May Department Stores Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Feb 17, 1984

268 N.L.R.B. 979 (N.L.R.B. 1984)

MAY DEPARTMENT STORES CO.
May Department Stores Company, Venture Stores
Division and United Retail Workers Union
Local No. 881, Chartered by United Food and
Commercial Workers International Union,
AFL-CIO, CLC. Cases 13-CA-21660 and 13-
CA-21696
17 February 1984
DECISION AND ORDER
BY CHAIRMAN DOTSON AND MEMBERS
HUNTER AND DENNIS
Upon charges and an amended charge filed by
United Retail Workers Union, Local No. 881, char-
tered by United Food and Commercial Workers
International Union, AFL-CIO, CLC, herein
called the Union, the General Counsel of the Na-
tional Labor Relations Board, by the Regional Di-
rector for Region 13, issued an order consolidating
cases, and a consolidated complaint and notice of
hearing on 18 December 1981, against May De-
partment Stores Company, Venture Stores Divi-
sion, herein called the Respondent. The complaint
alleges that the Respondent has engaged in and is
engaging in certain unfair labor practices affecting
commerce within the meaning of Sections 8(a)(5)
and (1) and 2(6) and (7) of the National Labor Re-
lations Act, as amended. Copies of the charges and
the consolidated complaint and notice of hearing
were duly served on the parties. The Respondent
filed an answer to the complaint, denying that it
had committed any unfair labor practices.
Thereafter, the Respondent, the Union, and
counsel for the General Counsel entered into a stip-
ulation of facts and jointly petitioned the Board to
transfer this proceeding directly to the Board for
findings of fact, conclusions of law, and a decision
and order. The parties stipulated that they waived
a hearing before an administrative law judge, the
making of findings of fact and conclusions of law
by an administrative law judge, and the issuance of
an administrative law judge's decision. The parties
also agreed that no oral testimony was necessary or
desired by any of the parties, and that the charges,
the complaint, the answer, and the stipulation of
facts, including attached exhibits, constituted the
entire record in the case. The parties, however, re-
served the right to object to the materiality, rel-
evancy, or competence of any of the stipulated
facts.
On 23 April 1982 the Board issued its order ap-
proving the stipulation and transferring the pro-
ceeding to the Board. Thereafter, the General
Counsel, the Respondent, and the Union filed briefs
which have been duly considered by the Board.'
The National Labor Relations Board has delegat-
ed its authority in this proceeding to a three-
member panel.
The Board has considered the entire record
herein as well as the briefs filed by the parties, and
makes the following
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE RESPONDENT
May Department Stores Company, Venture
Stores Division, is a Delaware corporation engaged
in the retail sale and distribution of general mer-
chandise at various store locations in the States of
Illinois and Indiana, with its offices and principal
place of business located at St. Ann, Missouri.
During the 1981 calendar year, a representative
period, the Respondent, in the course and conduct
of its business, derived gross revenues in excess of
$500,000 and received in excess of $50,000 from
retail sales within the States of Illinois and Indiana,
of general merchandise, which it purchased and
caused to be transported to the States of Illinois
and Indiana directly from points located outside
those States.
The Respondent admits, and we find, that it is an
employer engaged in commerce within the mean-
ing of Section 2(2), (6), and (7) of the Act.
II. THE LABOR ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
United Retail Workers Union and United Food
and Commercial Workers International Union,
AFL-CIO, CLC, are labor organizations within
the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act.
I1. THE ALLEGED UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
A. Introduction
In 1978, the Respondent recognized United
Retail Workers Union (URW) as the collective-bar-
gaining representative of its employees in the fol-
lowing units:
(a) All employees employed in Respondent's
operations at the following locations: 1) 9449
Skokie Boulevard, Skokie, Illinois; 2) 116
South Waukegan, Deerfield, Illinois; 3) 444
East Rand Road, Arlington Heights, Illinois;
4) 521 East North Avenue, Glendale Heights,
Illinois; 5) 125 West 87th Street, Chicago, Illi-
The Respondent filed a "Motion To Supplement the Record," the
General Counsel filed a motion in opposition to the Respondent's motion,
and the Respondent filed a reply to the General Counsel's opposition. In
view of our disposition herein, we deny these motions, as this additional
evidence would have no effect on the outcome of this proceeding.
268 NLRB No. 152
979
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
nois; 6) 11440 South Halsted Street, Chicago,
Illinois; 7) 7601 South Cicero Avenue, Chica-
go, Illinois; 8) 6063 Broadway, Merrillville, In-
diana; 9) 1311 Golf Road, Schaumburg, Illi-
nois; and 10) 1740 North Kostner, Chicago, Il-
linois, but excluding all managers and other
employees defined as supervisors, trainees (to a
maximum of six per store) and department
managers, office clerical employees, security
personnel (including guards and watchmen),
professional employees and craftsmen perform-
ing work in said stores, but who are not part
of the facility's normal employee complement.
[Hereinafter the Chicago stores.]
(b) All employees employed in Respondent's
operations located at 2800 North Water Street,
Decatur, Illinois, but excluding all managers
and other employees defined as supervisors,
trainees (to a maximum of six per store) and
department managers, office clerical employ-
ees, security personnel (including guards and
watchmen), professional employees and crafts-
men performing work in said store, but who
are not part of the facility's normal employee
complement. [Hereinafter the Decatur stove.]
The Respondent and the URW entered into their
initial collective-bargaining agreement for the Chi-
cago stores in June 1978, and for the Decatur store
in July 1978. The most recent collective-bargaining
agreement for the Chicago stores is effective by its
terms from 21 July 1980 through 24 July 1983. The
most recent collective-bargaining agreement for the
Decatur store is effective by its terms from 1 Janu-
ary 1981 through 31 December 1983. The Re-
spondent terminated both agreements effective 1
November 1981.
B. The Union Affiliation Election
In June 1981, the presidents of URW's four
locals unanimously agreed to seek affiliation with
United Food and Commerical Workers Internation-
al Union, AFL-CIO, CLC (UFCW). During July
1981, URW held meetings for the membership of
its local unions regarding the proposed affiliation.
Each meeting was open to all URW members. 2
The following individuals were eligible to vote
in the affiliation election:
(a) All active URW members on the payroll of
an employer under contract with URW as of the
last payroll date prior to 31 July 1981; and
(b) Nonmembers employed by an employer
under contract with URW as of the last payroll
date prior to 31 July 1981: (1) who had not com-
I As of 31 October 1981, the 4 locals of URW represented approxi-
mately 22,400 employees, of whom approximately 20,500 were URW
members.
pleted but would complete their 30-day probation-
ary period before 31 July and (2) from whom
URW had received a membership application
before 31 July 1981.
On or about 31 July 1981 Walenze Direct Mail,
on behalf of URW, mailed instructions and ballots
for a mail ballot referendum on the affiliation to
20,548 individuals fitting the eligibility require-
ments. Of this number, 9,235 ballots were timely
returned and tabulated. The results showed that
6,823 votes were cast for, and 2,344 against, affili-
ation. There were 68 invalid votes.3
On or about 21 August 1981 officials of URW
informed Respondent of the results of the mail
ballot referendum. In subsequent correspondence
Respondent agreed to honor its bargaining agree-
ments with URW until 1 November 1981, the date
UFCW granted a charter to URW as its Local No.
881.
C. The Respondent's Refusal to Bargain
Since on or about 1 November 1981 the Re-
spondent has:
(a) Refused to recognize and bargain with Local
No. 881 as the exclusive collective-bargaining rep-
resentative for the employees of its Chicago and
Decatur stores.
(b) Refused to process grievances with Local
No. 881 arising on or after I November 1981 in ac-
cordance with article IX of the current collective-
bargaining agreements.
(c) Refused to grant Local No. 881 representa-
tives access to its stores for purposes of administer-
ing the collective-bargaining agreements in accord-
ance with section 8.5 of the current collective-bar-
gaining agreements.
(d) Refused to transmit to Local No. 881 union
dues and initiation fees as called for by section 8.2
of the current collective-bargaining agreements.
(e) Refused to enforce the union membership re-
quirement relative to Local No. 881 as set forth in
section 8.1 of the current collective-bargaining
agreements.
(f) Refused to submit the names and addresses of
new hires in accordance with section 8.1(D) of the
current collective-bargaining agreements.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
We find merit in Respondent's contentions that
the election herein was conducted with insufficient
due process safeguards. As announced in Amoco
a The Respondent has approximately 1,292 unit employees, 1,214 of
whom were eligible to vote. Of the ballots sent to Respondent's employ-
ees, 389 were returned and tabulated. No determination of how these bal-
lots from employees in either of the two units herein were cast is avail-
able.
980
MAY DEPARTMENT STORES CO.
Production Co., 262 NLRB 1240 (1982), a critical
element of an affiliation election is that all unit em-
ployees, whether union members or not, be permit-
ted to participate and vote in the affiliation elec-
tion. Because, in this case, all unit employees have
not been accorded these rights, we find that the af-
filiation was improper. The Respondent, therefore,
did not violate Section 8(a)(5) and (1) of the Act
when it refused to bargain with United Retail
Workers Union Local No. 881, chartered by
United Food and Commercial Workers Union,
AFL-CIO, CLC, and refused to comply with the
provisions of the coliective-bargaining agreements
noted herein in effect with United Retail Workers
Union, as they would apply to Local No. 881.
ORDER
The National Labor Relations Board orders the
consolidated complaint dismissed.
981