84 NLRB 202 ; and Harbor Plywood Corporation of America, 81 NLRB 1331. 1In view of our disposition of the case , we find it unnecessary to consider the addi- tional argument of the Employer and the Intervenor that the requested units are inap- propriate because they are not coextensive in 'scope with the existing multiplant uiil%. PHILLIPS-JONES CORPORATION 1 and UNITED GARMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA, AFL, PETITIONER . Cases No. 15-RC-538. September 12, 1951 Decision and Direction of Election Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before John C. Truesdale, 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 Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member panel [Chairman Herzog and Members Houston and Reynolds]. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds : 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. 2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain em- ployees of the Employer. 3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa- tion of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9 (c) (1) and'Section 2 ('6) and '(7) of the Act. 4. The Petitioner seeks to represent a unit composed of production and maintenance employees at the Employer's Geneva, Alabama, plant, including warehouse employees, with certain specified exclu- sions. The Employer contends that only a broader unit embracing the production and maintenance employees in both its Geneva and Hartford, Alabama, plants is appropriate. The parties also disagree as to the unit placement of group leaders, instructors, plant clerical employees, a truck driver, and machinist repairman. 1 The name of the Employer appears as corrected at the hearinr. 96 NLRB Na 17. 154 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD The' Employer is engaged in the manufacture of shirts, operating several plants in the States of Alabama and Pennsylvania. This pro- ceeding concerns only its Geneva and Hartford, Alabama, plantsk which are located about 12 miles apart. At the Geneva plant the Em- ployer conducts a complete shirt-manufacturing operation, consisting of the cutting and sewing of the cloth, and the inspection, laundering, and packaging of the finished product. Unlike the Geneva plant, the Hartford plant is engaged only in certain phases of the sewing- opera-tions. Some of the cloth cut and partially sewn at Geneva is delivered to Hartford where it is sewn. Thereafter, the shirts are returned to Geneva for inspection and preparation for market. The Employer maintains a single office at the Geneva plant where all personnel matters are handled and a single payroll is kept for both plants. The Geneva plant likewise provides supplies and warehousing facilities and maintenance services for both plants. The Hartford plant is under the supervision of the Geneva plant manager. How- ever, the sewing room, the only operation at that plant, like the several departments at Geneva, has a supervisor who is directly responsible to the plant manager. Employees in the Geneva and Hartford plants exercise similar skills and may transfer from one plant to the other without loss of their seniority. They also enjoy the same employee benefits and have the same general working conditions. There is no history of collective bargaining at either plant. In view of the foregoing, and particularly the integration of opera- tions, centralized administration, and close community of employee interests in the two plants, we find that a unit embracing the employees of both plants is appropriate 2 As we are administratively satisfied that tl.e Petitioner has an adequate showing of interest in the broader unit hereinafter established, we shall not dismiss the petition, but shall direct an election in a unit including the employees of the Geneva and Hartford plants! There remains for consideration the unit placement of employees in the following disputed categories and classifications whom the Em- ployer would include, and the Petitioner would exclude : Group leaders: Each of the 10 group leaders has about 10 employees for whom each leader furnishes raw materials and removes finished work. They transmit to their respective groups instructions from the plant supervisors, one of whom is present at all times in each work- room. They have no authority to hire or discharge, or effect any changes in the status of employees, or make effective recommendations ' Nashville Wire Products Manufacturing Co., Inc., et at., 89 NLRB 135; Boland Manu- facturing Company, 83 NLRB 1254. See also National Cash Register Company, 95 NLRB 27. Cf Southwest Truck Body Company, 93 NLRB 1341. 8If the Petitioner does not desire to participate in an election at this time , we shall permit it to withdraw its petition without prejudice upon notice to the Regional Director within 10 days after issuance of the Decision and Direction of Election herein. Flora Cabinet Company, Inc, 94 NLRB 12. PHILLIPS-JONES CORPORATION 155 concerning same. They likewise do not responsibly direct any em- ployees, but merely give routine directions to the latter. We find that the group leaders are not supervisors within the meaning of the Act, tnd shall include them in the unit.4 Instructors: Five individuals in this classification are employed in the two plants. They train new employees and coach experienced ones. In emergencies, instructors substitute for the plant supervisors and assistant supervisors. They also make effective recommendations concerning changes in the status of traineees. We find that the in- structors are supervisors within the meaning of the Act and shall exclude them from the unit.-' Plant clericals: The plant clerks in the Geneva plant and the two plant clerks in the Hartford plant work in the various production departments alongside the production employees, recording and tabu- lating, for payroll purposes, the amount of the daily earnings of the latter. We shall include the plant clerks in the production and main- tenance unit in accordance with Board policy.6 Truck driver: This employee transports materials and finished prod- ucts between the plants and the warehouse. He also delivers mer- chandise from the Geneva plant to the railway freight station for shipment. When not thus employed, he also assists in packaging shirts. We shall include him in the unit.' Machinist repairmen: The Petitioner would include the four ma- chinist repairmen, and the Employer would exclude them. The ma- chinist repairmen, like other maintenance employees, work under the direct supervision of the plant manager. Although they may prevent operators from using machines that are not in good working condi- tion, the record is clear that they exercise no supervisory authority over any employees. As they have a close community of interest with the other production and maintenance employees, we shall include them in the unit.8 We find that all production and maintenance employees at the Employer's Geneva and Hartford, Alabama, plants, including the Geneva warehouse employees, group leaders, plant clerical employees, machinist repairmen, and the truck driver, but excluding office clerical employees, professional employees, instructors, guards, and all super- visors as defined in the Act, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act. [Text 'of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this volume.] n United States Gypsum Company, 91 NLRB No 33. S Stokely Foods, Inc., 91 NLRB No 29 "Louisville Railway Company, 94 NLRB 20. Y Southland Manufacturing Company, 91 NLRB No. 38. 1 Barmac, Inc., 89 NLRB 139.