J.H. Rutter-Rex Manufacturing Co., Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 29, 1946

70 N.L.R.B. 897 (N.L.R.B. 1946)

In the Matter Of J. H. RUTTER-REX MANUFACTURING COMPANY, INC.,
EMPLOYER and AMALGAMATED CLOTHING WORKERS OF AMERICA, C.
I. 0., PETITIONER
Case No. 15-R-1725.Decided August 29, 19!6
Mr. Samuel Lang , of New Orleans, La., for the Employer.
Messrs. Fred C. Peiper, Louis Stark , Ernest J. Wright, and Albert
H. Bernadas , all of New Orleans , La., for the Petitioner.
Mr. F. G. Dunn, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at Nev
Orleans, Louisiana, on July 18, 1946, before Jerome A. Reiner, Trial
Examiner. The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are
free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. The Employer,
in its brief, moved to dismiss the petition. This motion is hereby
denied.,
Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations
Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
J. H. Rutter-Rex Manufacturing Company, Inc., operates plants
in New Orleans, Louisiana, where it is engaged in the manufacture
of work pants and work shirts. During the 6 months' period ending
on or about June 30, 1946, the Employer's purchases were in excess of
$75,000, 60 percent of which was shipped to its plants in New Orleans
from points outside the State of Louisiana. During the same period,
its sales were in excess of $125,000, 75 percent of which was shipped
to customers outside the State of Louisiana. -
The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
1 One of the grounds contended by the Employer for dismissing the petition was that no
evidence was introduced at the hearing to show that the Petitioner represents a substan-
tial number of employees in the alleged appropriate unit. We find no merit in This con-
tention See Matter of 0 D Jennings & Company, 68 N. L R. B. 516.
70 N. L. R. B., No. 68.
897
898 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress of
Industrial Organizations, claiming to represent employees of the
Employer.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The employer refuses to recognize the Petitioner as the exclusive
bargaining representative of employees of the Employer until the
Petitioner has been certified by the Board in an appropriate unit.
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the
representation of employees of the Employer, within the meaning of
Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Petitioner seeks a unit of all production and maintenance cnr
ployees of the Employer, 2 including shipping department employees,
but excludmg,all office and clerical employees, line operators, mechan-
ics, supervisors, floorladies, and all other supervisory employees. The
Employer took no position as to the unit at the hearing.3
We find that all production and maintenance employees of the Eul-
ployer, including shipping department employees, but excluding all
office and clerical employees, line operators, mechanics, supervisors,
floorladies, 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 mean-
ing of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining with J. H. Rutter-Rex Manufactur-
ing Company, Inc., New Orleans, Louisiana,' an election by secret
ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than thirty
2 The Employer' s operations are carried on at four separate locations in the city of
New Orleans The bulk of the employees in the unit sought work at 3725 Dauphine Street,
where the actual stitching of the clothing takes place A small group of employees work
at the three other locations , where the clothing is cut and marked , stored , and packed for
shipment The operations of the Employer at its four locations are closely integrated
there is a single pay roll, and a continuous interchange of employees Although Petitioner
originally sought only the employees located at 3725 Dauphine Street, it amended its re-
quc.t during the course of the hearing to include production and maintenance and shipping
department employees at all four of the Employer ' s plants
3 Hon ever, in its brief, the Employer agrees that the unit should include employees at
all four locations of the Company' s operations , but took no position therein as to the specific
composition thereof.
J. H. RUTTER-REX MANUFACTURING COMPANY, INC. 899
(30) days from the date of this Direction, under the direction and su-
pervision of the Regional Director for the Fifteenth Region, acting
in this matter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and
subject to Article III, Sections 10 and 11, of National Labor Relations
Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3, as amended, among the em-
ployees 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
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 Amalgam-
ated Clothing Workers of America, C. I. 0., for the purposes of col-
lective bargaining.
MR. JAMES J. REYNOLDS. JR.. took no part in the consideration of
the above Decision and Direction of Election.
712 44-47-vul 70---5 5