Hollywood Maxwell Co.

70 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD crew of the research laboratory and the light cleaning crew, but ex- cluding mail register, file, stored records, and all other clerks, recep- tionists, mail sorters, typists, night service board operator, steno- grapher, secretary, personnel director, auditors, telephone operators, and all other office and clerical employees, cigar stand attendants, watchmen, professional employees, confidential employees, mainte- nance foremen, operations foremen, day service foremen, carpenter shop foremen, warehouse foremen, elevator operator foremen, electri- cal supervisor, shipping supervisor, office supervisor, mail section supervisor, the housekeeper, assistant manager, and manager at the hotel, janitor foremen, combination foremen, and all other super- visors as defined in the amended 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.] HOLLYWOOD MAXWELL Co. and INTERNATIONAL LADIES' GARMENT WORKERS' UNION, AFL, PETITIONER. Case No. 17-1?C-1122. November 20,1951 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 Harry Irwig, 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 Reynolds and Styles]. 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 represen- tation of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. 4. The appropriate unit : The Petitioner seeks to represent a unit of production and shipping department employees at the Employer's Topeka, Kansas, plant, ex- cluding maintenance men, designers, office and clerical employees, guards, watchmen, and supervisors as defined in the Act. 97 NLRB No. 13. HOLLYWOOD MAXWELL CO. 71 Except for the Petitioner's proposed exclusion of the maintenance men, the parties are in agreement concerning the composition of the unit. The Employer employs only one maintenance man. As the Petitioner has given no reason for excluding this employee, whose interests are clearly related to those of the production employees, and as he would otherwise be unrepresented, we shall include him in the unit. We therefore find that all production, maintenance, and shipping employees at the Employer's Topeka, Kansas, plant including the inspectors and the janitor, but excluding designers, office and clerical employees, guards, watchmen, and supervisors 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. 5. The Employer contends that the petition is premature because of the contemplated expansion in the size of the Topeka operations, whereby the present employee complement of 95 will be increased to an expected complement of 250 employees. The Petitioner requests an immediate election. The Employer began operations in Topeka on April 13, 1950, with 50 employees, and moved into the new location for expanded oper- ations during December 1950. The Employer then planned, and it apparently still intends, to increase its complement to approximately 250 employees. At the end of June 1951, the Employer had 140 employees but laid off about 40 employees shortly thereafter due to its inability to train employees in large numbers. During the month preceding the instant hearing, the Employer hired 15 new employees but 14 employees left its employment during that time, leaving approx- imately 95 employees on the payroll as of the time of the hearing. The Employer has procured the needed machinery for the expansion and has installed about 90 percent of it. The largest contemplated expansion will result from the proposed addition of a cutting depart- ment. However, although the 2 cutting machines have been installed in the cutting department for over 5 months the Employer has failed to hire any employees for that department. The Employer has made arrangements for hiring a cutting department foreman, but he is not presently on the Employer's payroll and it is entirely speculative as to when he will be hired. The cutting department employees will perform production work which is unlike the sewing work now being done but the Employer does not contend, nor is there any basis for a contention, that these new employees cannot be properly placed in a production and maintenance unit. As the Employer does not offer any concrete plan of expansion and cannot say definitely when the full complement of employees will be achieved, it is clear that timely achievement of the Employer's pro- 72 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD posed expansion is speculative. In these circumstances and because the record discloses that the present complement is a substantial and representative segment of the working force which will eventually be employed, we shall direct an immediate election., The Petitioner requests that eligibility to vote in the election di- rected herein be determined by the payroll period next preceding August 6, 1951, the date of filing the petition herein. We see no compelling reason to depart in this case from our usual procedure of utilizing the payroll period immediately preceding the direction of election and the Petitioner's request is hereby denied 2 [Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this volume.] i Electrical Reactance Corporation, 92 NLRB 1256. 2 Greater Erie Broadcasting Company (Radio Station WWOL), 92 NLRB 270. LUNTZ IRON & STEEL COMPANY and UNITED STEELWORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO, PETITIONER. Case No. 8-RC-1308. November 00, 1951 Decision and Certification of Representatives On July 24, 1951, pursuant to a "Stipulation for Certification upon Consent Election," an election by secret ballot was conducted under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Eighth Region, among the employees in the stipulated unit. Upon the com- pletion of the election, a tally of ballots was furnished the parties. The tally reveals that of approximately 66 eligible voters, 56 cast valid ballots, of which 28 were for, and 28 were against, the Petitioner. Two void ballots were cast and there were no challenged ballots. On July 27,1951, and July 30,1951, the Petitioner and the Employer, respectively, filed objections to the election. The Petitioner alleged that (1) certain activities of the Employer and its agents interfered with the employees' free choice of a bargaining representative; (2) the Board agent conducting the election erred in ruling void a ballot marked in a manner resembling a "no" under the "Yes" box, asserting that this ballot should have been counted for the Petitioner; and (3) the agent also erred in ruling valid a ballot marked with a red pen- ciled "X" in the "No" box, which was identified by the Employer's observer as having been cast by him. The Petitioner requested that the Board agent's determination concerning these two ballots be over- ruled and that it be certified or, in the alternative, that the election be set aside on the basis of its first objection. The Employer alleged in its first and second objections that the Petitioner and its agents en- 97 NLRB No. 11.