Albert's Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 6, 1950

90 N.L.R.B. 110 (N.L.R.B. 1950)

In the Matter of ALBERT'S INCORPORATED,' EMPLOYER and OFFICE
EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION LOCAL No . 243, A. F. OF L.,
PETITIONER
Case No. 20-RC-720.-Decided June 6, 1950
DECISION AND ORDER
Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before Robert V.
Magor, 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 :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the National Labor Relations Act.
2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent certain em-
ployees of the Employer.
3. No question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section
9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act, for the following
reasons:
The Employer operates a chain of retail department stores in Cali-
fornia. Only the store located in Richmond is involved herein.
The Petitioner seeks to sever from an existing over-all unit presently
represented by the Intervenor 2 a unit of all office clerical employees,
including billers, bookkeepers, cashiers, payroll clerks, invoice clerks,
credit interviewers, and secretary clerks with the usual exclusions. The
Employer and the Intervenor apparently contend that the only unit
appropriate is the existing unit of selling and nonselling employees.
The Richmond store, under the supervision of a store manager, is
divided into approximately 25 departments which include selling,
office, stockroom, and cleaning. The office work is done on the mez-
zanine between the first and second floors, which is physically sepa-
rated from all other departments. There is no interchange between
office employees and other store personnel. Office employees, with the
exception of the credit personnel, do not ordinarily have contact with
store customers. A personnel manager hires and discharges most store
i The name of the Employer appears as amended at the hearing.
s Local 1179, Retail Clerks, International Association , A. F. L.
90 NLRB No. 29.
110
ALBERT S INCORPORATED 111
employees, but the office manager, who is in charge of the office de-
partment, has authority to hire and discharge office employees.
Subordinate to the office manager is a credit manager who is re-
sponsible for two charge authorizers; a head cashier, responsible for
three cashiers; and the supervisor of the accounts payable department,
responsible for only one person. In addition there are two window
cashiers, one sales ledger employee, two sales auditors, one telephone
operator, two billers, one payroll employee, and one secretary, all of
whom work directly under the supervision of the office manager.
All store employees are paid bimonthly by check, work the same
number of hours, punch the same time clock, and enjoy the same
employee benefits. Certain selling employees have commission ar-
rangements, and, as a compensatory arrangement, bonuses, which de-
pend on net profits, are paid to the office employees.
Since 1938 the Company has had collective bargaining agreements
with the Intervenor covering all selling and nonselling employees in-
cluding the office clericals.
This proceeding raises for the first time the appropriateness of sever-
ing the clerical employees of a department store from an existing
over-all unit. In units in industrial plants we have usually provided
for the separation of office clerical workers from production and main-
tenance employees. In department stores we have found units of office
employees appropriate, absent a bargaining history on a broader
basis,' but because of the similarity of functions of all department
store employees, and the closely integrated character of a retail estab-
lishment, we have also included office employees in a single unit with
selling employees 4
Where there has been a history of bargaining on an over-all basis
we have been reluctant to disturb the pattern established by such
bargaining and have generally permitted the severance of smaller
units in department stores only when the employees involved were
craftsmen b or constituted units similar in nature to other departmental
units, which we have traditionally permitted to be severed despite a
broader bargaining history.6 However, the unit sought here is not a
craft group, nor is it similar to units which have in the past been
severed. As noted, there has been a 12-year history of bargaining on
.a broader basis, and there is no evidence that the office employees have
a Maas Brothers, Inc., 88 NLRB 129.
Phelps Dodge Mercantile Co., 78 NLRB 179; Montgomery Ward & Co., Inc., 70 NLRB
1302.
5 Marshall Field and Co ., 76 NLRB 479 ( maintenance machinists ) ; Bloomingdale
Brothers, Inc., 81 NLRB 1252 (electricians).
6Bloomingdale Brothers , Inc., supra ( engineering department employees which the Board
found were similar to the usual powerhouse employees). In that same decision, however,
the Board denied the severance of warehouse employees.
112 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
not been adequately represented to secure consideration for their par-
ticular problems. In addition there is a constant interflow of com-
munication between the selling and office employees, and both groups
enjoy the same employees benefits and have similar working conditions.
In view of all the circumstances, we conclude that there is no suffi-
cient basis for severing the office clerical employees from the existing
store-wide unit, and we shall, therefore, dismiss the instant petition.
ORDER
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and the entire record
in the case , the Board hereby orders that the petition filed in this
proceeding by the Office - Employees International Union, Local No.
243, A. F". of L., be, and it hereby is, dismissed.
MEMBER REYNOLDS took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Order.