Bemis Bro. Bag Co.

In the Matter of BEMIS BRO. BAG COMPANY and TExTIIM WORKERS UNION OF AMERICA, C. I. O. Case No. R 55!49.Decided July 10, 1943 Mr. Carl Wilde , of Indianapolis, Ind., for the Company. Mr. Ralph Cline, of Indianapolis, Ind., for the C. I. O. Mr. Cassatt Martz, of Indianapolis, Ind., for the Independent. Miss Frances Lopinsky , of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION STATEMENT OF THE CASE (Upon petition duly filed by Textile Workers Union of America, C. I. 0., herein called the C. I. 0., alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of Bemis Bro. Bag Company," Indianapolis, Indiana, the National Labor Relations Board provided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice before Louis M. Groeniger, Trial Examiner. Said hearing was held at Indianapolis, Indiana, on June 17,1943. The Company, the C. 1. 0., and Independent Employees Association, herein called the Independ- ent, appeared, participated, and were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evi- dence bearing on the issues. The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. All parties were afforded opportunity to file briefs with the Board. Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY Bemis Bro. Bag Company. a Missouri corporation with its principal office in St. Louis, Missouri, operates some 20 plants, 1 of which is in Indianapolis, Indiana, and is concerned in this case. The Company I The correct name of the Company is as set out above. In the petition and other formal papers the Company was incorrectly designated as "Bemis Bag Company." 51 N. L. R. B., No. 48. , 211 540612-44-vol 51-15 212 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD manufactures, sells, and distributes cloth and paper bags `and page, cartons. During 1942 the chief products purchased by the Company for use in its business at the Indianapolis plant, most of which came from outside the State, were cotton and burlap cloth and paper valued in excess of $500,000. Sales,, about 65 percent of which- were made outside the State of Indiana, were in.execss of $500,000. The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. H. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED ' Textile Workers Union of America is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, admitting to member- ship employees of the Company. Independent Employees Association is an unaffiliated labor organi- zation admitting to membership employees of the Company. III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION On April 24, 1943, the C. I. O. requested recognition as the exclu- sive bargaining representative of the Company's employees. On May 1 the Company replied, refusing recognition to the C. I. O. for the reason that it was then recognizing and bargaining with the Inde- pendent and for the further reason that in December 1942, the Board sustained the Regional Director's refusal to issue a notice of hearing on a ,prior petition filed by the C. I. O. in August 1942. On May 25, 1943, the Company and the Independent executed a contract terminating May 25, 1944. The previous contract in force between the Independent and the Company terminated June 1, 1943. We find, contrary to the contention of the Company and the Inde- pendent, that the present contract is no bar to a determination of representatives since the C. I. O. had given notice of its demands before the contract of May 25, 1943, was executed.2 A statement of the Field Examiner introduced in evidence at the hearing indicates that the C. I. O. represents a substantial number of employees in the unit herein found to be appropriate.3 We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the representation of employees of the Company, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. 2 'Sec Matter of Globe Mills, Inc., 41 N L It. B 94 Obviously the Board's action in De- cembe, 1942 in refusing to authorize a hearing on the piuor petition was based on the fact that the petition was premature , since the contract then had.5 months to run It did not preclude the C. I O. from making a later timely claim, as it did. 3 The C I O. submitted 118 authorization cards, dated April and May 1943, 83 of which 'appear to bear genuine signatures of employees on the Company 's pay roll of June 3, 1943_ There are approximately 235 employees in the appropriate unit. BEMIS BRO. BAG COMPANY 213 IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT All parties are in agreement that all employees, other than super- -N isory employees, armed guards, and office clerical employees, should be included in the unit. The following categories are in dispute : timekeepers, whom the C. I. O. would include within the unit, but whom the Company and the Independent would exclude; and watch- men and factory clerical workers, whom the Company and the Independent would include and the C. I. O. would exclude. The timekeepers are, with the exception of one, members of the office clerical staff. One works in the machine shop. Timekeepers were not covered by the pontract. We find timekeepers to be office clerical workers and shall exclude them from the unit. The watchmen work on rotating shifts, acting as firemen when on the day shift, and as combination firemen-watchmen when on the night shift. They are unarmed, and the record shows that they work pri- marily as firemen. We find that they are maintenance employees and shall therefore include them in the unit. The factory clerical workers are under the supervision of the fore- men of their respective departments. They are paid on an hourly rate and their work is confined to their own departments. Since their work is closely aligned with that of production employees, we shall include the factory clerical employees in the unit. We find that all employees of the Company at its Indianapolis, Indiana, plant, including shipping department employees, firemen- watchmen, and factory clerical employees, but excluding plant-pro- tection employees, timekeepers, office clerical workers, and all supervisory employees with authority to hire, promote, discharge, discipline or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or effectively recommend such action, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.4 V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES We shall direct that the question concerning representation which has arisen be resolved by an election by secret ballot among the employees of the Company in the unit found appropriate in Section IV, above, who were employed during the pay-roll period immedi- ately preceding the date of the-Direction of Election herein, subject to the limitations and additions set forth in the Direction. ' This is substantially the same unit covered by the contract between the Copipany ant the Independent. 214 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD DIRECTION OF ELECTION By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National Labor Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor Rela- tions Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, it is hereby DnRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa- tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Bemis Bro. Bag Company, Indianapolis, Indiana, an election by secret ballot shall be conducted 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 Ninth Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Article III, Section 10, of said Rules and Regulations, among all employees of the Company 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, and including employees in the armed forces of the United States who present themselves in person at the polls, but excluding employees who have since quite 'or been discharged for cause, to determine whether they desire to be represented by Textile Workers Union of America, C. I. 0., or by Independent Employees Association, for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by neither.