R. H. Macy Co., Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Dec 16, 1969

180 N.L.R.B. 470 (N.L.R.B. 1969)

470 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Davison-Paxon , A Division of R . H. Macy Co., Inc.
and R . W. D. S. U. Council of Ga., affiliated with
Retail, Wholesale & Department Store Union,
Local 315, Petitioner . Case 10-RC-7699
December 16, 1969
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF
ELECTION
BY CHAIRMAN MCCULLOCH AND MEMBERS
JENKINS AND ZAGORIA
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9(c) of
the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, a
hearing was held before Hearing Officer Robert C.
D. McDonald. The Employer filed a brief.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
Act, the National Labor Relations Board has
delegated its powers in connection with this case to
a three-member panel.
The Board has reviewed the Hearing Officer's
rulings made at the hearing and finds that they are
free from prejudicial error. They are hereby
affirmed.
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board
finds:
1. The'&Employer is engaged in commerce within
the meltning of the Act and it will effectuate the
purposes of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein.
2. The labor organization involved claims to
represent certain employees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists
concerning the representation of certain employees
of the Employer within the meaning of Sections
9(cxl) and 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The Petitioner seeks a unit of all warehouse
employees, truckdrivers , and garage employees at
the Employer's Atlanta, Georgia, service building,
excluding only all office clericals , professional
employees , supervisors, and guards . The Employer
takes the position that the unit sought is not
appropriate , because not limited to employees
engaged in warehousing and delivery functions, that
is, receiving , storing , shipping , and delivering
merchandise and supplies . It would , thus, exclude
from the unit those whom it describes as the
relatively skilled employees in the service building
workshops who are engaged in their respective shop
areas in, for example , furniture , television, and
lawnmower repair.
The Employer has two stores and a service
building in Atlanta . The service building is under the
overall direction and supervision of the Service
Building Manager . It contains the delivery, hauling,
stockkeeping receiving , and supply departments,
each of which has its own supervisor who reports
directly to the Manager . Also located there are the
service shops, all of which are under the immediate
supervision of the Work Rooms Manager who
reports to the Customer Service Manager who in
turn is responsible to the Building Manager.
In an earlier decision,' the Board found that the
service building employees here involved could
properly comprise an appropriate unit separate from
the employees in the Atlanta retail stores. It further
concluded that employees in the service building
engaged in typical warehousing operations, as well
as those not so engaged, together constituted an
appropriate unit, a conclusion directly contrary to
the position urged here by the Employer. However,
the Board predicated its result, at least in part, on
the conclusion that there was within the service
building "regular and substantial interchange of
employees and common supervision of groups with
diverse work skills" creating such functional
integration as to support a comprehensive service
building unit.
In the present proceeding the Employer has
sought to show, with some success, that there is
little or no interchange between workshop and
warehousing employees and that there are separate
lines of supervision for these employees.
Nevertheless, it is clear that the service building is
essentially a place where goods are received, stored,
processed, and then shipped to the retail stores or
directly to customers, and that the employees
located there are engaged in such activities or
closely related work. Though some of the work of
the workshop employees is concerned with repairing
goods after they have reached the customer, others
of the workshop employees, like the warehouse
employees, process goods before they are delivered.
For example, employees in the furniture shop may
repair damaged furniture before sale or shipment,
and the rug workshop performs cutting and
installation . Also, as indicated, the Service Building
Manager is the top supervisor for all service
building workers, including those whom the
Employer would exclude from the unit. The service
building involves basically a single, separate
operation, much like a single plant which is, under
the Act, an inherently appropriate unit.' In these
circumstances, the fact that work shop employees
are more skilled than warehousing employees no
more suggests the inappropriateness of the
buildingwide unit than does the fact that a plant
may have employees of varying skills suggest the
inappropriateness of a plantwide unit.
In any event, the record shows that the requested
employees work in a building geographically
separated from the Employer's other facilities, do
not interchange with employees at such facilities, are
subject to supervision which does not come from or
extend to the other facilities, and perform duties
which are not to any great extent performed at the
other facilities. Accordingly, as the service building
employees comprise a separate identifiable group of
employees , we find that they constitute a single
'Davison-Paxon Company, 153 NLRB 1502
'Dixie Belle Mills, Inc., 139 NLRB 629, 631
180 NLRB No. 59
DAVISON-PAXON
appropriate unit.3
The Employer raised several matters with respect
to the composition of the unit. First, we agree, as
apparently does the Petitioner, that the clerical
employees in the service building office are office
clericals and, thus, excluded. However, the clericals
employed in the warehousing and shop areas of the
service building we find are plant clericals and are
included in the unit. Also, we agree with the
Employer - and the Petitioner does not take a
contrary position - that on the record before us the
part-time warehouse employees appear to be regular
part-time employees and thus should be included.
We conclude further that the working foremen in
the warehouse and driver sections are not statutory
supervisors and are, consequently, in the unit.', We
agree with the Petitioner on the exclusion of the
three downtown store delivery employees as they
have minimal contact with service building
employees and, insofar as the record shows, operate
out of the downtown stores and are, at least in their
day-to-day functions, supervised by personnel
located at the downtown stores.
In view of the foregoing we find that the following
employees of the Employer constitute a unit
appropriate for purposes of collective bargaining
within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act: All
employees at the Employer's Atlanta, Georgia,
service building, including warehouse employees,
workshop employees, truckdrivers, garage
employees, supply department employees, regular
part-time employees, plant clerical employees and
working foremen in the warehousing and driver
sections, but excluding office clerical employees,
downtown store delivery drivers, professional
471
employees , guards and supervisors as defined in the
Act.
[Direction of Elections omitted from publication.]
'Davison-Paxon Company , supra. The May Department Stores
Company, d/b/a Famous Barr Company. 176 NLRB No 14
Contrary to the Employer 's position , we include the garage employees in
the unit These employees are located in a separate building which is,
however, adjacent to the service building They work on vehicles used
mainly by service building employees and their immediate supervisor
reports to the Service Building Manager . Thus, it is evident that they are
part of the service building operations Also we shall include the supply
department employees, a result contrary to that reached in our earlier
decision affecting the service building However , it appears that since that
decision and unlike the situation in the past, the supply department is now
located in the service building with its supervisor reporting directly to the
Service Building Manager
The working foremen have more experience in their particular work,
receive higher pay than , and direct to some extent the activities of, other
employees in their departments. However , they work alongside of, and
perform the same work as, such employees . They do make
recommendations as to job load, work requirements , and usage of storage
space , but they have no authority to hire, discharge , or otherwise to affect
the employment status of employees . Also there is no evidence that their
direction of other employees in the relatively routine warehousing and
related operations is responsible direction within the meaning of the Act
Accordingly, we find the working foremen not to be supervisors. See, e g ,
UTD Corporation ( Union-Card Division), 165 NLRB No 48
'In order to assure that all eligible voters may have the opportunity to
be informed of the issues in the exercise of their statutory right to vote, all
parties to the election should have access to a list of voters and their
addresses which may be used to communicate with them Excelsior
Underwear Inc., 156 NLRB 1236; N L. R B. v. Wyman-Gordon Company,
394 U.S 759. Accordingly, it is hereby directed that an election eligibility
list, containing the names and addresses of all the eligible voters, must be
filed by the Employer with the Regional Director for Region 10 within 7
days of the date of this Decision and Direction of Election. The Regional
Director shall make the list available to all parties to the election. No
extension of time to file this list shall be granted by the Regional Director
except in extraordinary circumstances Failure to comply with this
requirement shall be grounds for setting aside the election whenever proper
objections are filed.