Asheboro Hosiery Mills, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 20, 1947

74 N.L.R.B. 341 (N.L.R.B. 1947)

In the Matter of ASHEBORO HosIERY MILLS, INC., EMPLOYER and
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF HOSIERY WORKERS, C. I. 0., PETITIONER
Case No. 5-B-2675.-Decided June 20,1947
Messrs. Thornton H. Brooks and Kenneth M. Brim, of Greensboro,
N. C., for the Employer.
Mr. Theodore Briclcman, of Chattanooga, Tenn., and Mr. Sonnie
Davis, of Burlington, N. C., for the Petitioner.
Mr. Leonard J.111andl, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at Greens-
boro, North Carolina, on February 6,1947, before Joseph Lepie, hearing
officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from
prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.-
Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations
Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
Asheboro Hosiery Mills, Inc., a North Carolina corporation, is en-
gaged in the busiliess of manufacturing ladies' full fashioned hosiery at
its plant at Asheboro, North Carolina. During the 6 months preceding
February 1947, it purchased raw materials valued at approximately
$170,000, for use at its plant, of which 85 percent represents shipments
from points outside the State of North Carolina. During the same
period, it manufactured finished products valued at about $850,000,
of which approximately 90 percent was shipped to points outside the
State.
The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
' The Employer ' s motion at the hearing to dismiss the petition on the ground that the
unit sought is inappropriate , is denied for the reasons set forth in Section IV hereof
74 N. L. R B., No. 56 341
342 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 Em-
ployer.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Employer refuses to recognize the Petitioner as the exclusive
bargaining representative of employees of the Employer until the Pe-
titioner 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 em-
ployees in the Employer's knitting department, including day laborers
who work in the knitting department full time, but excluding all other
day laborers, fixers, office, clerical, and supervisory employees. The
Employer contends that the unit should be plant-wide, and requests the
inclusion of 'fixers, and all employees on the knitting department pay
roll, whether their full working time is spent in the knitting depart-
ment or not. In the event the Board finds a smaller than plant-wide
unit appropriate, the Employer wishes the unit to include the knitting,
looping, seaming and inspecting departments.
The Employer's plant is housed in two 2-story brick buildings. The
knitting department occupies the first floor, and the looping, seaming,
and inspecting departments are located on the second floor, of build-
ing No. 2. The knitting department employs approximately 130 work-
ers, and the looping, seaming, and inspecting departments about 85.
There are about 26 employees in the other departments, which do the
finishing, receiving and shipping.
In charge of the entire plant is the plant manager. A superintend-
ent who is in charge of both the knitting and the looping, seaming and
inspecting departments is next in the Employer's hierarchy. Under
the superintendent, there is a fixer in charge of the looping, seaming,
and inspecting. On the first shift, the superintendent has direct charge
of knitting operations.2 There are two fixers under him on this shift.
On the second and third shifts, fixers are in complete charge of knit-
ting. There is no interchange of employees between the knitting de-
partment and other departments because knitting is a highly skilled
2 The looping, seaming, and inspecting department works only one shift ; the knitting
department three shifts.
ASHEBORO HOSIERY MILLS, INC. 343
occupation requiring several years' training. Although the Petitioner
has attempted to organize the employees in all the departments, only
the knitting department workers have shown any interest in collective
bargaining.
In view of the physical and administrative separation of the knitting
department, the absence of interchange of employees between the
knitting department and other departments, the high degree of skill
required of knitting department employees, and the present state of
self-organization, we are of the opinion that the knitting department
employees may now constitute an appropriate unit .3
There are 12 employees known as day laborers in the knitting de-
partment. The Petitioner requests that 3 of them, who spend all of
their working time in the knitting department, be included, and that
the other 9 be excluded on the ground that some of their working time
is spent in other departments. The Employer requests the inclusion
of all day laborers because they are an integral part of the knitting
department. Although some of the laborers spend a portion of their
working time outside the knitting department, all 12 are carried on
the knitting department pay roll, their duties place them in constant
contact with the knitting department workers, and their working con-
ditions are identical. Thus, it appears that there is a community of
interest between all the day laborers and the other knitting department
employees. We shall include in the unit all day laborers in the knit=
ting department.
Because of the well-established pattern of collective bargaining in
the full fashioned hosiery industry, whereby fixers are excluded from
units of production and maintenance employees,4 we shall exclude fixers
from the unit hereinafter found appropriate.
We find that all production and maintenance employees in the Em-
ployer's knitting department, including all day laborers in the knitting
department, but excluding office and clerical employees, and all fixers,
and any other supervisory employees with authority to hire, promote,
discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of em-
ployees, or effectively recommend such action, constitute a unit appro-
priate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning
of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
Matter of Garden State Hosiery Co , 74 N L R B. 318 ; Matter of Chadbourne Hosiery
Mills, Inc, 74 N L R. B 333, Matter of Nebel Knitting Company, 74 N L. R B. 310, issued
recently , Matter of Mail, McEv)en Kaiser Company, 66 N L R B 1341 ; Matter of Forest
City Knitting Co , 69 N L R B 89.
'Matter of Mock Judson, Voehringer Company of North Carolina, Inc, 63 N. L. it. B.
96, Matter of Dan4ta Ilosierg Manufacturing Co., Inc, 71 N. L. it. B. 366.
344 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the
purposes of collective bargaining with Asheboro Hosiery Mills, Int.,
Asheboro, North Carolina, an election by secret ballot shall be con-
ducted as early as possible, but not later than thirty (30) days from
the date of this Direction , under the direction and supervision of the
Regional Director for the Fifth Region, acting in this matter as agent
for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Sections 203.55
and 203.56 , of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regula-
tions-Series 4, among the 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 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 American Federation of Hosiery Workers., C. I. 0.,
for the purposes of collective bargaining.
MR. JAMES J. REYNOLDS , JR., dissenting :
For the reasons stated in my dissenting opinion in Matter of Garden
State Hosiery Co .,s I do not believe that the extent of the Petitioner's
effective organization of the employees involved is a proper factor to
be used in determining the appropriate unit.
Accordingly, I would dismiss the petition herein.
5 74 N L R B. 318, issued recently.