Artoraft Hosiery Company, Meridian Division, Employer And United Textile Workers Of America, Afl, Petitioner, 1474 (1947)

In the Matter of ARTORAFT HOSIERY COMPANY, MERIDIAN DiviSION,

EMPLOYER and UNITED TEXTILE WORKERS OF AMERICA, AFL,

PETITIONER Case No. 15-R-1885.-Decided January 9, 1947 Mr. Geoffrey J. Cunniff, of Philadelphia, Pa., for the Employer.

Messrs. Joseph Jacobs and William Oliver, of Atlanta, Ga., Mr. A. J.

Holifield, of Ellisville, Miss., and Mr. W. R. Herrod, of Asheville,

N. C., for the Petitioner.

Mr. Benj. E. Cook, of counsel to the Board.

DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at Meridian,

Mississippi, on October 9, 1946, before T. Lowry Whitaker, hearing officer.' The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. At the hearing the Employer moved to dismiss the petition on the ground that no question concerning representation had arisen. For reasons stated in the 0. D.

Jennings case,' the motion is hereby denied.

Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations Board makes the following:

FINDINGS OF FACT I. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER Artcraft Hosiery Company is a Delaware corporation having its principal office located in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The Employer owns a plant at Meridian, Mississippi, which operates under the name of Artcraft Hosiery Company, Meridian Division, which is the only plant involved in this proceeding. The Employer is engaged in the manufacture of women's full-fashioned and seamless hosiery, and during the past 12 months it purchased materials valued at more than $100,000, 90 percent of which was shipped to its plant from points outside the State of Mississippi. During the same period the EmMatter of 0. D. Jennings & Company, 1474 1475 ployer produced finished products valued at more than $200,000, approximately 90 percent of which was shipped to points outside the State of Mississippi.

The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.

2. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, claiming to represent employees of the Employer.

3. TIE 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...