Super X Drugs of Illinois, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Dec 12, 1977

233 N.L.R.B. 1114 (N.L.R.B. 1977)

1114 DECISIONS O F NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Super X Drugs of Illinois, Inc. and Retail Clerks
Union, Local 1550, chartered by Retail Clerks
International Association, AFGCIO, Petitioner.
Case 13-RC-14393
December 12. 1977
DECISION ON REVIEW AND ORDER
BY CHAIRMAN FANNING AND MEMBERS
JENKINS AND PENELLO
On June 22, 1977, the Regional Director for
Region 13 issued a Decision and Direction of
Election in the above-entitled proceeding in which he
found appropriate a unit of employees employed by
the Employer at its store located at 7601 South
Cicero Avenue. "Ford City." Chicago, Illinois.
Thereafter. in accordance with Section 102.67 of the
National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regula-
tions, Series 8, as amended. the Employer filed a
timely request for review of the Regional Director's
decision, contending that a unit limited to the Ford
City store is inappropriate.
On July 21, 1977, the National Labor Relations
Board granted the request for review and stayed the
e!ection pending decision on review. The Employer
requested that its brief to the Regional Director be
considered as a brief on review and the Petitioner
filed a brief.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the
National Labor Relations Board has delegated its
authority in this proceeding to a three-member panel.
The Board has reviewed the entire record in this
case with respect to the issues under review,
including the briefs of the parties, and makes the
following findings: the Employer. an Ohio corpora-
tion, operates a nationwide chain of retail drug stores
through administrative subdivisions known as dis-
tricts; these districts are headed by a district
manager, to whom individual store managers report.
The Northern Illinois District contains 28 stores
and is supervised by District Manager Mason and his
assistant. Five of these stores are located in Cook
County, Illinois: the Ford City store in Chicago,
three other stores in Chicago which are 2, 7, and 10
miles from Ford City, and a fifth store in Skokie, 25
miles away.
The Petitioner seeks only the Ford City store,
employing 19 employees, while the Employer asserts
that the smallest appropriate unit should consist of
all 4 Chicago stores, employing 53 employees, or
alternatively all 5 Cook County stores, employing 65.
-
' ZCL L V - G I I fir-,", In,., ;3& ; ; L Y ;AL , , I ~ ~ , , . , u u ~ Urug Cornpan):
Incorporared, 169 NLRB 877 (1968).
Although employees have been h~red without bemg personally
There is no history of bargaining for any of these
stores? although there has been collective bargaining
in a single-store unit for another store in the district.
In finding that the presumptive appropriateness of
a single-store unit had not been rebutted here,l the
Regional Director relied primarily on his conclusion
that the individual store manager has substantial
autonomy in the operation of the stores, which in his
opinion was evidenced by the infrequency of District
Manager Mason's visits to the store. We disagree.
The Employer's operations are highly centralized
and all of the stores are similarly laid out, displaying
and selling the same merchandise at the same price.
The district manager determines the mode of
advertising and the prices.
Operating hours for all stores in the district are
established by the district manager. He also deter-
mines the number of employees needed per position,
the particular hours they are to work, and the total
hours to be worked by each employee in each
position. The store managers determine which
employee will work the hours as budgeted and they
also authorize employees to work the 8-16 hours of
overtime allotted by the district manager.
The Employer's personnel records are maintained
at the district's central ofice, while employment
applications are kept at the individual stores. When a
vacancy occurs, the district manager places an
advertisement in the paper, giving the individual
store address. In the event of a skilled position
vacancy, the district manager's phone number is alsc
given, as he will conduct the initial interview. The
district manager and store managers decide which of
several applicants to interview and both may conduct
reference checks, but only the district manager sees
the results of polygraph tests, which all applicants
take. The store manager alone may interview
applicants for unskilled positions, but the final
decision as to whether to hire rests with the district
manager.2 If there are more qualified applicants than
there are openings at a particular store, some may be
hired at other district stores. An applicant's residence
is not a factor in the hiring process. The employees at
the five Cook County stores periodically attend
training sessions and the store managers attend joint
meetings on occasion.
Store managers may reprimand or terminate an
employee only after having discussed the issue with
the district manager and receiving his authorization
to do so. Similarly, the district manager must
approve all leaves of absence, promotions, and pay
raises. Raises are based on the merit review system,
which is carried out by the district manager, who
~n~erviewed by the &strict manager, nonetheless he makes the final
decisions on all h~rer.
233 NLRB No. 163
SUPER X DRUGS OF ILLINOIS 1115
observes the employees during vislts and discusse:
their work with the store manager
Documentary evidence shows that. during a 14-
month period. there were 21 instances of temporary
interchange among the 5 Cook County stores and 3
permanent transfers. The district manager further
testified that these figures represented only about
one-half of the totai empioyee interchange dunng the
period. There is aiso evidence that on occasion
merchandise is transferred among the stores.
District Manager Mason visits every store in the
district on afi average of once every 2 to 3 weeks,
devoting 70 percent of his time to these visits, and
spending from 4 hours to an entire day at each store.
He prepares a weekly itinerary showmg which stores
he to visit. and if he must deviate from his
schedule he notifies the store manager at the store he
was tc visit and gives him the phone number at
which he can be reached. He also gives his secretaq
this information and other store managers and
empioyees can call him while he 1s on a visit. I t
appears that Mason's assistant aiso visits stores.
The visits are conducted to ascertain whether the
srore manager is running the store in accordance
with both the district manager's directions and with
established business practices. The district manager
checks on merchandising: notes the general appear-
ance of the store and its advertising and price
policies; and discusses problems with store inanagers
and with employees. including their grievances.
In view of the foregoing, w% find that the autonomy
of the store manager with respect to personnel
matrers is severely circumscribed by the authority
retained by the district manager. While the latter's
visits to the store may be characterized as infrequent,
it is clear that the modus operandi of store operations
provides for ready telephonic communication be-
tween store managers and the district manager with
respect to any problems arislng at the store level. In
these circumstances. and in vlew of the geographic
proximiry of the Employer's Cook County stores.
and the-interchange between these stores, we find
that the presumptive appropriateness of s single-
store unit has been rebutted. In reaching this
conclusion. we are not unmindful of the fact that one
store in the district has bargained as a separate unit
and that the Board has found, in two earlier
.' See Super X Drugs ojlliinors, Inc., Case 13-RC-12751. review denied
Aupu.~' 9. 1972. and Case !3-RC-13140. revlew den!ea October I?, 1973.
proceedings: that the instant store constituted a
separate appropriate unit.3 However, with respect to
the iatter. it is noted that since that decision the
district manager has exercised more authority over
the individual stores' personnel matters and that
employees are now hired for the various stores by the
district manager without regard to their residence or
proxirfity to any given store.
As we have found the requested unit to be
inappropriate, and as the Petitioner has made no
alternative unit request, we shall dismiss the peti-
tion."
ORDER
Ir is hereby ordered that the petition be, and it
hereby is. dismissed.
CHAIRMAN FANNING, dissenting:
As I agree with the Regional Director that the
presumptive appropriateness of a single-store unit
has not been rebutted herein, I dissent.
The record indicates that the individual store
manager enjoys substantial autonomy in the store's
operation. Not only does he determine, within a
certain framework. what hours each employee will
work as well as overtime, but he has hired salesclerks,
stockers, and part-time employees without their
having been personally interviewed by the district
manager. Indeed. the store manager's autonomy and
considerable discretion is necessitated by the infre-
quency of the visits to each store by the district
manager, vir, once every 2 to 3 weeks.
My colleagues, in citing the recent minor changes
in the Employer's personnel policy, deviate from two
earlier proceedings in which the Board found that the
employees in the same store involved herein consti-
tuted an appropriate unit. As these employees
contmue to be employed under the day-to-day
immediate supervision of the local store manager. I
would find that the Employer's centralized opera-
tion. featuring its itinerant district manager, does not
overcome the presumptive appropriateness of the
single-store unit.
Accordingly, in agreement with the Regional
Director: I would direct an election in the unit
sought.
' Tlus actlon shall not be construed as passing on the Employer's
affirmatwe unit contention.