Cone Mills Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Nov 9, 1954

110 N.L.R.B. 830 (N.L.R.B. 1954)

830 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR - RELATIONS BOARD
3: We find that 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, in accordance with a stipulation of the parties, that the
following employees of the Employer constitute a unit appropriate
for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Sec-
tion 9 (b) of the Act: All production and maintenance employees
of the Employer employed at its Yazoo City, Mississippi , plant,
including plant clericals , truckdrivers , truck hostlers , messengers,
janitors , and laboratory employees , but excluding all office clerical
employees, field representatives , first aid nurses , engineers , assistant
engineers , draftsmen , professional employees, guards, and supervisors
as defined in the Act.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
CONE MILLS CORPORATION-EDNA PLANT and GEORGE T. TERRY,
PETITIONER and UNITED TEXTILE WORKERS OF AMERICA, A. F. L.
CONE MILLS CORPORATION-EDNA PLANT and TEXTILE WORKERS
UNION OF AMERICA, C. I. 0., PETITIONER
CONE MILLS CORPORATION-WRITE OAK PLANT and JAMES KENNEDY,
PETITIONER and UNITED TEXTILE WORKERS OF AMERICA, A. F. L.
GREENSBORO-BURLINGTON JOINT BOARD
CONE MILLS CORPORATION-WHITE OAK PLANT and TEXTILE WORK-
ERS UNION OF AMERICA, C. I. 0., PETITIONER
CONE MILLS CORPORATION-MINNEOLA PLANT and MERTON SIMPSON,
PETITIONER and UNITED TEXTILE WORKERS OF AMERICA, A. F. L.,
LOCAL 700
CONE MILLS CORPORATION-MINNEOLA PLANT and TEXTILE WORKERS
UNION OF AMERICA, C. I. 0., PETITIONER
CONE MILLS CORPORATION-PRINT WORKS PLANT and VERNON L.
INGOLD, PETITIONER and UNITED TEXTILE WORKERS OF AMERICA,
A. F. L., LOCAL 259
CONE MILLS CORPORATION-PRINT WORKS PLANT and TEXTILE WORK-
ERS UNION OF AMERICA, C. I. 0., PETITIONER
CONE MILLS CORPORATION-PROXIMITY PLANT and LLOYD C. KEN-
NEDY, PETITIONER and UNITED TEXTILE WORKERS OF AMERICA,
A. F. L., LOCAL 739
CONE MILLS CORPORATION-PROXIMITY PLANT and TEXTILE WORKERS
UNION OF AMERICA, C. I. 0., PETITIONER
110 NLRB No. 135.
CONE MILLS CORPORATION 831
CONE MILLS CORPORATION-GRANITE PLANT and HUBERT ROSS IN-
GOLD , PETITIONER and UNITED TEXTILE WORKERS OF AMERICA,
A. F. L. LOCAL 1113
CONE MILLS CORPORATION-GRANITE PLANT and TEXTILE WORKERS
UNION OF AMERICA, C. I. 0., PETITIONER. Cases Nos . 11-RD-47,
11-RC-623, 11-RD-48, 11-RC-629, 11-RD-49, 11-RC-630, 11-
RD-50,11-RC-631,11-RD-51,11-RC-632,11-RD-52, and 11-RC-
633. November 9,1954 I
Decision and Direction of Elections
Upon separate petitions duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the Na-
tional Labor Relations Act, a consolidated hearing l was held before
John M. Dyer, 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 this case, the Board finds : 3
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the Act.
2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent certain
employees of the Employer.
3. Questions affecting commerce exist 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.
The instant proceedings involve six North Carolina plants of the
Employer known as the Edna, White Oak, Minneola, Print Works,
Proximity, and Granite plants, respectively. The United Textile
Workers of America, AFL, herein called the AFL, represents separate
production and maintenance employees' units at each of the plants
under separate contracts and pursuant to Board certifications. Sep-
arate decertification petitions affecting each of the plants were filed
on April 30 and May 18, 1954. On May 3 and May 19, 1954, the Tex-
tile Workers Union of America, CIO, herein called the CIO, filed sep-
1 As consolidation of hearings is a matter of administrative discretion , we find no merit
in the contention that the proceedings herein were improperly consolidated . Pacific Mari-
time Association, 100 NLRB 1259 , footnote 7.
2 One Luther Carroll was permitted to intervene at the hearings as representative of
the Greensboro-Burlington Joint Board , AFL, which represents the various local AFL
unions. Carroll is an AFL signatory to the contracts and addendum clauses. The United
Textile Workers of America , AFL, International representative, who was also permitted to
intervene , excepts to Carroll's intervention on the ground that Carroll is no longer an
AFL representative , an assertion which Carroll denies. We find that Carroll's inter-
vention was proper under the circumstances , and did not prejudice the AFL International.
The United Textile Workers of America , AFL, herein called the AFL, challenged the
decertification petitioners ' showing of interest , and moved that the hearing be reopened
for the purpose of taking evidence on fraudulent signatures , although admittedly it had
no evidence of fraud. As there is no evidence of fraud , the motion is denied . Moreover
the Board has repeatedly held that the showing of interest is a matter of administrative
discretion , not litigable by the parties.
3 The requests of the Employer and Intervenor for oral argument are hereby denied, as
the record and briefs adequately present the positions of the parties.
832 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
agate certification petitions with respect to each of these plants, seek-
ing representation of the production and maintenance employees in
each of these units. The parties agree that sparate units of produc-
tion and maintenance employees at each plant are appropriate. How-
ever, the Employer and the AFL urge their current contracts, which
have varying expiration dates, as a bar to all the decertification and
certification petitions.
The contract for the Proximity plant expired on October 1, 1954.
The contract for the White Oak plant, which expires on December 1,
1954, has an October 1, 1954, automatic renewal date. The contract
for Print Works plant has a November 1, 1954, expiration date, but no
automatic renewal clause. The decertification petitions for each of
the foregoing plants were filed on May 18, 1954, and the certification
petitions affecting the same plants were filed on May 19, 1954. As the
Proximity plant contract has expired, and as the October 1, 1954, au-
tomatic renewal date of the White Oak plant contract has passed, these
contracts cannot serve to bar immediate elections at these plants.4 As
the Print Works plant contract will expire within the next 30 days,
that contract likewise cannot serve to bar an election at this time.'
We turn next to the contracts covering the Edna, Granite, and
Minneola plants, respectively. The contract at the Edna plant ex-
pires March 1, 1955, and contains a January 1, 1955, automatic renewal
date. The contract at the Granite plant expires January 1, 1955, and
has no automatic renewal clause. The contract at the Minneola
plant, expires February 1, 1955, and contains a December 1, 1954,
automatic renewal date. In asserting that the contracts at these three
plants do not bar the instant petitions, the decertification petitioners
and the CIO rely on the following clause which was executed as an
addendum 6 to each of the contracts on the same day that the con-
tracts were executed, and on action taken thereunder :
Elections
It is recognized that prior to the normal expiration date of the
contract between the parties, as signed this day, the employees
may desire to vote in a secret election on whether they want to
continue the union and the contract until [applicable expiration
date], or whether to discontinue the union as their bargaining
agent. Accordingly, it is agreed that if at any time at least 50%
4 Coca-Cola Bottling Works Company, 03 NLRB 1414 ; Anheuser-Busch, Inc , 102 NLRB
800, 803
c Affiliated Bakers Corp., 101 NLRB 1484, 1486
6 The Intervenor contends that these addenda are invalid because they were not, in all
cases, signed by the same union signatories who signed the contracts All the addenda
were signed by Luther Carroll, business manager of the Greensboro-Burlington Joint Board,
AFL, which is authorized to act on behalf of the various local unions, and at a time when
Carroll was unquestionably authorized to act on behalf of both the Joint Board and the
locals.
CONE MILLS CORPORATION 833
of the employees in the bargaining unit at this plant sign a peti-
tion for an election, then the contract will not be raised as a bar
to an election by the National Labor Relations Board or by some
mutually agreeable body. In the event such a petition is signed
by 50% of the employees, the union agrees to cooperate in every
way in securing a consent election at an early date and will abide
by the results of the election.
Each of the decertification petitioners submitted special requests
for an election from more than 50 percent of the employees in each
unit.
The Employer and the AFL urge alternatively (1) that the quoted
clause does not by its terms effectively waive the contracts as a bar to
either decertification or certification proceedings, and (2) that even
if the clause does by its terms render the contracts no bar to the de-
certification proceedings, the contracts nevertheless bar the certifica-
tion proceedings.r
As we read the quoted clause, it provides in clear and unequivocal
terms that the employees shall have the right to an election to deter-
mine whether the contracting union should no longer continue to serve
as collective-bargaining representative. Under the circumstances, and
as the contingency contemplated by the agreement of the parties has
in fact arisen, in that more than 50 percent of the employees in each
of the units have manifested their desire for an immediate election,
we find that the contracts do not bar the decertification proceedings.8
Furthermore, as questions concerning representation have been raised
by the decertification petitions, we find that the contracts likewise do
not serve as a bar to the certification proceedings.9
The Employer and the Intervenor moved to dismiss the petitions
on the additional ground that the contract bar issue is res judicata
because of a prior dismissal of a petition involving the Granite plant.
However, the condition contemplated in the above-described ad-
dendum clauses had not yet occurred and, in any event no contention
was made based on such clauses at that time. We therefore find no
merit in the motion to dismiss on this ground."
7 The Employer and the AFL also contend that the individual card requests for an elec-
tion signed by the employees do not meet the requirement of the contracts that a "peti-
tion" be signed by 50 percent of the employees . We find that the cards signed by over
50 percent of the employees clearly show an intent to take the course of action contem-
plated by the quoted clause in the contracts.
BHiden Warehouse and Forwarding Company, 80 NLRB 1587; The Amertican News
Co , Inc., 102 NLRB 196.
See Pantasote Company, 103 NLRB 1271
io The Employer and the Intervenor also moved to dismiss the petitions on the further
ground that there was collusion between the decertification petitioner and the petitioning
union The Board has held this contention to be irrelevant where, as here, the union
involved is in full compliance with the filing requirements of Section 9 of the Act Phs.la-
delphia Chewing Gum Corporation, 107 NLRB 997 ; Ketchum & Company, Inc, 95 NLRB
43, footnote 1. %
338207-55-vol. 110 54
834 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
4. The appropriate units :
In accordance with the agreement of the parties, we find that the
following constitute units appropriate for purposes of collective bar-
gaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act :
(a) All production and maintenance employees at the Employer's
Edna plant, Reidsville, North Carolina, excluding clerical or steno-
graphic employees, second hands, timekeepers, loom step checkers,
yarn testers, supply room man, overseers, watchmen, executives, and
all other supervisors as defined in the Act.
(b) All production and maintenance employees at the Employer's
White Oak plant, Greensboro, North Carolina, excluding powerplant
employees, electricians, production records clerks, supply clerks, trip
boy, timekeepers, loom stop checkers, spinning end breakage check-
ers, laboratory employees, watchmen and guards, truckdrivers and
mechanics, village upkeep employees, general construction employees,
professional employees, foremen-fixers, and all other supervisors as
defined in the Act.
(c) All production and maintenance employees at the Employer's
Minneola plant, Gibsonville, North Carolina, excluding clerical em-
ployees, spinning breakage and weaving loom stop checkers, police-
men, watchmen, foremen, and all other supervisors as defined in the
Act.
(d) All production and maintenance employees at the Employer's
Print Works plant, Greensboro, North Carolina, including factory
clerical employees and truckdrivers, but excluding all machine print-
ers (journeymen and apprentices) in the printing department, office
clerical employees, watchmen and armed guards, laboratory employ-
ees (actual workmen are not considered laboratory employees when
assigned to the chemical building), overseers, second hands, and all
supervisors as defined in the Act.
(e) All production and maintenance employees at the Employer's
Proximity plant, Greensboro, North Carolina, including plant cleri-
cal employees, second hands, and head loom fixers, but excluding office
clerical employees, production records clerk, timekeepers, spinning
end breakage and weaving loom stop checkers, head overhaulers, head
spindle plumbers, laboratory employees, watchmen, village upkeep
employees, truckdrivers and mechanics, electricians, supply room man,
outside carpenters, powerplant employees, second hands, opener and
picker room foremen and fixers, foremen, and all other supervisors
as defined in the Act.
. (f) All production and maintenance employees at the Employer's
Granite plant, Haw River, North Carolina, excluding office clerical
employees, watchmen, and supervisors as defined in the Act.
[Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication.]