Sandy's

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 30, 1953

105 N.L.R.B. 928 (N.L.R.B. 1953)

928 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
professional employees , guards, and supervisors as defined
in the Act.
(2) All production and/or operating employees, including
the employees in the yard department and stock clerks, but
excluding maintenance employees, office clerical employees,
professional and technical employees, the laboratory tech-
nicians, guards , and supervisors as defined in the Act.
If a majority of the employees in each of the voting groups
both select either the Trades Council or the CIO, they will
be, taken to have indicated their desire to constitute a single
appropriate unit. If a majority of the employees in voting
group ( 1) select a labor organization which is not selected
by the employees in voting group (2), the employees in voting
group (1) will be taken to have indicated their desire to
constitute a separate unit and the union so selected may be
certified for such unit. If a majority of the employees in
voting group (2) alone vote for either the Trades Council
or the CIO, the union selected may be certified for such unit.
The Regional Director is instructed to issue a certification
of representatives consistent herewith to the bargaining agent
or, agents selected for such unit or units , which the Board,
under the circumstances, finds to be appropriate for the
purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section
9 (b)• of the Act.
[Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication.]
NORMAN S. CORPORATION, d/b/a SANDY'S and RETAIL
CLERKS INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION, LOCAL UNION
NO. 1691, AFL, Petitioner: Case No. 15-RC-913. June 30,
1953
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before John H. Immel,
Jr., hearing officer . The hearing officer ' s rulings made at the
hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby
affirmed. ' The Employer ' s motion to dismiss the petition on
jurisdictional grounds is denied for reasons which appear
below.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, the
Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case
to a three-member panel [Members Murdock, Styles, and
Peterson].
Upon the entire record in this case , the Board finds:
1. Norman S. Corporation , a Louisiana corporation , herein
called the Corporation , operates 2 retail shoe stores, known
t The petition and other formal papers were amended at the t earing to reflect the Em-
ployer's correct name.
105 NLRB No. 113.
SANDY'S 929
as Sanders and Jons , at New Orleans , and a , retail shoe and
dry-goods store, known as Sandy's , at Baton Rouge . Sandy's
is the only store involved in this proceeding . Abe Wiener,
Sander W. Wiener , Norman A. Wiener, and Beryl Wiener
Aronson , partners , d/b/a Abe Wiener & Company , a partner-
ship , herein called the Partnership , operates 6 retail shoe
stores in New Orleans.
The annual volume of the interstate operations of the
Corporation falls short of the minimum requirements estab-
lished by the Board.' The Petitioner , however , contends that,
in view of the relationship , described below, which exists
between the Corporation and the Partnership , the Board should
assert jurisdiction on the basis of the combined interstate
operations of the two firms, which admittedly exceed the
minimum requirements ;' the Employer disagrees.
Of the 859 outstanding shares of the Corporation, 171 are
owned by Abe Wiener , its president , who also owns a two-fifths
interest in the Partnership ; 440 shares are owned by Sander
Wiener , his son , who also owns a one-fifth interest in the
Partnership ; and 110 shares are ownedbyEdwardJ. Ripberger,
who, as secretary - treasurer of the Corporation and as office
manager for the business office of the Partnership , is on the
payroll of both firms . Norman S. Wiener , another son of Abe
Wiener is vice president of the Corporation and owns a one-
fifth interest in'the Partnership.4
Abe Wiener purchases all the shoes for the Corporation and
the Partnership . Incoming shipments , the majority of which go
to a warehouse owned by the Partnership, are earmarked in
unspecified amounts for the account of the Corporation or for
the joint account of the Corporation and the Partnership.'
"Close-out" shoes in the Partnership stores are sometimes
routed through the warehouse to supply the needs of other
Partnership or Corporation stores. The firms have a common
business office , one room of which is occupied by a stenog-
rapher on the Corporation payroll and by a bookkeeper on the
Partnership payroll, and the other room of which serves as a
private office for Abe Wiener . This office prepares payrolls
2 Total direct and indirect purchases made for the Corporation dur :952 of merchandise
from outside the State amounted to approximately $370,000 in`• "1 sales of mer-
chandise during 1952 were made within the State. I follow Tree Lu pt`s'shy. 91 NLRB
635
3During 1952, total direct out-of-State purchases by the Partnership amounted to $557,000
in value; during the same period, the Partnership made direct sales in the amount of $25,000
to firms in the State of Georgia, Edward J Ripberger, noted below, testified at the hearing
that there were "courtesy" sales, made on the basis of personal favors rather than business
transactions , and were not likely to be regularly repeated.
4The remaining shareholders are unrelated to the above-named individuals and have no
interests in the Partnership. Merle Wiener Aronson, a daughter of Abe Wiener, has the
remaining one-fifth interest in the Partnership
i The other merchandise sold by Sandy's is purchased by the store manager at Baton
Rouge. No charges are made to the Corporation for the services of Abe Wiener as pur-
chasing agent The Corporation pays between 5 and 10 cents a pair on shoes received from
the warehouse to cover handling and warehouse expenses
930 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
for all the Corporation and Partnership stores exceptSandy's6
and maintains social-security , tax-withholding , and sales
records for all the stores . These records are separately kept
for each firm. '
The individual store managers for both firms have a con-
siderable amount of autonomy in their operations .' Those in
charge of the Corporation stores are ultimately responsible
to Abe Wiener and Ripberger ; those in charge of the Partner-
ship stores are ultimately responsible only to Abe Wiener.
There is no regular interchange of employees between the
Corporation stores and the Partnership stores.
Under all the above circumstances , including the close
relationship which exists between the Corporation and the
Partnership with respect to management , control, organization,
supervision , and operational policies , we find that they together
constitute a single employer within the meaning of the Act;
that the Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning
of the Act ; and that it will effectuate the purposes and policies
of the Act to assert jurisdiction in the instant case.8
2. The Petitioner is a labor organization claiming torepre-
sent employees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the
representation of employees of the Employer within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and ( 7) of the Act.
4. The Petitioner and the Employer generally agree that
regular selling and nonselling employees at the Employer's
Baton Rouge , Louisiana , retail store known as Sandy ' s,. in-
cluding part - time employees , but excluding supervisors, con-
stitute an appropriate unit . The parties disagree with respect
to the status of the shoe department supervisor , who the
Petitioner contends is a supervisor as defined in the Act.
The shoe department supervisor spends one-third of his
time in the direction of the 2 full -time, and the 1 or 2 part-
time, shoe clerks in his department , in the course of which he
acquaints the employees with the stock , shows them where it
is kept, advises them as to what shoes to display , and assists
them in making sales. He also sells shoes, is responsible for
the appearance of the shoe department , handles customer
complaints , suggests shoe displays to the manager, and places
shoe orders with him. He receives twice the compensation of
the employees under him and is empowered to make recom-
mendations concerning the employment of the employees in
his charge . Except for the store manager, who the parties
agree , and we find , is a supervisor as defined in the Act, no
other person appears to exercise supervisory authority over
the 25 employees at Sandy's . We conclude that the shoe depart-
ment supervisor responsibly directs the employees under him,
6Sandy's prepares its own payroll and pays it from its bank account; the payroll figures
are sent to the New Orleans business office.
7 They hire and discharge employees , train new employees, establish store hours, and
order stock as they need it
8 A E Rogers , d/b/a A E Rogers Co., et al, 103 NLRB 1274; Commercial Equipment
Company, Inc , and Monty Larsen and Rudy Larsen, Co-Partners d/b/a Industrial Truck
and Trailer Service Company, 95 NLRB 354 1
UNITED STATES GYPSUM COMPANY 931
and we shall therefore exclude him, as a supervisor, from
the unit herein found appropriate.'
We therefore find that all regular full-time and part-time
selling and nonselling employees at the Employer's Baton
Rouge, Louisiana, retail store known as Sandy's, including
sales clerks, cashiers, the window trimmer, the maid, the
porter, and the bookkeeper, but excluding the shoe department
supervisor, the store manager, and any other supervisors as
defined in the Act, constitute a unit appropriate for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section
9 (b) of the Act.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication]
9Charles Livingston & Sons, Inc., 86 NLRB 30, and cases cited therein.
UNITED STATES GYPSUM COMPANY and LOCAL 278,
UNITED GAS, COKE AND CHEMICAL WORKERSOFAMER-
ICA, CIO, Petitioner. Case No. 13-RC-3032. June 30, 1953
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Jewel C.
Maher, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at
the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby
affirmed.'
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, the
Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case
to a three-member panel [Members Murdock, Styles, and
Peterson].
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds:
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning
of the Act. The instant case involves only the Employer's
East Chicago, Indiana, plant.
2. The labor organization involved claims to represent
employees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the
representation of employees of the Employer within the mean-
ing of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The Petitioner seeks to represent the following employees
at the Employer's East Chicago, Indiana, plant: All lead
mechanics, perlite tube operators, board machine operators,
board kiln operators, board head takeoff men, grainboard
machine operators, board asphalt emulsion operators, shingle
wet machine operators, shingle hydropress operators, shingle
punch press operators, glatex machine operators, glatex kiln
`The Employer's motion to dismiss the petition, referred to the Board by the hearing
officer, is denied for the reasons hereinafter set forth in paragraph numbered 4.
105 NLRB No. 132.