New England Spun Silk Corp.

In the Matter of NEW ENGLAND SPUN SILK CORPORATION and FEDERAL UNION OF TEXTILE WORKERS, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR Case No. R-1193.-Decided March 1, 1939 Spun Silk, Rayon, and Mixture Yarns Producing Industry-Investigation of Representatives : question concerning representation of employees : controversy as to appropriate unit; controversy as to majority--Unit Appropriate for Col- lective Bargaining : production and maintenance employees and assistant fore- men at Company's finishing mill, excluding supervisory, executive, and clerical employees ; separation of plants and of interests of employees ; desire of finish- ing millworkers to organize-Representatives: proof of choice : authenticity of signatures established principally by verified random samplings in proven cir- cumstances-Certiflcation of Representatives : upon proof of majority repre- sentation. Mr. Edward Schneider, for the Board. Mr. Edward F. Dalton, of Boston, Mass., for the Company. Mr. Aaron Velleman, of Boston, Mass., for the Union. Mr. Sidney Sugerman, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES STATEMENT OF THE CASE On November 28, 1938, Federal Union of Textile Workers (Amer- ican Federation of Labor), herein called the Union, filed with the Regional Director for the First Region (Boston, Massachusetts) a petition alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen con- cerning the representation of employees of New England Spun Silk Corporation, Brighton, Massachusetts, herein called the Company, and requesting an investigation and certification of representatives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act. On December 17, 1938, the National Labor Relations Board, herein called the Board, acting pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the Act and Article III, Section 3, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 1, as amended, or- dered an investigation and authorized the Regional Director to con- duct it and to provide for an appropriate hearing upon due notice. 11 N. L. R. B., No. 64. 852 NEW ENGLAND SPUN SILK CORPORATION ET AL . 853 On January 4, 1939, the Regional Director issued a notice of hear- ing,.copies of which were duly served upon the Company and upon the Union. Pursuant to the notice, a hearing was held on January 12 and 13, 1939, at Boston, Massachusetts, before Patrick H. McNally, the Trial Examiner duly designated by the Board. The Board and the Company were represented by counsel, and the Union by its organizer; all participated in the hearing. Full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues was afforded all parties. During the course of the hearing the Trial Examiner made several rulings on motions and on objections to the admission of evidence. The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner and finds that no prejudicial errors were committed. The rulings are hereby affirmed. Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY New England Spun Silk Corporation, a Massachusetts corporation all of whose capital stock is owned by Societe Industriale Pour le Schappe, of Basel, Switzerland, and Societe Anonyme Pour le Schappe, of Lyons, France, was organized in 1920 to extend produc- tion into the domestic market. It immediately acquired its present mill at Newton, and shortly thereafter its present mill at Brighton, both in the State of Massachusetts. They were taken over as going concerns, both independently complete production units. The Com- pany has since engaged in operations at the two plants producing spun silk yarns, spun rayon yarns, and mixture yarns. While all other spinners in this industry throughout the country are said to perform their operations as one continuous process in a single plant, the Company, by reason of the circumstances of its original manner of operation, and rather than scrap the Newton mill, which, though inadequate, has certain physical advantages of its own, has divided its production into two departments : boiling and dressing of raw materials at Newton; combing, spinning, and finishing at Brighton. The entire process, from delivery of raw materials to Newton to shipment and billing from Brighton, is a progressive system of production limed at the one break in its continuity by the Company's own trucking facilities. A slight quan- tity of raw material, between 5 and 10 per cent of the total used, enters the Brighton plant directly, without passing through the Newton mill at all. Normally the Company employs approximately 325 workers at Brighton, 125 at Newton. 164275-39-vol. xi-55 854 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD The Company's raw-material purchases during the fiscal year ending June 30, 1938, amounted to $299,724.44, more than 90 per cent of which was brought into Massachusetts from abroad and from other States. The Company's net sales for the same period amounted to $792,227.41, of which 95 per cent was shipped to con- cerns outside the State. The Company has sales representatives in the States of New York, Illinois, and Pennsylvania. II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED Federal Union of Textile Workers is a labor organization affiliated with the American Federation of Labor,' admitting to its membership all production and maintenance employees in the Company's Brighton mill, excluding supervisory, clerical, office, and executive employees. III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION In November 1938, the Union called upon the Company for recog- nition on behalf of the employees of the Brighton plant. The Com- pany expressed doubt as to whether the Union represented the employees and suggested that it petition for an election. The Com- pany contends for an appropriate unit larger in scope than that described by the Union in its petition, and denies that the Union represents a majority of the employees in such larger unit. We find that a question has arisen concerning representation of employees of the Company. IV. THE EFFECT OF THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION UPON COMMERCE We find that the question concerning representation which has arisen, occurring in connection with the operations of the Company described in Section I above, has a close, intimate, and substantial relation to trade, traffic, and commerce among the several States, and tends to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce and the free flow of commerce. V. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT In support of the Union's contention that the Brighton mill alone is appropriate, it appears that previous efforts in 1937 of the Com- mittee for Industrial Organization to organize both plants as a unit were unsuccessful. The Newton workers have remained apathetic to organizational activity. A grievance, early in November 1938 1 The A. F. of L. charter is to be granted upon application after certification by the Board. NEW ENGLAND SPUN SILK CORPORATION ET AL. 855 before the question of representation arose, that employees' income was being cut unfairly by the Company in application of the Fair Labor Standards Act, resulted in a short strike at Brighton, but no disturbance at Newton, although both were similarly affected. There is no guiding labor history otherwise. Each plant has its own permanent superintendent, foreman, and nurse. Each plant hires its own help. The Company treats with the employees of each plant separately on matters respecting their wages. There is no social intermingling or other common activity of any con- sequence among the workers of the two plants. They are evidently not aware of nor interested in the respective problems and conditions existing in the separate plants. The Company contends that an appropriate unit would comprise both mills. Although each of the Company's plants has its own superintendent, both are managed as a whole business from executive offices in Brighton. Matters of policy affecting either or both mills are determined at the executive offices, where all corporate records, control accounts, and fiscal operations are centralized. A paymaster at Brighton makes up pay rolls for both plants. Wage levels for similar types of operation at both plants are uniformly fixed, raised, and lowered. To a slight extent there has been interchange of em- ployees between the plants, but in the main these have been permanent shifts. The plants, being only 7 miles apart, are easily accessible to each other by trolley connections. Labor difficulties creating a stop- page at either plant would necessarily result in a shut-down of both. The employees of the Brighton plant clearly favor their own or- ganization, and no other employees of the Company have been heard to gainsay its advantage and desirability. Giving due weight to the suggestions and considerations advanced by the Company, we can find no valid reason, in the light of all the circumstances, to change the direction and form which organization has already taken, and thereby contravene the express desires of the employees. The parties stipulated and agreed that the production and main- tenance employees of the Company, all as defined and classified in Board Exhibit No. 5-D in evidence, together with its assistant fore- men, but exclusive of supervisory, executive, office, and clerical employees, are to be included in the appropriate unit. We find that the production and maintenance employees and the assistant foremen of the Company, at its Brighton plant, excluding supervisory, executive, office, and clerical employees, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining and that said unit will insure to employees,of the Company the full benefit of their right to self-organization and to collective bargaining and otherwise effectuate the policies of the Act. 856 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD VI. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES During the week ending December 3, 1938, the Company employed 327 workers in the appropriate unit. The Company concedes that to be the average number of such employees on the pay roll in the cur- rent condition of business. Accepting the Company's concession, we shall fix that workweek for the purpose of determining the eligibility of employees to designate and select their representative. The Union introduced in evidence 198 authorization cards purport- ing to have been signed between November 7 and 21, 1938, by persons conceded by the Company to have been its employees at the Brighton plant on the dates borne thereon; and conceded, in the cases of un- dated cards, to have been its employees there on November 7, 1938. Of the 198 such employees, 8 who are claimed to have signed cards were laid off prior to the eligibility week. However, as four of them were permanent employees who appear to have been temporarily laid off, they will be held eligible; and as the other four, recently hired, seem to have been temporary help, they will be held ineligible.2 The Company conceded the authenticity of the signatures of the six witnesses at the hearing who were its employees, and those of two others present thereat. The Company kept no pay-roll or other regular signature record which might be used for purposes of comparison, excepting certain casual pink slips, of which it made available therefor 23 bearing on their reverse sides the original signatures of various employees whose cards were in question. The Company declined to stipulate the results of a comparison of this batch with the correspond- ing cards submitted. In this batch are four slips corresponding to the cards of the four laid-off temporary employees mentioned in the next preceding paragraph and declared ineligible. One of the remain- ing 19 slips, by some unexplained variation, is signed by a person other than the employee whose name appears on its face, but the signatory is nevertheless an employee whose card is under scrutiny. We 'find the 19 signatures on the cards submitted, corresponding identically to the 19 specimen signatures on the slips, to be genuine. Thus, of 194 signatures to be considered, 8 are conceded to be authentic and 19 more are found to be. No direct proof of the genuineness and identity of the other 167 sig- natures was offered, the Company rejecting the suggestion of the Union that the signatures of all the employees at Brighton be obtained under the Regional Director's supervision for the purpose of checking them with the cards. This practical device the Company termed an "extrajudicial procedure" which would have a "coercive effect" upon those asked to submit specimen signatures. 2 Thus excluding from consideration the cards of Annie Hughes , Josephine Liberacki, Helena Suthons, and Clara Yannaci. NEW ENGLAND SPUN SILK CORPORATION ET AL . 857 We are left with proof of a different sort, nonetheless reliable when pieced together in the light of all the circumstances. At the first meeting of the Union on November 7, 1938, attended by some 150 Brighton employees of the Company, blank form cards of authoriza, tion and pencils were distributed. None but such employees attended and remained at the meeting while that was being done and the cards were being signed, handed up, and counted. Various witnesses testi- fied that about 60 cards were signed on a table at which the organizer of the Union was seated. The latter testified that individuals passed before him in a queue, each pausing to sign a card. Others testified that they saw persons all about them, in various parts of the hall, signing cards or, at least, writing on them, and that the cards were then collected, brought up to the table, and stacked together. In this manner, some 104 signed cards were accounted for. Thereafter, at various times and places, including several subsequent union meetings, another 94 signed cards were turned in. In view of the fact that 19 of the cards submitted are, for all prac- tical purposes, verified random samplings of the entire lot,3 and in view of the uncontroverted evidence that the signatures were properly solicited and honestly obtained, and nothing to the contrary being made to appear, we shall accept the cards at face value. We find that the Union has been designated and selected by a ma- jority of the employees in the appropriate unit as their representative for the purposes of collective bargaining. It is, therefore, the exclu- sive representative of all the employees in such unit for the purposes of collective bargaining, and we will so certify. Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following : CONCLUSION:, OF LAW 1. A question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the repre- sentation of employees of New England Spun Silk Corporation, Brighton, Massachusetts, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act. 2. The production and maintenance employees and the assistant foremen of the Company, at its Brighton, Massachusetts, plant, ex- cluding supervisory, executive, office, and clerical employees, consti- tute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining, within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act. 3. Federal Union of Textile Workers, American Federation of Labor, is the exclusive representative of all the employees in such unit s Note that the four cards excluded from consideration ( footnote 2, supra ) bear signa- tures which are also authentic, by comparison with the corresponding pink slips. 858 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD for the purposes of collective bargaining, within the meaning of Section 9 ( a) of the National Labor Relations Act. CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National Labor Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Rela- tions Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 8, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 1, as amended, IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED that Federal Union of Textile Workers, American Federation of Labor, has been designated and selected by a majority of the production and maintenance employees and the assist- ant foremen of New England Spun Silk Corporation, at its Brighton, Massachusetts, plant, excluding supervisory, executive, office, and clerical employees, as their representative for the purposes of collec- tive bargaining and that, pursuant to the provisions of Section 9 (a) of the Act, Federal Union of Textile Workers, American Federation of Labor, is the exclusive representative of all such employees for the purposes of collective bargaining in respect to rates of pay, wages, hours of employment, and other conditions of employment.