Sears Roebuck & Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jan 29, 1957

117 N.L.R.B. 133 (N.L.R.B. 1957)

SEARS ROEBUCK & COMPANY 133
Sears Roebuck & Company and Local 404, International Brother-
hood of Teamsters , Chauffeurs , Warehousemen and Helpers of
America, AFL-CIO, Petitioner . Case No. 1-RC-4666. January
29,1957
DECISION AND ORDER
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a hearing was held before Joseph C. Barry, 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 organization involved claims 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)
and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act, for the following reasons:
The Petitioner seeks to represent the warehouse employees, includ-
ing clerical employees, employed at the Employer's Springfield, Mas-
sachusetts, warehouse. The Petitioner is willing to include certain
service repairmen who perform part of their work in the warehouse,
if the Board determines that they are warehouse employees. The
Employer contends that the unit is too limited in scope, and that the
petition should be dismissed.
The Employer operates a retail store, a service station, and a ware-
house in Springfield, Massachusetts. The service station is located
approximately 100 yards from the retail store and the warehouse is
located approximately 11/2 miles from the store. The warehouse is
operated under the direction of the warehouse supervisor who reports
directly to the general manager, who is in overall charge of all opera-
tions. Approximately 90 percent of the warehousing services are
performed for the Springfield store. The remaining 10 percent of
its services are performed for other Sears' stores in the area. The
services performed for these other stores consist largely of the receipt
and transshipment of bulk products which are shipped to the Spring-
field store in order to take advantage of carload shipping rates. These
other stores also draw on the goods stocked in the warehouse in emer-
gency situations. About 5 to 10 percent of the furniture refinishing
work performed in the warehouse is performed on furniture sold by
stores other than the Springfield store.
In addition to the facilities at the warehouse, the Employer main-
tains shipping, receiving, and storage facilities at the Springfield
117 NLRB No. 30.
134 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
retail store. The Employer receives and ships merchandise at both
locations and employs employees in shipping and receiving classifi-
cations at both locations. Though such employees employed at the
store are under the immediate supervision of a supervisor other than
the warehouse supervisor, they perform basically the same functions,
as performed by the warehouse employees. Other employees employed
at the warehouse, include the furniture refinishers, who remove stains
and marks from furniture before it is delivered to customers, a deluxor
who performs similar functions on metal or porcelainized appliances,
maintenance men, 10 clerical workers, who perform the necessary cleri-
cal work connected with the receipt and shipment of goods, and
approximately 20 service repairmen who repair major electrical ap-
pliances. All but the service repairmen work under the supervision
of the warehouse supervisor.
Apart from considerations relating to the proper unit placement
of the service repairmen, furniture refinishers, and the deluxor, we
find that the Employer's warehousing employees do not constitute an
appropriate unit. In the recent A. Harris do Co. decision,' the Board
reexamined its policies with respect to the establishment of separate
units of warehousing employees in the retail department store in-
dustry. In accordance with that decision, the Board will find ap-
propriate a separate unit of warehousing employees where: (a) The
Employer's warehousing operation is geographically separated from
its retail store operations; .(2) there is separate supervision of em-
ployees engaged in warehousing functions; and (3) there is no sub-
stantial integration among the warehousing employees and those
engaged in other store functions. Only where all three of these con-
ditions are met will such units be approved.
Turning now to the facts of the instant case, we are satisfied that
the Employer's warehousing operations do not meet the conditions
for the establishment of a separate unit of warehousing employees.
Thus, the Employer's warehousing activities are only in part carried
on at a location geographically separated from the store; a substantial
part of the warehouse activities being carried on at the store. More-
over, not all of the Employer's warehousing employees work under
supervision separate from that of other employees. We find that
these circumstances preclude the establishment of a separate unit of
warehousing employees at the Employer's West Springfield, Massa-
chusetts, operations.' Accordingly, we shall dismiss the petition.
[The Board dismissed the petition.]
1 116 NLRB 1628
21n view of the foregoing , we find it unnecessary to pass on the Employer's further con-
tention, that its warehousing activities are so integrated with its other operations at its
West Springfield store as to make the requested warehouse unit inappropriate on that
ground also.