The Red Cross Drug Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jan 9, 1969

174 N.L.R.B. 85 (N.L.R.B. 1969)

THE RED CROSS DRUG COMPANY
The Red Cross Drug Company and Retail Clerks
Local No. 1403, Retail Clerks International
Association, AFL-CIO. Case 30-CA-689
January 9, 1969
DECISION AND ORDER
BY CHAIRMAN MCCULLOCH AND MEMBERS
FANNING AND ZAGORIA
On August 16, 1968, Trial Examiner Robert
Cohn issued his Decision in the above-entitled
proceeding, finding that the Respondent had
engaged in and was engaging in certain unfair labor
practices and recommending that it cease and desist
therefrom and take certain affirmative action, as set
forth in the attached Trial Examiner's Decision.
Thereafter, the General Counsel and the Respondent
filed exceptions to the Trial Examiner's Decision,
and the General Counsel also filed a supporting
brief. The Union filed cross-exceptions and a
supporting 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
powers in connection with this case to a
three-member panel.
The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial
Examiner made at the hearing and finds that no
prejudicial error was committed. The rulings are
hereby affirmed. The Board has considered the Trial
Examiner's Decision, the exceptions,
cross-exceptions, and briefs, and the entire record in
this case, and hereby adopts the findings,
conclusions, and recommendations of the Trial
Examiner, except to the extent herein modified.'
ORDER
Pursuant to Section 10(c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor
Relations Board hereby adopts as its Order the
Recommended Order of the Trial Examiner, as
herein modified, and orders that the Respondent,
The Red Cross Drug Company, Racine, Wisconsin,
its officers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall
take the action set forth in the Trial Examiner's
Recommended Order, as so modified:
1. Delete from paragraph 2(a) of the
Recommended Order the words "establish a
preferential hiring list, and."
2. Delete paragraph 2(b) of the Recommended
Order and substitute therefor the following:
'We do not adopt the Trial Examiner ' s recommendation that the
Respondent be required to place the names of the laid-off employees of the
W ashmgton Avenue store upon a preferential hiring list , and offer them
employment at the other stores when positions for which they are qualified
become available . In our view , to require a preferential list would
improperly impose minimum terms on the bargaining the Respondent is
required to engage in with the Union
85
"(b) Make whole the employees of Respondent's
Washington Avenue store for any loss of pay they
may have suffered by reason of the Respondent's
unfair labor practices, in the manner set forth in the
section of this Decision entitled `The Remedy'."
3. Delete the language of paragraph 2(c) of the
Recommended Order "whose names appear on the
aforesaid preferential hiring list" and substitute
"referred to in paragraph 2(b)."
4. Delete from the Appendix the paragraphs
reading "WE WILL establish a preferential hiring
list . . ." and "WE WILL notify . ..."
TRIAL EXAMINER ' S DECISION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
ROBERT COHN, Trial Examiner: This proceeding, heard
before me in Racine, Wisconsin, on May 28, 1968,
involves, essentiE.lly, the issue of whether The Red Cross
Drug Company' (herein the Company or Respondent)
violated Section 8(a)(5) and (1) of the National Labor
Relations Act, as amended (herein called the Act),
through its failure to notify and negotiate with Retail
Clerks Local No. 1403, Retail Clerks International
Association, AFL-CIO (herein the Union), concerning the
decision to close, and eventual closing, of the
Respondent's Washington Avenue store, the Union having
been previously designated as the collective-bargaining
representative of the employees at said store.' The
Respondent, by its duly filed answer, generally admitted
the jurisdictional allegations of the complaint, but denied
the commission of any unfair labor practices.
At the hearing, all parties were represented and were
afforded full opportunity to participate, to examine and
cross-examine witnesses, to argue orally and/or to file
briefs with the Trial Examiner. Oral argument was
waived. Posthearing briefs have been filed with the Trial
Examiner by counsel for the General Counsel and by
counsel for the Respondent, which have been duly
considered.
Upon the entire record in this case, I make the
following:
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
1. BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
The Respondent, a Wisconsin corporation, is engaged
in the operation of a chain of retail drug stores in Racine,
Wisconsin, including a store which, prior to November 2,
1967, was located at 5415 Washington Avenue in Racine.
During the annual period preceding the filing of the
charge herein, which is a representative period,
Respondent made sales, through all the retail stores, in
excess of $500,000. In the same period, Respondent
purchased and received goods and materials from points
outside the State of Wisconsin, valued in excess of
$50,000.
'The name of the Company appears as corrected at the hearing The
former name was Red Cross Rexall Drug Stores, Inc. See 169 NLRB No.
89.
The charge was filed by the Union on November 13, 1967, and was
served on Respondent the same date. The complaint and notice of hearing
was issued on April 9, 1968.
174 NLRB No. 17
86 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Upon the foregoing facts, which Respondent ' s answer
admits, I find that at all times material Respondent has
been and is an employer engaged in commerce within the
meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.'
such closure upon - bargaining unit employees . The sole
issue herein is, whether such conduct violated Section
8(a)(5) and (1) of the Act, and, if so, what the remedy
should be.
II. THE LABOR ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
Retail Clerks Local No. 1403, Retail Clerks
International Association , AFL-CIO, is a labor
organization within the meaning of Section 2 (5) of the
Act.
111. THE ALLEGED UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
A. Chronology of Events
Following complaint proceedings against the
Respondent pursuant to Section 10 of the Act (Case
30-CA-539), a Trial Examiner of the National Labor
Relations Board (hereinafter referred to as the Board)
issued his Decision on October'19, 1967. In such decision,
the Trial Examiner found and concluded, inter alia, that
the Union had been at all times since on and after
January 20, 1967, the exclusive representative of all
employees of the Respondent in an appropriate unit for
purposes of collective bargaining. The unit found
appropriate is described as follows:
All full-time and regular part-time employees at
Respondent's store located at 5415 Washington Avenue,
Racine, Wisconsin, excluding one store manager,
professional employees, guards and supervisors as
defined in the Act
The Trial Examiner further found that at all times since
on or about January 24, 1967, the Respondent refused to
recognize and bargain collectively with the Union as the
exclusive representative of its employees in the aforesaid
appropriate unit, thereby'violating Section 8(a)(5) and (1)
of the Act.
On October 24, 1967, the Union wrote to the
Respondent's attorney requesting a meeting for the
purpose of negotiating a collective-bargaining agreement.
Two days later, on October 26, the attorney, by letter,
advised the Union that the case would be appealed and
therefore the Respondent "would not negotiate until there
is a final determination .114
The Board, on February 2, 1968, issued its Decision
and Order (169 NLRB No. 89) in which it overruled the
exceptions of the Respondent and adopted the findings,
conclusions, and recommendations of the Trial Examiner
in all material respects. The record in the instant
proceeding reflects that the Respondent intends to request
a review of the Board's Decision and Order in the Court
of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.
B. Statement of the Issues
Following the rendition; of the Trial Examiner's
Decision and the' exchange of correspondence between the
Union and the Respondent's attorney hereinabove
described, the Respondent closed its Washington Avenue
store and terminated the employees at that location
without prior notice to or bargaining with the Union
either with respect to the decision to close or the effects of
'The Board asserted jurisdiction over the Respondent in Case
30-CA-539, reported at 169 NLRB No 89.
'The letter (G. C. Exh. 3) is actually dated October 26 , 1968. This is an
obvious inadvertence.
C. Statement of Facts'
The Respondent does not contest the allegation that it
closed its Washington Avenue store on or about
November 2, 1967, without prior notice to or bargaining
with the Union; the Respondent submits that such closure
was impelled by economic conditions over which it had no
control, i.e., that the store had been a losing proposition
since its establishment on November 1, 1965, and "there
was nothing the Union could have done, unless it was
willing to underwrite the losses at the store until and if it
was ever able to break even, or make a profit.
Management had never heard of such generosity by a
union." (Resp. answer, p. 3).
Respondent asserts that the store was originally built as
part of a plan for a large shopping center to be erected by
the landowner on the corner of Washington Avenue and
Highway No. 31 in Racine. However, due to
circumstances beyond the control of the Respondent, the
shopping center was never completed and following the
first year of its operation, the Washington store showed a
loss of some $30,000. Commencing about the first of the
year, 1967, the Respondent started negotiations with the
landowner seeking cancellation of its 15-year lease
agreement. Such negotiations continued throughout the
year until "in November of 1967 when an agreement was
made wherein the Company paid [the landowner] a
penalty to break the lease of $23,611.92."6 The operating
loss of the Washington Avenue store during its second
year of operation was set at $24,110.21.
The parties stipulated that neither the Union nor the
employees of the store were notified of its closing prior to
November 2, 1967. It was further stipulated that the
Respondent operates four other retail drug stores in
Racine within a 5-mile radius of the Washington Avenue
store and that there were lunch counters at two of those
stores. At the time of the closing of the Washington
Avenue store, there were I1 bargaining unit employees, of
which approximately 7 were employed at the lunch
counter at the Washington Avenue store.'
With respect to employment of the terminated
Washington Avenue store employees, the record herein
reflects only the statement of the Respondent that "there
has been no prevalent rehiring of those who worked at the
Washington Avenue store. One of the part-time employees
who helped out during the holidays there is helping at one
of the other stores."8
Analysis and Concluding Findings
It is by now well established that when a company
subject to the Act contemplates the closing of part of its
operations, which will have a significant impact upon the
tenure of employment of bargaining unit employees, it is
bound to notify and bargain with the designated agent of
such employees both respecting the decision and the effect
'There was no oral testimony at the hearing , all findings of fact are
based upon either unopposed allegations in the pleadings , stipulations of
the parties , or unopposed statements of position by counsel at the hearing.
'See Exh "A" attached to Resp . answer, p. 3
'Some of the lunch counter employees were part-time employees who
worked after school.
'See Exh . "A" to Resp . answer, p 1.
THE RED CROSS DRUG COMPANY
of such closing upon such employees.' As previously
noted, the Trial Examiner in the prior case found that the
Union had been designated as the exclusive representative
for all employees in the appropriate unit since January 20,
1967. Thus the Respondent had practically a whole year
in which to notify the Union of its contemplated action
and to bargain with respect to both it and the effect of
such contemplated closure on the future employment
opportunities of the employees in the unit. The Company's
contention that "there was nothing the Union could have
done" is clearly no defense. Both the Board and the courts
have recognized that, in comparable situations, unions
have been known to make alternative suggestions
concerning the need for elimination of unit jobs or at least
propose "steps that might be taken to minimize the effect
upon employees of the proposed action."10
On the basis of the foregoing facts, in the light of the
authorities above cited, I find and conclude that by failing
to notify and bargain with the Union concerning the
decision to close the Washington Avenue store and the
effect of such closure on the bargaining unit employees,
the Respondent violated Section 8(a)(5) and (I) of the
Act.
Upon the basis of the above findings of fact, and upon
the entire record in this case, I make the following
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. The Red Cross Drug Company is an employer
engaged in commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6)
of the Act.
2. Retail Clerks Local No. 1403, Retail Clerks
International Association, AFL-CIO, is a labor
organization within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the
Act.
3. All full-time and regular part-time employees at the
5415 Washington Avenue, Racine, Wisconsin, store of the
Respondent, excluding one store manager , professional
employees, guards and supervisors as defined in the Act,
constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective
bargaining within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act
4. Retail Clerks Local No. 1403, Retail Clerks
International Association, AFL-CIO, was, on January 20,
1967, and at all times since has been, the exclusive
representative of the employees in the above-described
unit for the purposes of collective bargaining within the
meaning of Section 9(a) of the Act.
5. By unilaterally closing its Washington Avenue,
Racine, Wisconsin, store, without prior notice to,
consultation with, or bargaining with the above-named
labor organization, thereby failing and refusing to bargain
'Thompson Transport Company, Inc., 165 NLRB No 96, McGregor
Printing Corporation , 163 NLRB No. 113, and cases cited at fn. 9 thereof
The instant case does not, of course , involve a situation where an employer
closes his entire business . Accordingly, I need not, and do not, determine
the impact of the Supreme Court's decision in N.L R .B v. Darlington
Mfg Co.. 380,U.S 263, which dealt with that issue See , eg., Ozark
Trailers, Inc., 161 NLRB 561, 564-565
"Winn-Dixie Stores , Inc, 147 NLRB 788, 789, enfd. as modified 361
F 2d 512 (CA 5). Contrary to the Respondent's assertions , unions have
been known to assist managements financially in order to maintain
working opportunities for their members. For example, the Amalgamated
Clothing Workers has for many years maintained its own bank in New
York and Chicago , which has extended credit to employers . It, along with
the International Ladies ' Garment Workers ' Union, also offers employers
engineering assistance The Millinery Workers (formerly the AFL Hatters)
more than once. saved jobs for its members by providing financial aid to an
employer . See, e .g., Seidman "The Union Agenda for Security," in
Monthly Labor Review , June, 1963, p 640
87
collectively with the above-named labor organization as
the exclusive representative of the employees in the
above-described unit, the Respondent has engaged in and
is engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of
Section 8(a)(5) of the Act.
6. By the above-described conduct, which thereby
interfered with, restrained, and coerced its employees in
the exercise of rights guaranteed them in Section 7 of the
Act, the Respondent has engaged in and is engaging in
unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section
8(a)(1) of the Act.
7. The above-described unfair labor practices tend to
lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing
commerce and the free flow of commerce, and constitute
unfair labor practices affecting commerce within the
meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
THE REMEDY
In his brief, counsel for the General Counsel, while not
seeking a remedy which would "include the reopening of
the Washington Avenue store," asserts that an
appropriate remedy must "redress the unfair labor
practices and recreate, to the extent possible, the situation
that would have prevailed but for Respondent's unlawful
conduct." According to the General Counsel, this should
include provisions: (1) that the Respondent be required to
bargain not only about the effect of the closing upon unit
employees, but also about the resumption of the
operation; (2) that the Respondent be required to offer all
terminated employees immediate and full reinstatement to
substantially equivalent positions at remaining stores in
the Racine area, discharging, if necessary, employees hired
at other stores subsequent to the closing of the
Washington Avenue store; (3) that a preferential hiring
list should be established for those remaining employees
for whom no work is immediately available; and (4) that
the employees should be made whole by paying them
backpay from the date of the closing until one of four
conditions are met."
The Board has recognized that "In fashioning remedies
the Board must bear in mind that the remedy should `be
adapted to the situation that calls for redress,' with a view
toward `restoring the situation as nearly as possible, to
that which would have obtained but for [the unfair labor
practice]' " (citing Phelps Dodge Corp. v. N.L.R.B., 313
U.S. 177, 194).12
In fashioning a remedy to the facts of the instant case,
I have kept in mind that the General Counsel did not
allege an 8(a)(3) violation in his complaint, and does not
contend that the closing of the Washington Avenue store
was for other than economic motives. On the other hand,
I cannot overlook facts which appear in the record which,
in my view, taint the Respondent's assertion of good faith,
and which I have considered in making a determination as
to what constitutes an appropriate remedy in this case.
These are: (1) The finding in the previous decision by the
Trial Examiner (affirmed by the Board) that "the
Respondent completely rejected the collective-bargaining
principle and that it merely sought an election in order to
gain time within which to undermine the Union and
dissipate its majority" ;13 (2) the announcement by the
"G C. brief, pp. 1 & 2 The four conditions set forth are the same as
those established by the Board in Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc, 147 NLRB 788,
792, see also Ozark Trailers , Inc. 161 NLRB 561, 571, Royal Plating and
Polishing Co., Inc., 160 NLRB 990, 998.
1RRoyal Plating and Polishing Co., Inc, 160 NLRB 990, 997
"See sec. III, E, of Trial Examiner's Decision.
88 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Respondent that it will seek review of the Board's
bargaining order in the prior case on the ground that the
single store unit is inappropriate . This in the face of the
finding in the previous case that the Respondent ' s answer
admitted that the single store unit was-an appropriate one
for bargaining ; and (3 ) although, as hereinabove pointed
out, the Respondent asserts that negotiations with the
landowner concerning the cancellation of the lease
commenced around the first of the year, 1967, there was
no reference by Respondent of its intentions in any
correspondence with the Union in January 1967 (see
previous Trial Examiner ' s Decision, section III, A);
indeed , according to the Trial Examiner' s Decision, there
was no reference at all made by the Respondent to this
contemplated event during the Union ' s campaign in
January, although it would certainly seem reasonable and
likely that Respondent ' s officers would have indicated to
either the Union or some of Respondent 's employees that
such an important event as the probable closing of the
store was in the offing. This, in the context of the
Respondent ' s other unfair labor practices , renders the
announcement of the closing on November , 2, 1967 -
about 2 weeks following the Trial Examiner ' s Decision -
as slightly more than simply a fortuitous coincidence.
Accordingly , I agree with the General Counsel that a
backpay order is an appropriate means of remedying
8(a)(5) violations of the type involved herein, "even where
such violations are unaccompanied by a discriminatory
shutdown of operations.""
I agree with the contention of counsel for the General
Counsel that the circumstances of this case do not render
practicable a remedy which would order the reopening of
the Washington Avenue store . The condition precedent to
the establishment of the store , i.e., the planned shopping
center, has apparently been abandoned , the lease has been
canceled, and there is no indication that another store in
the area, absent a shopping center, would be economically
feasible. However, I shall , in the light of the authorities
above cited , recommend that the Respondent be ordered
to bargain collectively with the Union concerning the
decision to close such operation as well as with respect to
the effects of such closure on the employees in the
above-described unit.
In the absence of an allegation and finding that the
closing of the Washington Avenue store was
discriminatorily motivated , I find no authority for the
position of the General Counsel that the Respondent be
required to offer all terminated Washington Avenue
employees reinstatement to positions at the Respondent's
remaining stores in the Racine area, "discharging, if
necessary , employees hired at other stores subsequent to
the closing of the Washington Avenue Store ." (G. C.
brief, p. 2 ) However, I do find appropriate to the
circumstances that Respondent be required to place the
names of the laid-off employees of the Washington
Avenue store upon a preferential hiring list following the
system of seniority , if any, customarily applied to the
conduct of Respondent's business , and offer them
employment at the other stores when positions for which
they are qualified become available.15
With respect to backpay, I shall recommend that the
Respondent make the discharged employees whole for any
loss of pay they may have suffered as a result of the
"Ozark Trailers , Inc., 161 NLRB 561, 571; Royal Plating and Polishing
Co., Inc., 148 NLRB 545, 548
"Compare McG regor Printing Corporation , 163 NLRB No 113.
Respondent's unfair labor practices. The liability for such
backpay shall cease upon the occurrence of any of the
following conditions: (1) Reaching mutual agreement with
the Union relating to the subjects which Respondent is
herein required to bargain about; (2) bargaining to a bona
fide impasse, (3) the failure of the Union to commence
negotiations within 5 days of the receipt of the
Respondent's notice of its willingness to bargain with the
Union; or (4) the failure of the Union to bargain
thereafter in good faith. Of course, Respondent's backpay
obligation to any individual employee would cease when
that employee is reinstated at one of the remaining stores.' 6
Backpay, which shall run from November 2, 1967, until
the fulfillment of one of the foregoing conditions, shall be
based upon the earnings which the terminated employees
would normally have received during the applicable period
less any net interim earnings, and shall be computed on a
quarterly basis in the manner set forth in F W
Woolworth Company, 90 NLRB 289; N.L.R.B. v.
Seven-Up Bottling Company of Miami, Inc., 344 U.S.
344; with interest thereon, Isis Plumbing & Heating Co.,
138 NLRB 716.
RECOMMENDED ORDER
Pursuant to Section 10(c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, as amended, it is hereby ordered that
Respondent, The Red Cross Drug Company, its officers,
agents, successors, and assigns, shall
1. Cease and desist from:
(a) Refusing to bargain collectively with Retail Clerks
Local No. 1403, Retail Clerks International Association,
AFL-CIO, as the exclusive representative of its
Washington Avenue store employees in the aforesaid
appropriate unit, concerning the decision to close the
Washington Avenue store and the effects of such closure
on such employees.
(b) Unilaterally closing any of its stores without prior
notice to and bargaining with the collective-bargaining
representative, if any, of employees of such store
concerning the decision to close and its effects upon such
employees.
(c) In any like or related manner interfering with,
restraining, or coercing its employees in the exercise of the
right to self-organization, to form labor organizations, to
join or assist the above-named Union or any other labor
organization, to bargain collectively through
representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in
concerted activities for the purposes of collective
bargaining or other mutual aid or protection as
guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act, or to refrain from any
and all such activities, except to the extent that such right
may be affected by an agreement requiring union
membership as a condition of employment, as authorized
in Section 8(a)(3) of the National Labor Relations Act, as
amended, by the Labor-Management Reporting and
Disclosure Act of 1959.
2. Take the following affirmative action which, it is
found, will effectuate the policies of the Act.
(a) Offer to, and upon request, bargain collectively with
the Union concerning the closing and possible resumption
of its Washington Avenue store, and, failing to reach
agreement in this matter, establish a preferential hiring
list, and bargain concerning the effects upon the
"See Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc, 147 NLRB 788, 792; Royal Plating and
Polishing Co., Inc.. 160 NLRB 990, 998; cf. Ozark Trailers, Inc., 161
NLRB 561, 571.
THE RED CROSS DRUG COMPANY
employees , in the manner set forth in the section of this
Decision entitled "The Remedy." If an understanding
should be reached , embody such understanding in a signed
agreement.
(b) Make whole those individuals whose names appear
on the preferential hiring list, required to be created under
paragraph 2(a) above, for any loss of pay they may have
suffered by reason of the Respondent ' s unfair labor
practices , in the manner set forth in the section of this
Decision entitled "The Remedy."
(c) Notify, if and when the operations of the
Washington Avenue store are resumed , all the individuals
whose names appear on the aforesaid preferential hiring
list if serving in the Armed Forces of the United States of
their right to full reinstatement upon application in
accordance with the Selective Service Act and the
Universal Military Training and Service Act, as amended,
after discharge from the Armed Forces.
(d) Preserve and, upon request , make available to the
Board or its agents , for examination and copying, all
payroll records, social security payment records,
timecards , personnel records and reports, and all other
records necessary or useful to determine the amount of
backpay due and the rights of reinstatement under the
terms of this Order.
(e) Post at its stores in Racine, Wisconsin , copies of the
attached notice marked "Appendix ." i' Copies of said
notice, on forms provided by the Regional Director for
Region 30, after being duly signed by Respondent's
representative , shall be posted by the Respondent
immediately upon receipt thereof, and be maintained by
the Respondent for 60 consecutive days thereafter, in
conspicuous places, including all places where notices to
employees are customarily posted . Reasonable steps shall
be taken by the Respondent to insure that said notices are
not altered , defaced , or covered by any other material.
(f) Promptly upon receipt from the Regional Director
of copies of the said notice, mail a copy thereof, signed as
set forth above, to Retail Clerks Local No. 1403, Retail
Clerks International Association , AFL-CIO, and to each
of the employees entitled to backpay hereunder, at his last
known address, by certified mail.
(g) Notify the Regional Director for Region 30, in
writing, within 20 days from the receipt of this Decision,' g
what steps the Respondent has taken to comply herewith.
"In the event that this Recommended Order is adopted by the Board,
the words "a Decision and Order" shall be substituted for the words "the
Recommended Order of a Trial Examiner" in the notice In the further
event that the Board 's Order is enforced by a decree of a United States
Court of Appeals, the words "a Decree of the United States Court of
Appeals Enforcing an Order" shall be substituted for the words "a
Decision and Order."
"In the event that this Recommended Order is adopted by the Board,
this provision shall be modified to read. "Notify the Regional Director for
Region 30, in writing, within 10 days from the date of this Order, what
steps Respondent has taken to comply herewith."
APPENDIX
NOTICE TO ALL EMPLOYEES
Pursuant to the Recommended Order of a Trial
Examiner of the National Labor Relations Board, and in
order to effectuate the policies of the National Labor
Relations Act, as amended, we hereby notify our
employees that:
WE WILL NOT refuse to bargam collectively in good
faith with Retail Clerks Union Local No. 1403, Retail
89
Clerks International Association, AFL-CIO, as the
exclusive bargaining representative of all employees in
the appropriate unit by failing or refusing to bargain
with the above-named labor organization with regard to
the decision to close the Washington Avenue store, and
the effects of such closure upon the employees in the
appropriate unit. The appropriate unit is:
All full-time and regular part-time employees at
the 5415 Washington Avenue, Racine, Wisconsin,
store, excluding one store manager, professional
employees, guards and supervisors as defined in the
Act.
WE WILL NOT unilaterally close any of our stores
without prior notice to or bargaining with the
collective-bargaining representative, if any, concerning
such decision and the effects thereof.
WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner interfere
with, restrain, or coerce employees in the appropriate
unit in the exercise of their right to self-organization, to
form, join, or assist unions, to bargain collectively
through representatives of their own choosing, and to
engage in concerted activities for the purposes of
collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection,
or to refrain from such activities, except to the extent
that such right may be affected by an agreement
requiring union membership as a condition of
employment, as authorized in Section 8(a)(3) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, by the
Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act if
1959.
WE WILL establish a preferential hiring list
containing the names of all employees in the
appropriate unit laid off as a result of the closing of the
Washington Avenue store on November 2, 1967,
following the system of seniority, if any, customarily
applied to the conduct of our business.
WE WILL notify the aforementioned union , and each
listed employee, of the establishment of such list and
the contents thereof, and WE WILL offer the individuals
whose names appear on the aforesaid list jobs for which
they are qualified, as such jobs become open or may
develop at either of our other stores in the Racine,
Wisconsin, area, or upon reopening of the Washington
Avenue store (whichever first occurs), before any other
person is employed.
WE WILL make whole the individuals we laid off on
November 2, 1967, as a result of the closing of the
Washington Avenue store, for any loss of pay suffered
by them as the result of failure and refusal to bargain
with the above-named Union concerning the closing of
the Washington Avenue store, with 6 percent interest
Dated By
THE RED CROSS DRUG
COMPANY
(Employer)
(Representative) (Title)
Note: We will notify, if and when we resume operations
of the Washington Avenue store, all the individuals whose
names appear on the aforesaid preferential hiring list if
serving in the Armed Forces of the United States of their
right to full reinstatement upon application in accordance
with the Selective Service Act and the Universal Military
Training and Service Act, as amended, after discharge
from the Armed Forces.
This notice must remain posted for 60 consecutive days
from the date of posting, and must not be altered,
90 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
defaced, or covered by any other material. directly with the Board's Regional Office, Second Floor,
If employees have any question concerning this notice Commerce Building, 744 North Fourth Street,
or compliance with its provisions, they may communicate - Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53203, Telephone 272-3861