Mayfair Cotton Mills

In the Matter Of MAYFAIR COTTON MILLS and TEXTILE WORKERS UNION OF AMERICA, CIO Case No. 10-R-1584.-Decided January 16, 1946 Mr. L. W. Perrin, of Spartanburg, S. C., for the Company. Mr. R. C. Thomas, of Spartanburg, SX., for the Union. Mr. Oscar Geltman, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION STATEMENT OF THE CASE Upon a petition duly filed by Textile Workers Union of America, CIO, herein called the Union, alleging that a question affecting com- merce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of May- fair Cotton Mills, Arcadia, South Carolina, herein called the Com- pany, the National Labor Relations Board provided for an appro- priate hearing upon due notice before Dan M. Byrd, Trial Examiner. The hearing was held at Spartanburg, South Carolina, on August 28, 1945. The Company and the Union appeared and participated. All parties were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to examine and- cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence 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 - Mayfair Cotton Mills, a South Carolina corporation, is engaged in the manufacture of unfinished cotton print cloth at two mills in Ar- cadia, South Carolina. During the year 1944, the Company pur- chased raw materials, consisting principally of cotton, valued at ap- proximately $2,000,000, 86 percent of which was received from points outside the State of South Carolina. During the same period, the Company manufactured products valued at approximately $3,000,000, almost all of which was shipped to points outside the State of South Carolina. 65 N. L. R. B., No. 84. 511 679100-46-vol 65-34 512 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD We find that the Company is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. H. THE ORGANIZATION 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. III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION At a conference held on August 10, 1945, the Union requested recog- nition as the statutory bargaining representative of the Company's employees. The Company declined to grant such recognition, where- upon the Union filed its petition herein on August 11, 1945. A statement of a Board agent, introduced into evidence at the hear- ing, indicates that the Union represents a substantial number of em- ployees in the unit hereinafter found appropriate' 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. IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT The Union contends that the appropriate unit should consist of all production and maintenance employees at the Company's two mills in Arcadia, South Carolina, including watchmen, and section men and loom fixers,2 but excluding office clerical employees, timekeepers, store clerks, storeroom clerks, and second hand, and other supervisory employees. The Company disagrees with the unit proposed by the Union in that it would exclude watchmen from the unit, and would include timekeepers and storeroom clerks in the unit. Watchmen. These employees are neither militarized nor deputized. At each mill they are stationed in an office adjoining the entrance gate. They perform the typical duties of watchmen, making rounds, punch- ing time clocks, and generally protecting the premises in the interests of the Company. It is clear that their duties are not of a monitorial nature with respect to other employees. We shall include them in i he unit.' Timekeepers. These employees are stationed and spend almost all of their time in offices in mills No. 1 and No. 2. Apparently, they work 'The Field Examiner reported that the Union submitted 332 authorization cards dated from February to July 1945, both inclusive. There are approximately 625 employees in the appropriate unit. 2 It appears from the record that the Company' s section men and loom fixers are not supervisory employees within the meaning of the Board's customary definition. 2 Matter of Champion Sheet Metal Company, Inc., 61 N. L. R. B. 511 ; Matter of Gulf Refining Company (Tulsa Pine Line Division), 64 N. L. R. B. 304. MAYFAIR COTTON MILLS 513 on the day shift only. They receive time and production records from the overseers or other supervisors of various sections, and from these records they prepare pay-roll reports for the Company's main office. Since the duties of these employees are dissimilar from those of the production and maintenance employees, we shall exclude them from the unit 4 Storeroom clerks. These employees work in stockrooms, issuing parts and supplies and keeping inventory records. They are super- vised by the mill superintendent, at the Company's mill No. 1, and by the weave room overseer, at mill No. 2. They work on a three shift basis, as do production employees generally. We have heretofore held that such employees should be included in a unit of production and maintenance employees, in the absence of an agreement to exclude them.-' We shall include them in the unit. We find that all production and maintenance employees at the Com- pany's two mills in Arcadia, South Carolina, including watchmen, sec- tion men, loom fixers, and storeroom clerks, but excluding office cleri- cal employees, timekeepers, store clerks, and second hands, and all other 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. V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES The Company contends that, in view of the fact that 222 of its em- ployees are in the armed forces, any election should be deferred until "the final termination of the war". Implicit in this contention is the alternative position that all employees in the armed forces should be given an opportunity to vote-by mail ballot if necessary. We are of the opinion that the facts in this case do not substantially differ from those in Matter of South West Pennsylvania Pipe Lines.6 Accord- ingly, we shall provide for the mail balloting of employees in the armed forces who fall within the appropriate unit, subject to the conditions hereinafter mentioned. We shall direct that the question concerning representation be re- solved by an election by secret ballot among employees in the appropri- ate unit who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of the Direction of Election herein, subject to the 4 See Matter of E. B: Gunzberg, Jacob Mandell, Sidney Scheinman and Arnold Scheinman, d/b/a Bridge Metal Products Co., 62 N. L. R. B. 644. 3 Matter of Rockford Screw Products Co , 62 N. L. R. B. 1430 ; Matter of The Harrison Steel Castings Company, 63 N. L. R. B. 585. 6 64 N. L. R. B. 1384. 514 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD limitations and additions set forth in the Direction. The Regional Director shall mail ballots to employees within the appropriate unit on military leave, provided one or more of the parties hereto, within seven (7) days from the issuance of the Direction of Election, files with the Regional Director a list containing the names, most recent addresses, and work classifications of such employees. The Regional Director shall open and count the ballots cast by mail by employees on military leave, provided that such ballots must be returned to and received by the Regional Office within thirty (30) days from the, date they were mailed to such employees by the Regional Director.7 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 3, as amended, it is hereby DHIECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa- tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Mayfair Cotton Mills, Arcadia, South Carolina, an election by secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than forty-five (45) days from the date of this Direction, under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Tenth Region, acting in this matter as, agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Article III, Sections 10 and 11, of said Rules and Regulations, among 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, and including employees in the armed forces of the United States, 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 or not they desire to be represented by Textile Workers Union of America, CIO, for the purposes of collective bargaining. MR. GERARD D. REILLY took ' no part in the consideration of the above Decision and Direction of Election. T A free interchange between the interested parties of information on the addresses and work categories of the employees to be voted by mail will he necessary , in order to avoid challenges and post-election objections Accordingly , the Board will make available to all interested parties any information of this nature furnished it by any other party In the event that the parties should send the absentee voters information or literature bear- ing directly or indirectly on the pending election , copies of all such documents should be simultaneously filed with the Regional Office for inspection by or transmittal to the other parties. However, acceptance or transmittal of such literature by the Board 's office is not to be construed as conferring immunity on the filing party in the event that objections are later Interposed concerning its content. The usual principles will apply.