Westbrook Manufacturing Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 12, 1957

118 N.L.R.B. 127 (N.L.R.B. 1957)

WESTBROOK MANUFACTURING COMPANY 127
newspaper headlines and reports purportedly substantiating the his-
tory of racketeering and violence referred to in the letter of February
20. The Petitioner replied with a renewal of its challenge to debate.
There is no claim that the newspaper headlines and articles were
forged or that the letters were factually false. The claim is that by
.reviving the record of violence and. murder not associated with the
present administration of the Petitioner, the Employer falsely stimu-
lated a fear of violence among the employees and instilled a threat
of physical harm which prevented the free choice of a bargaining
agent. We do not agree. As in the Merck case,2 the statements com-
plained of are obvious propaganda, clearly recognizable as such by
employees free and competent to evaluate it. In the Gummed Prod-
ucts 3 and Comfort Slipper 4 cases the Board reiterated the principle
that campaign propaganda which includes exaggerations, inaccura-
cies, partial truths, name-calling, and falsehoods, while not condoned,
may be excused provided it is not so misleading as to prevent the
exercise of a free choice by employees in the election of their bargain-.
ing representative.
We accordingly adopt the Regional Director's recommendations
and, overrule the objections. As the Petitioner did not receive. a
majority of the votes cast, we shall certify the results of the election.
[The Board certified that a majority of the valid votes was not cast
for Production and Miscellaneous Workers Union of Chicago and
Vicinity, Local 705, and that this labor organization is not the exclu-
sive representative of the employees in the unit found appropriate.]
a Merck & Company, Inc., 104 NLRB 891.
a The Gummed Products Company, 112 NLRB 1092.
Comfort 8 pper Corporation, 112 NLRB 183.
Westbrook Manufacturing Company and United Brotherhood of
Carpenters and Joiners of America , AFL-CIO, Petitioner. Case
No.15 RC-1640. June 12, 1957
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly , filed under Section 9 (c)- of the Nationale
Labor Relations Act, a ` hearing wag , held. before Loren P. Jones,
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 National Labor .
Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with
this case to a three -member panel [Chairman Leedom and Members
Murdock and Rodgers].
118 NLRB No. 18. '
128 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is a Mississippi corporation with its only plant lo-
cated in Jackson, Mississippi. During the past 12-month period, the
sales of the Employer exceeded $500,000. During the same period,
the Employer shipped directly out of the State merchandise valued
in excess of $50,000, and received from outside the State merchandise
valued in excess of $100,000. We find the Employer is engaged in
commerce within the meaning of the Act and that it will effectuate
the policies of the Act to assert jurisdiction.
2. The labor organization involved claims to represent the em-
ployees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the represen-
tation of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section
9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The Employer is engaged in the manufacture and sale of custom-
made fixtures for commercial establishments at its plant in Jackson,
Mississippi. The Petitioner seeks a unit of all production and main-
tenance employees, including the truckdrivers. Evidence was, taken
as to whether the following individuals should be included in the
unit.
There is an employee referred to in the record as a female clerical
who works under the supervision of the factory superintendent in a
factory office adjacent to both the main office and the production
area. She classifies the orders that come in from the field salesmen
for certain pieces of equipment, makes a tabulation of the equipment,
and forwards the information to the detail men. She works the same
hours as the detail men which is approximately 5 hours less than the
production employees. She receives the same 'benefits as the pro-
duction employees, punches a time clock; and is hourly paid.. We
find on the evidence in the record that she is a plant clerical and in-
clude her in the unit.'
There are five detail men who work in a factory office under the
supervision of the factory superintendent. It is their function to
break down the sales orders into component parts and to prepare
material lists, job tickets, and cutting instructions . To facilitate and
explain these job tickets, they sometimes prepare freehand drawings
of a rough nature to illustrate the requirements of the job ticket.
They consult daily with the craftsmen to explain any ticket or cutting
instruction that is not immediately clear . They have no supervisory
authority, are hourly paid, punch a time clock, and receive the same
employee benefits as other employees. Their pay is comparable to
the average craftsman. They are not required to have technical,
training or special schooling of any kind. We find, contrary to the
3 The Employer , although urging her inclusion at the hearing, states in its brief that she
should be excluded as an office clerical . We do not find that the record supports this con-
clusion . The Union took no position.
WESTBROOK MANUFACTURING COMPANY 129
Petitioner's contentions, that the detail men are not technical em-
ployees and shall include them in the unit.
The factory maintenance man works immediately under the factory
superintendent and does all factory maintenance as well as mainte-
nance of the clubhouse. He has a helper to whom he issues directions
but has no authority to discipline, hire, or discharge. We disagree
with the Petitioner's contention that the factory maintenance man is
a supervisor. We find that the relationship between him and his helper
is that of a craftsman to a less skilled employee. We include the
factory maintenance man in the unit.
The outside serviceman is under the supervision of the foreman of
the shipping and supply department. The major part of his duties
is the servicing of the Employer's equipment and helping to make in-
stallations. However, when not occupied with these duties, he works in
the stockroom. The parties took no position on the unit placement
of this employee. We find that he has interests in common with the
other employees in this department and include him in the unit.
The Employer has two salesmen-a city salesman and an outside
salesman. Both are under the supervision of the foreman of the ship-
ping and supply department, and work part of their time in the stock-
room of that department. The city salesman works regularly 2 days
a week in the stockroom. His travel is limited to within the city, he
uses a company car, and, in addition to selling, makes up and delivers
small replacement orders. One of the owners of the Employer testi-
fied that he "presumed" the city salesman was hourly paid; however,
the Employer's brief states that he is salaried, as is the outside sales-
man. The outside salesman spends less time working in the stockroom
than does the city salesman; he uses his own car and is paid mileage
and reimbursed for actual expenses. Otherwise, his duties are similar
except that his sales activity is outside the city in northern Mississippi.
As these salesmen are tinder the supervision of the foreman of the
shipping department, and spend a portion of their time each week
working in the department with the other employees, we find that they
have a sufficient community of interest with the employees of this de-
partment to warrant their inclusion in the unit.
We find that the following employees constitute a unit appropriate
for the purpose of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section
9 (b) of the Act:
All production and maintenance employees of the Employer's plant
located at Jackson, Mississippi, including the factory maintenance
man, the detail men, the outside serviceman, the city salesman and the
outside salesman, and the plant clerical, but excluding the office clerical,
employees, guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
450553- 58-vol. 118-10