Ware Cotton Batting Co., Inc.

WARE COTTON BATTING CO., INC. 363 WARE COTTON BATTING CO., INC. and INTERNATIONAL HOD CARRIERS , BUILDING AND COMMON LABORERS' UNION OF AMERICA , AFL, ROOFERS and MANUFAC- TURERS LOCAL 667, Petitioner . Case No. 15-RC-895. April 24, 1953 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 Joseph Smolen, 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 Styles and Peterson] . 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 employees of the Employer. 3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representation of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. 4. We find that all production and maintenance employees at the Employer's New Orleans , Louisiana , plant, excluding guards , office clerical employees , confidential employees, professional employees , and supervisors , 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 and should be dismissed because of a contemplated expansion in the size of the unit . The Petitioner urges that an immediate election should be directed as a representative group of em- ployees is now working in all classifications. At the time of the hearing on March 5, 1953 , the Employer was engaged in the manufacture of cotton batting from raw cotton . On or about December 15, 1952 , the F. Burkart Manu- facturing Company , a St. Louis , Missouri , firm, engaged in the manufacture of cotton and sisal batting, purchased the stock of the Employer . It is presently expandin .altering the Employer ' s production setup , with the intenti oomofproducing sisal batting in addition to cotton batting . At the time of the hearing, the machinery in the plant had been moved in such a way as to permit the new sisal production line to be installed. The plant manager testified that he hoped to start production on the new sisal line within 30 to 60 days from the date of the hearing. At the time of the hearing , in March, there were approxi- mately 30 employees , working on 2 shifts , employed on the cotton batting production line . These employees do whatever 1 The petition was amended at the hearing to show the correct name of the Employer. 3 64 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD work is necessary to be done in the plant, and none of them has a specific work classification. The Employer testified it expected to hire 15 to 30 new employees when the sisal line went into operation in April. However, some of the employees presently working on the cotton line may be transferred to the sisal line when that line is installed! Because the processes of manufacturing sisal and cotton batting are so similar, it is probable that no new work classifications will be created for the sisal line different from those on the cotton line.3 We believe that the present complement of employees is a representative and substantial segment of the working force ultimately to be employed. We therefore see no reason for departing from the Board's usual policy of directing an imme- diate election.4 Accordingly, the Employer's motiontodismiss is hereby denied. [Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.] 2It will be up to the plant superintendent to decide whether to hire new employees for the sisal line, or to transfer cotton- line employees to do sisal - line work. s Although the process of manufacturing sisal and cotton batting is similar , some different types of machines are used due to the stiffer nature of sisal as compared to cotton. 4Pershing Avenue Corporation, Ivers & Pond Piano Company, Paul G. Mehlin & Sons and Poole Piano Company, 98 NLRB 148; Oliver Iron and Steel Corporation, Berry Division, 98 NLRB 1110; Chrysler Corporation, Michaud Ordnance Plant, 98 NLRB 1105. HIGGINS, INC. and UNITED BROTHERHOOD OF CARPEN_ TERS & JOINERS OF AMERICA, SHIP CARPENTERS, CAULKERS & JOINERS, LOCAL NO. 584, AFL, Petitioner HIGGINS, INC. and INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF BOILERMAKERS, IRON SHIPBUILDERS AND HELPERS OF AMERICA, LOCAL 37, AFL, Petitioner. Cases Nos . 15-RC- 881, 15 -RC-8'87, 15-RC-884, and 15-RC-886. April 24, 1953. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon separate petitions duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National or Relations Act, a consolidated hearing was held before . Lewis, 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 these cases to a three-member panel [Chairman Herzog and Members Murdock and Peterson]. Upon the entire record in these cases,' the Board finds: 1 The Board grants the motion of United Brotherhood of Carpenters & Joiners of America, Ship Carpenters, Caulkers & Joiners, Local No. 584, AFL, herein called the Carpenters, to withdraw its petition in Case No. 15-RC-887 and the motion of international Brotherhood of Boilermakers , Iron Shipbuilders and Helpers of America, Local 37, AFL , to withdraw its petition in Case No. 15-RC-884. 104 NLRB No 50.