Whittier Mills Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Sep 16, 1939

15 N.L.R.B. 457 (N.L.R.B. 1939)

III the Matter of WHITTIER MILLS COMPANY AND SILVER LAKE COM-
PANY and TEXTILE WORKERS ORGANIZING COMMITTEE
In the Matter of SCOTTDALE MILLS and TEXTILE WORKERS ORGANIZING
CobIMITTEE
In the Matter Of WHITTIER MILLS COMPANY AND SILVER LAKE COM-
PANY and TEXTILE WORKERS ORGANIZING COMMITTEE
In the Matter of SCOTTDALE MILLS, INC. and TEXTILE WORKERS OR-
GANIZING COMMITTEE
Cases Nos. C-1228, C-1229, R-1197, and R-1198, respectively.-
Decided September 16, 1939
Cotton Textile Industry-Interference, Restraint, mild Coercion: anti-union
statements by supervisory employees ; disparagement of union by refusal to bar-
gain-Collective Bargaining: charges of refusal to bargain sustained : effecting
wage reductions at outset of negotiations without consulting or notifying union;
ordered to bargain with union-Repres,entati,ves: proof of choice: presumption
of continuing effectiveness of certifications by Board following election in prior
representation proceedings ; evidence insufficient to rebut presumption ; change
in union membership irrelevant-Investigation of Representatives: petitions
dismissed in view of orders to bargain.
Mr. Berdon M. Bell and Mr. W. G. Stuart Sherman, for the
Board.
Weekes cf Candler, by Mr. John Wesley Weekes and Mr. Charles
Murphey Candler, Jr., of Decatur, Ga., for the respondents.
Mr. C. E. Earnhardt, of Atlanta, Ga., for the T. W. O. C.
Mr. Abraham J. Harris, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
ORDER
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Charges and amended charges having been filed on August 24,
1938, and October 20, 1938, respectively, by Textile Workers Organiz-
ing Committee, herein called the. T. W. O. C., the National Labor
Relations Board, herein, called the Board, by Charles N. Feidelson,
Regional Director for the Tenth Region (Atlanta, Georgia), issued
and duly served its complaint dated October 20, 1938, against Scott-
. 15 N. L. R. B., No. 47.
457.
458 DECISIONS Ol NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
dale Mills, herein called either the respondent or Scottdale , alleging
that the respondent had engaged in and was engaging in unfair
labor practices affecting commerce within the meaning of Section
8 (1) and (5) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the National Labor
Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act. In substance,
the complaint alleged that during the month of June 1938, and at
all times thereafter, the respondent refused to bargain collectively
with the T. W. O. C. as the exclusive bargaining representative of
all the respondent 's employees within an appropriate unit consisting
of the production and maintenance employees of the respondent,
excluding supervisory and clerical employees, and that the respondent
had interfered with, restrained, and coerced its employees in the
exercise of their right to self -organization.
Charges and amended charges having been filed on July 5, 1938,
and October 20, 1938, respectively , by the T. W. O. C., the Board,
by the Regional Director , issued and duly served its complaint dated
October 20 , 1938, against Whittier Mills Company and Silver Lake
Company, herein called either the respondents or Whittier and Sil-
ver Lake, alleging that the respondents had engaged in and were
engaging in unfair labor practices affecting commerce within the
meaning of Section 8 ( 1) and ( 5) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the
Act. In substance , the complaint alleged that on or about May 20,
1938, and at all times thereafter, the respondents refused to bargain
collectively with the T. W. O. C. as the exclusive bargaining repre-
sentative of all the respondents ' employees within an appropriate
unit consisting of all the production and maintenance employees
of Whittier and Silver Lake, excluding supervisory and clerical em-
ployees, and that the respondents had interfered with, restrained, and
coerced their employees in the exercise of their right to self-organ-
ization.
Thereafter, the respondents filed their answers to the complaints,
admitting the allegations thereof relating to their businesses but
denying the commission of the unfair labor practices charged.
On October 10, 1938, pursuant to Article II, Section 37 (b), of
National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 1,
as amended , the Board issued an order consolidating the Whittier
and Silver Lake. case and the Scottdale case for the purpose of
hearing and for all other purposes.
Pursuant to notice served upon the respondents and the T. W. O. C.,
a hearing was held in Atlanta, Georgia , from November 7 to Novem-
ber 12, 1938, before William H. Griffin, the Trial Examiner duly
designated by the Board. On November 12, 1938, the hearing was
adjourned until November 21, 1938. On November 17, 1938, the
Trial Examiner notified the parties that the hearing was adjourned
sine die to be resumed on 5 days' notice.
WHITTIER MILLS COMPANY, ET AL. 459
On November 19 and- November 28, '1938, respectively, the
T. W. O. C. filed with the Regional Director a petition and an
amended petition for all investigation and certification of represent-
atives of the employees at Whittier and Silver Lake pursuant to
Section 9 (c) of the Act. On November 19, 1938, the T. W. O. C.
filed with the Regional Director a similar petition for an investiga-
tion and certification of representatives of the employees at' Scottdale.
On December 30, 1938, pursuant to Article III, Section 10 (c) (2),
and Article II, Section 37 (b), of National Labor Relations Board
Rules and Regulations-Series 1, as amended, the Board issued an
order consolidating the representation cases with the complaint cases
for purposes of hearing and for all other purposes. On the same
date the Board directed the Regional Director to conduct an investi-
gation and provide for an appropriate hearing upon due notice,
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.
Pursuant to notice served upon the parties the hearing was re-
sumed in Atlanta, Georgia, on January 23, 1939, before William H.
Griffin, the Trial Examiner duly designated by the Board, and was
closed on January 26, 1939. Throughout the hearing, the Board and
the respondents were represented by counsel. The T. W. O. C. was
represented by a duly authorized representative. All participated
in the hearing. Full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-
examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing upon the issues
was afforded to all, parties.
At the hearing, it was stipulated that the pertinent parts of the
record in the complaint cases "relating to commerce, jurisdiction;
and to the appropriate unit" should be considered as 'parts of the
record in the representation cases.
On March 24, 1939, the Trial Examiner filed an Intermediate
Report, in which he found that Whittier and Silver Lake had re-
fused to bargain collectively with the T. W. O. C. and that Scottdale,
Whittier, and Silver Lake had interfered with, restrained, and
coerced their employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in
Section. 7 of the Act. On April 5, 1939, the respondents filed their
exceptions to the Intermediate Report.
On June 22, 1939, pursuant to request therefor by the respondents
and notice to them and to the T. W. O. C., a hearing was had before
the Board in Washington, D. C., for the purpose of oral argument.
Counsel for the respondents participated.
The Trial Examiner at the hearing and in his Intermediate Report
made various rulings on motions and on objections to the admission
of evidence. The Board has reviewed these rulings and finds that
460 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
no prejudical errors were committed. The rulings of the Trial
Examiner are hereby affirmed. The Board has considered the excep-
tions to the Intermediate Report and, except as they are consistent
with the findings, conclusions, and order set forth below, finds no
merit in them.
Upon the entire record in this consolidated proceeding, the Board
makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESSES OF THE RESPONDENTS
The respondent , Scottdale Mills, is a corporation organized under
the laws of the State of Georgia , with its principal office and its
mill located at Scottdale, Georgia. Scottdale is' engaged in the
manufacture and sale of osnaburgs and specialty goods. Its raw
materials consist principally of cotton and cotton waste. Between
January 1 , 1937, and November 5 , 1938, Scottdale used approxi-
mately 8,800 ,000 pounds of these raw materials , approximately half
of which were obtained outside the State of Georgia . In the same
period, Scottdale finished or manufactured products of an aggre-
gate volume of 7,480,000 pounds , approximately three-fourths of
which it, shipped outside the State of Georgia. Scottdale employs
selling agents throughout the United States and obtained the ma-
chinery used by it in its mill outside the State of Georgia.:
The respondents, Whittier Mills Company and Silver Lake Com-
pany, are corporations organized under the laws of the State of
Georgia, with their principal offices and their mills located at Chat-
tahoochee , Georgia. The mills of Whittier and Silver Lake occupy
the same building . Whittier is engaged in the manufacture and
sale of hose cords , belt duck, yarns , and cloth . Silver Lake is
engaged in the manufacture and sale of cords and lines. The raw
materials used by Whittier and Silver Lake consist principally of
cotton and cotton waste products and, in addition , Whittier uses a
small amount of wool and rayon . Between January 1, 1937,' and
November 5 , 1938, Whittier used approximately 11,440,000 pounds
of raw materials and, during the same period, Silver Lake used
approximately 1,584,000 pounds . Whittier obtains between 20 per cent
and 40 per cent of its raw materials outside the State of Georgia and
Silver Lake obtains its raw materials principally from Whittier.
Between January 1 , 1937, and November 5, 1938, Whittier and Silver
Lake finished or manufactured products in the aggregate volumes
of 9,724,000 pounds and 1,584,000 pounds , respectively , practically
all of which they shipped outside the State of Georgia . Whittier
and Silver Lake employ selling agents throughout the United
WHITTIER MILLS COMPANY, ET AL. 461
States and both obtained the machinery used by them in. their mills
outside the State of Georgia.
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
Textile Workers. Organizing Committee is a labor organization'
affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, admitting
to its membership the production and maintenance employees of
the respondents, excluding supervisory and clerical employees.
III. THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
A. The refusals to bargain collectvvely
1. The certifications
On October 25, 1937, after hearing upon due notice, the Boarc^
issued its Decision, finding that the production and maintenance
employees, excepting clerical and supervisory employees, of Whittier
and Silver Lake constitute a single unit appropriate for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining, and, following an election by secret
ballot, held pursuant to the Board's Direction of Election of August
25, 1937, and Amendment to Direction of Election of September
2, 1937, certified the T. W. O. C. as the exclusive collective bargain-
ing representative of all such employees.'
On November 1, 1937, after hearing upon due notice, the Board
issued its Decision, finding that the production and maintenance
employees, exclusive of clerical and supervisory employees, of Scott-
dale constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective
bargaining, and, following an election by secret ballot, held pursuant
to the Board's Direction of Election of August 27, 1937, and
Amendment to Direction of Election of September 2, 1937, certi-
fied the T. W. O. C. as the exclusive collective bargaining repre
sentative of all such employees.2
At the hearing in the present proceedings it was stipulated be-
tween counsel for the Board and for the respondents "that the same
facts exist now and existed in June 1938 as existed in the fall of
1937 at the time of the hearing on the question of, representation
with reference to the appropriate unit for collective bargaining."
We find that at all times since the Board's Decision and Certifica-
tion of Representatives of October 25, 1937, the production and
' Matter of Whittier Mills Company and Textile Workers Organizing Committee,
Matter of Silver Lake Company and Textile -Workers Organizing Committee, 3 N. L. R. B..
389.
' Matter of Scottdale Mills and Textile Workers Organizing Committee, 3 N. L. R. B.
441; 4 N. L. R. B. 1. '
462 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
maintenance employees, excepting clerical and supervisory em-
ployees, of Whittier and Silver Lake constituted and that they con-
stitute a single unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bar-
gaining and that at all times since the Board's Decision and Cer-
tification of Representatives of November 1, 1937, the production
and maintenance employees of Scottdale, exclusive of clerical and
supervisory employees, constituted and that they constitute a unit
appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining.
In the period from June 1938 to November 1938, the respondents
met from time to time with the representatives of the T. W. 0. C.
and purported to bargain with them with respect to the wages, hours,
and working conditions of the respondents' employees.3 Through-
out this period, the respondents dealt with the T. W. 0. C. as the
exclusive representative of their employees and did not question
its representation of a majority of the employees in the respective
appropriate units. At the hearing herein, for the first time, the
respondents claimed that the T. W. 0. C. ceased to represent a
majority of the employees in the respective appropriate units some
time prior to June 1938.
At the hearing, the respondents introduced, evidence to : show
that the number of those employed by them had been considerably
diminished between the time of the certifications and June 1938.
It is the theory of the respondents that this proof of diminished
employment in the mills vitiated the certifications and thus, the al-
leged refusals to bargain having occurred, at the earliest, approx-
imately 7 months after the certifications, required the T. W. 0. C.
to prove its membership anew as of the dates of the alleged refusals
to bargain. This the T. W. 0. C. sought to do by oral testimony of in-
creased membership since the certifications which was based upon the
T. W. 0. C.'s membership cards and other records. The respond-
ents called for the production of the membership cards for purposes
of cross-examination and offered to prove by them that many of the
signers of the cards no longer desire the T. W. 0. C. to be their
bargaining representative, that some of the signatures on the cards
had been forged, and that some of the signers had left the respond-
ents' employ. The T. W. 0. C., however, did not introduce its
membership cards into evidence.
To hold that, 7 months following certification by the Board of
a collective bargaining representative, the employer can question
with impunity the status of the certified representative as a rep-
resentative of a majority of the employees in the appropriate unit,
in the manner the respondents here attempt to do, would be to
s These bargaining conferences are discussed in greater detail in Section III, A, 2
infra.
WITTIER MILLS CODIPANY, ET AL. 463
render such a certification nugatory. The Congress cannot have
intended by Section 9 (c) of the Act to authorize the Board to do
a futile and meaningless thing. A certification would be futile' and
meaningless, could an employer, shortly thereafter, prior to carry-
ing on any bargaining with the certified representative, by the
simple expedient of raising some question as to the continuing va-
lidity of the certification, require the certified representative to prove
anew its status as a majority representative. Collective bargaining
under such circumstances could be indefinitely delayed by employ-
ers and the right of employees to bargain collectively would be
rendered illusory and the policies of the Act thwarted. To prevent
employers from thus flouting the Act, to give meaning to the Board's
authority to certify representatives designated by employees in ap-
propriate units, to effectuate the policies of the Act, the presumption
of the continuing effectiveness of such a certification by the Board
must be held not to be rebuttable, under the circumstances here
presented, by evidence such as that here introduced by the respond-
ents. In coming to this conclusion, we are not unmindful of the
fact that the status of the T. W. O. C. as the exclusive representa-
tive of the respondents' employees in the respective appropriate
units was not questioned by the respondents at the times of the al-
leged refusals to bargain.
The certifications of the Board, which prove the status of the
T. W. O. C. as the representative of a majority of the respondents'
employees in the respective appropriate units, rest upon elections
by secret ballot conducted by the Board's agents pursuant to its
Directions and not upon the T. W. O. C.'s membership cards which
the respondents called upon it to produce. Since this is so, the
respondents' offer of proof concerning the cards was irrelevant and
immaterial.
We find that at all times since the Board's Decision and Certifica-
tion of Representatives of October 25, 1937, the T. W. O. C. was and
that it is the exclusive representative of all the employees in an
appropriate unit at Whittier and Silver Lake for the purposes of
collective bargaining with Whittier and Silver Lake in respect to
rates of pay, wages, hours of employment, and other conditions of
employment.
We further find that at all times since the Board's Decision and
Certification of Representatives of November 1, 1937, the T. W. O. C.
.was and that it is the exclusive representative of all the employees
in an appropriate unit at IScottdale for the purposes of collective
bargaining in respect to rates of pay, wages, hours of employment,
and other conditions of employment.
464 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
2. The refusals to bargain collectively
Prior to the Board's certifications, the T. W. O. C. had sought to
negotiate a contract with the respondents, who, however, raised ques-
tions concerning representation. There followed the proceedings
which culminated in the Board's certifications. Thereafter, due to
the illness and death of the then State director of the T. W. O. C.,
negotiations lapsed until May 20, 1938, when the T. W. O. C. wrote
letters to the respondents with a view to obtaining an appointment
for a conference at which the T. W. O. C. could submit a tentative
proposal and negotiations could be resumed., On June 8, 1938,
Messrs. Weekes and Candler, attorneys for the respondents, told the
T. W. O. C. that they would meet with them at their earliest con-
venience. Accordingly a conference was arranged for June 10. At
this and at all subsequent conferences Weekes and Candler repre-
sented all the respondents and negotiations concerning them were car-
ried on simultaneously. It was understood by all parties that any
agreement negotiated by Weekes and Candler and the T. W. O. C.
would apply to all the respondents.
At the June 10 conference, the T. W. O. C. presented to Weekes
and Candler a proposed agreement. Weekes and Candler stated
that they would take this under advisement and would let the
T. W. O. C. hear from them. With the exception of Section 4
thereof 4 the proposed contract was not, at that time, discussed in
detail. As to Section 4, S. A. Hollihan, a T. W. O. C. representative,
explained at the conference that because of "the condition of the
textile industry at this time, that we wasn't asking for an increase
as shown in that blank space there" and that it would thus be
agreeable to the T. W. O. C. if the first sentence of Section 4 were
omitted from further consideration. There was no other discussion
of Section 4 at that time, nor was there any other discussion at the
June 10 conference concerning wage increases or reductions. Never-
theless, as the T. W. O. C. first learned on June 17, Whittier and
Silver Lake had put a wage reduction into effect as of June 6 with-
out having announced it in advance to their employees.3 To protest
4 "SECTION 4. It is further mutually agreed that wage rates , including piece rates,
shall be increased by ____ over those prevailing prior to which
increase shall be effective immediately and continuing throughout the life of this.
contract. During the life of this agreement , there will be no reduction of wage rates
except by mutual consent . It is understood that if unusual economic conditions affecting
the parties hereto arise requiring a different wage schedule , such basis shall he estab-
lished as fair and equitable to both parties by conferences and arbitration if necessary."
'The time when this reduction was made does not appear. It is a reasonable
inference , however, from the fact that Weekes and Candler' s explanation of the re-
spondents' failure to consult with the T. W. O. C. with reference thereto was based upon
the discussion of Section 4 at the June 10 conference, as is more fully explained here-
after , that the reduction was not actually made until sometime after the June 10
conference , and we so find . At any rate, it does not appear that any of those at
the June 10 conference, except, possibly, Weekes and Candler, knew of the reduction.
WHITTIER --ILLS COIIPANY, ET AL. 465
the reduction and its having been put into effect without prior con-
sultation with the T. W. 0. C., the T. W. 0. C. sought a conference
with Weekes and met with him on June 28. To explain this failure
to consult the T. W. 0. C., Weekes stated that it had been his and
Candler's impression that the T. W. 0. C. meant to disregard the
entire Section 4. Hollihan explained to Weekes what he had. stated
at the June 10 conference that the T. W. 0. C. had no such intention
and meant to disregard only that portion of Section 4 dealing with
wage increases: He further demanded immediate negotiations re-
garding wages and threatened to file with the Board charges of
refusal to bargain collectively if the wage reduction was not revoked.
Nothing further occurred at the June 28 conference and the
parties did not meet again until July 13, at which time the T. W.
0. C. sought a conference because on July 11 a wage reduction was
put into effect at Scottdale similar to the earlier wage reduction at.
Whittier and Silver Lake. Similarly, also, the T. W. 0. C. was not
notified or consulted regarding the Scottdale reduction and, on July
13, Hollilan again protested the respondents' failure to deal with
the T. W. 0. C. with respect to the wage reductions. ' Weekes and
Candler repeated that it was their understanding that the T. W. 0. C.
desired to eliminate the entire Section 4 from the proposed contract
and that, therefore, the respondent was under no obligation to con-
sult the T. W. 0. C. regarding the reduction.
There followed a series of conferences between representatives of
the T. W. 0. C. and Weekes and Candler, beginning on July 28 and
extending to the time of the hearing. The T. W. 0. C. sought to
obtain from Candler counterproposals to its proposed contract. De-
spite Caldler's promises in this respect, no written counterproposals
were ever presented by the respondents to the T. W. 0. C. Weekes
and Candler did, however, suggest alternatives to some of the pro-
posals made by the T. W. 0. C. During these conferences, Weekes
and Candler acknowledged that the T. W. 0. C. was the collective
bargaining representative for the respondents' employees and, by
October 26, substantial agreements were reached as to a number of
the matters embodied in the T. W. 0. C.'s proposals. On November
4, however, Candler disagreed as to matters to which he had pre-
viously agreed, and, at the same time, displayed his reluctance to re-
duce to writing such matters as he was willing to agree to. We find
it unnecessary to consider whether the events subsequent to the wage
reductions involved refusals to bargain by the respondent, since we
find that the respondents, by putting into effect the wage reductions
without notifying or consulting the T. W. 0. C., refused to bargain
with the T. W. 0. C., and thereby also disparaged the T. W. 0. C.
in such a way as to interfere with, restrain, and coerce their em-
ployees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the
466 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Act. In the negotiations subsequent to the wage reductions, we fired
nothing which cured the earlier refusals to bargain.
We do not here pass upon any question as to the business necessity
which prompted the respondents to effect the wage reductions. It is
the respondents' failure to give prior notice to or to consult with
the T. W. 0. C. regarding the reductions and not the reductions
themselves which we have scrutinized.
We find no merit in the respondents' claim that by the June 10
discussion of Section 4 the T. W. 0. C. waived bargaining with
respect to wage reductions. The June 10 conference furnishes no
basis for the respondents' claim that it was their understanding that
the T. W. 0. C. intended to disregard, the entire Section 4 of the
proposed contract. That this claim was but a subterfuge is obvious
from the respondents' repetition thereof on July 13 after Hollihan's
repetition of the T. W. 0. C.'s position as to Section 4 on. June 28.
We cannot credit the excuse asserted by Weekes and Candler for
not consulting the T. W. 0. C. as regards either the Scottdale redu
tion or the Whittier and Silver Lake reductions. We find that the
respondents"disregard of the T. W. 0. C. with respect to these reduc-
tions was knowing and deliberate.
We find that when they effected the wage reduction of June 6, 1938,
Whittier and Silver Lake refused to bargain collectively with the
T. W. 0. C. as the representative of their employees in an appro-
priate unit in respect to rates of pay, wages, hours of employment,
and other conditions of employment.
We find that when it effected the wage reduction of July 11, 1938,
Scottdale refused to bargain collectively with the T. W. 0. C. as
the representative of its employees in an appropriate unit in respect
to rates of pay, wages, hours of employment, and other conditions
of employment.
There were present at the conferences of June 10 and 28 and July
13 not only T. W. 0. C. organizers but also several of the respondents'
employees. The effect of the respondents' refusal to deal with the
T. W. 0. C. was. of necessity to disparage the T. W. 0. C. so as to
discourage these employees as well as others from maintaining their
affiliation with the T. W. 0. C. or from affiliating therewith and from
designating it as their bargaining representative.
We find that by the above refusals to bargain the respondents have
and each of them has interfered with, restrained, and coerced their
employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of
the Act.
B. Interference, restraint, and coercion
In addition to the foregoing refusal to bargain, Scottdale inter-
fered with, restrained, and coerced its employees in the exercise of
WHITTIER MILLS COMPANY, ET AL. 467
their rights under the Act by disparaging the Union by means of
remarks addressed to employees of Scottdale by its supervisory
employees.
Overseer W. P. Roseberry in August 1938 approached R. P. Alex-
ander, an employee in the mill, during working hours and, according
to Alexander, "he kinder caught me by the sleeve that way [indicat-
ing] and said, `You don't belong to that old union, do you?', and I
says, 'Yes, I belong to it, don't you?', and that was just through fun,
and I thought nothing about it, and he went on and says, `I wouldn't
belong to that old union, it causes lots of trouble, you know at the
time of the strike over at Porterdale, they lost a lot of jobs down
there, and it caused them to be moved out,' and one word after an-
other, and that is about all he said." Roseberry's remarks were not
mere bantering remarks. There was implicit in them a threat of
loss of employment to Alexander if he continued his membership in
the Union. Such remarks, coming from one of Roseberry's authority,
are an invasion of the rights of employees under the Act.
In October 1938, Holcomb, a second hand at Scottdale, who, when
Roseberry leaves the department, replaces him as overseer and who
is a supervisory employee with authority to recommend discharge
of employees, asked M. J. Watkins, an employee, whether he knew
"what makes it so hard on the fellows here today . . . . It is the
way that they are treated by this damned union." As in the case of
Roseberry's remarks, Holcomb's declared his antipathy to the Union.
We find that, by the foregoing statements of its supervisory em-
ployees, Scottdale has interfered with, restrained, and coerced its
employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of
the Act.
IV. THE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES UPON COMMERCE
We find that the activities of the respondents set forth in Section
III above occurring in connection with their operations described in
Section I above, have a, close, intimate, and substantial relation to
trade, traffic, and commerce among the several States and tend to lead
to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce and the free
flow of commerce.
V. THE REMEDY
We have found that the respondents have interfered with, re-
strained, and coerced their employees in the exercise of the rights
guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act. We shall therefore order the
respondents, and each of them, to cease and desist from so doing.
We have found that at all times since October 25, and November
1, 1937, respectively, the T. W. O. C. was and that it is the exclusive
representative of the employees in the appropriate units at Whittier
468 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
and Silver Lake and at Scottdale , respectively . We have also found
that when they effected the wage reductions of June 6, 1938 , and July
11, 1938, the respective respondents refused to bargain with the
T. W. O. C. as such representative . In order to effectuate the poli-
cies of the Act, we shall order the respondents , and each of them,
to bargain with the T. W. O. C. as the representative of their
employees in the respective appropriate units.
VI. THE PETITIONS
In view of the findings in Section III, A, 1, above , as to the appro-
priate units and the designation of the T. W. O. C. as the exclusive
representative of the respondents ' employees in the appropriate units,
it is not necessary to consider the petitions for certification of repre-
sentatives . Consequently , the petitions for certification will be
dismissed.
Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and upon the entire
record in these proceedings , the Board makes the following :
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. Textile Workers Organizing Committee is a labor organization
within the meaning of Section 2 (5) of the Act.
2. By interfering with, restraining , and coercing their employees
in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act, the
respondents have and each of them has engaged in and is engaging
in unfair labor practices , within the meaning of Section 8 (1) of
the Act.
3. The production and maintenance employees of Whittier and
Silver Lake, exclusive of clerical and supervisory employees , consti-
tute a single unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargain-
ing, within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
4. The production and maintenance employees of Scottdale, ex-
clusive of clerical and supervisory employees , constitute a unit
appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining, within the
meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
5. Textile Workers Organizing Committee was on October 25,
'1937, and at all times thereafter has been, the exclusive representa-
tive of all the employees in the appropriate unit at Whittier and
Silver Lake for the purposes of collective bargaining , within the
meaning of Section 9 ( a) of the Act.
6. Textile Workers Organizing Committee was on November 1,
1937 , and at all times thereafter has been, the exclusive representative
of all the employees in the appropriate unit at Scottdale for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining , within the meaning of Section 9 (a)
of the Act.
WHITTIER MILLS COMPANY, ET AL. 469
7. The respondents, by refusing to bargain collectively with Tex-
tile Workers Organizing Committee as the exclusive representative
of their employees in the respective appropriate units have and each
of them has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices,
within the meaning of Section 8 (5) of the Act.
8. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair labor practices
affecting commerce, within the meaning of Section 2 (6) and (7)
of the Act.
ORDER
9
Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and conclusions of
law, and pursuant to Section 10 (c) of the National Labor Relations
Act, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that the
respondents, Whittier Mills Company and Silver Lake Company,
Chattahoochee, Georgia, and Scottdale Mills, Scottdale, Georgia, and
each of them, and their officers, agents, successors, and assigns shall:
1. Cease and desist from :
(a) Refusing to bargain collectively with Textile Workers Or-
ganizing Committee as the exclusive representative of their produc-
tion and maintenance employees, excluding clerical and supervisory
employees ;
(b) In any other manner interfering with, restraining, or coercing
their employees, and the employees of each of them, in the exercise
of their rights to self-organization, to form, join, or assist labor
organizations, to bargain collectively through representatives of their
own choosing, or to engage in . concerted activities for the purpose
of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection as guaran-
teed in Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act.
2. Take the following affirmative action which the Board finds
will effectuate the policies of the Act
(a) Upon request, bargain collectively with Textile Workers Or-
ganizing Committee as the exclusive representative of their produc-
tion and maintenance employees, excluding clerical and supervisory
employees ;
(b) Post immediately in conspicuous places in and about their
plants notices to their employees, and maintain said notices for a
period of at' least sixty (60) consecutive days from the date of
posting, stating that the respondents will cease and desist in the
manner set forth in paragraphs 1 '(a) and (b), and that they will
take the affirmative action set forth in paragraph 2 (a) of this Order;
(c) Notify the Regional Director for the Tenth Region in writing
within ten (10) days from the date of this Order, what steps the
respondents have taken to comply herewith.
AND IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the petitions for investigation and
certification of representatives be, and they hereby are, dismissed.
199549-39-vol. 15-31