Walgreen Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 30, 1972

198 N.L.R.B. 1138 (N.L.R.B. 1972)

1138 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Walgreen Co. and Retail Clerks Union Local No.
1625, chartered by Retail Clerks International
Association , AFL-CIO,' Petitioner. Case
12-RC-4036
August 30, 1972
DECISION ON REVIEW
BY MEMBERS FANNING, KENNEDY, AND
PENELLO
On March 28, 1972, the Regional Director for
Region 12 issued a Decision and Direction of
Election in the above-entitled proceeding, the perti-
nent part of which is attached hereto as an appendix,
in which he found appropriate the Petitioner's
requested unit of certain employees employed by the
Employer at its store and grill located at 12295
Biscayne Boulevard, North Miami, Florida. There-
after, the Employer filed a timely request for review
of the Regional Director's decision, together with a
supporting brief, alleging that the Regional Director
made erroneous findings of fact and departed from
established policy.
On April 25, 1972, by telegraphic order, the request
for review was granted and the election stayed
pending decision on review.
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 considered the entire record in this
case with respect to the issues under review, and
hereby affirms the Regional Director's Decision and
Direction of Election, with the following addition.
In support of its contention that a single-store unit
is inappropriate the Employer relies in part on the
Board's recent decision in Gray Drug Stores, Inc., 197
NLRB No. 105. In that case the Board majority
found, on the record therein, that the presumption
that a single-store unit is appropriate had been
rebutted and that an appropriate unit would include
employees in the employer's drugstores in Dade
County (the Miami metropolitan area) and Broward
County (the Fort Lauderdale metropolitan area).2
Although there are obvious parallels between that
and the instant cases, particularly that both cases
, The names of the Employer and the Petitioner appear as amended at
the hearing
2 Members Fanning and Jenkins dissented in Gray Drug based on the
majority's refusal to grant a unit coextensive with the Miami Standard
Metropolitan Statistical Area, which was the petitioner's primary unit
request Individual store units in the Miami Area were alternatively sought
and they viewed the appropriateness of such individual store units as not
having been rebutted
3 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
arise from the same geographic area and both
involve the scope of units in retail drugstore chains
having highly centralized operations, the cases are
readily distinguishable.
The record in the instant proceeding shows that
district management, while maintaining overall
authority, is not involved in the day-to-day store
operations to the extent that central management
was in Gray Drug Stores. In Gray Drug Stores, central
management visited each store two to three times per
week. In the instant case, the distnct store manager
(who has no authority over grill operations) visited
each store in the distnct only about once a month, as
did the district grill manager (who has authority only
over grill operations). Also an assistant to each
district manager visited each store less frequently but
for longer periods.
In addition, the record herein reveals that a
manager at the store level exercises significantly
greater authority over the store's day-to-day opera-
tions than his counterpart in Gray Drug Stores. For
example, unlike the store managers in Gray Drug
Stores, Walgreen's store-level managers regularly hire
most of the unit employees. The only unit employees
regularly hired at the district level are cosmeticians.
On the basis of the record as a whole, particularly
the relatively infrequent visits by central manage-
ment to individual stores, the autonomy of individual
store managers, and the absence of substantial
interchange, we find, as did the Regional Director,
that the presumptive appropriateness of a single-
store unit has not been rebutted and that the single-
store unit here sought is appropriate.
Accordingly, the case is hereby remanded to the
Regional Director for the purpose of conducting an
election pursuant to his Decision and Direction of
Election, except that the eligibility payroll period
shall be that immediately preceeding the date of
issuance of this decision.3
APPENDIX
The Employer is an Illinois corporation with its
home office in Chicago, Illinois . The Employer has
about 560 stores throughout the United States, 23
stores in its Miami district, 11 of which are located in
Miami, Florida, metropolitan area.
The parties agree concerning the jobs to be
addresses which may be used to communicate with them Excelsior
Underwear Inc, 156 NLRB 1236, N L R B v Wyman-Gordon Co, 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 12 within 7 days of
the date of this Decision on Review 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
198 NLRB No. 158
WALGREEN CO.
included and excluded from the bargaining unit, but
Petitioner seeks a single store unit (about 32
employees) while Employer contends that the small-
est appropriate unit must include all metropolitan
Miami stores.
The Chicago office provides systems for merchan-
dising, uniforms, training booklets, and tapes for the
entire chain. All personnel records, paychecks, and
bills are kept and prepared at the Chicago office.
Fringe benefits and seniority run throughout the
,system, with possible difference in holidays. Labor
relations policy and dealing with unions is handled
by the Chicago office.
The regular store sales advertisements are for all
Miami area stores. The store managers meet with the
District Manager on Monday, when the advertising
is discussed and sales prices are set. The District
Manager sets many of them, depending on the prices
of local competitors. The supply of sales merchandise
is discussed at these meetings and merchandise is
regularly transferred between stores. The transfer is
made by the trucks which are delivering merchandise
to the stores. Merchandise is ordered from Employ-
er's Jacksonville warehouse or approved suppliers.
The hourly pay rates scale covers all stores in the
District. A home office employee annually makes a
wage survey of the area, and this employee, the
Regional Manager, and District Manager prepare a
proposed pay scale. This is submitted to Chicago for
approval.
When a new store is opened, the Regional and
District Managers set the store hours and manpower
budget hours, which control the total hours of work
in the store. The store hours are similar throughout
the District,' but are varied in accord with the
shopping hours in the neighborhood.
Most store employees are hired by the store and
grill managers. Applicants fill out the standard
company form, are interviewed by the store or grill
manager, and are hired at the discretion of the
supervisor. As the store has specific manpower hours,
the store supervisors are limited to this extent. All
new employees are finger-printed, and these are
checked by a department in the Chicago office. Most
new employees are hired at the first step in the pay
rate scale, but the store or grill manager may
recommend a higher rate to the District Manager.
The pay scale provides for increases after 6 months, 1
year, and 2 years of employment. While these raises
must be recommended by the store or grill manager,
and approved by the District Manager, they appear
to be somewhat routine. Pay raises after that period
are not routine and are initiated by the store or grill
manager, who prepares a form and makes recom-
mendation. This form is reviewed by the District
Manager, who must approve any raise.
1139
With regard to discharge of employees , the store
and grill managers may recommend such action and
with regard to senior employees , the recommenda-
tion will be discussed with the District Manager. It
appears from the record that the District Manager
may decide to transfer an employee rather than
discharge him if he decides that the problem may be
one of clash of personality , but the employee will
probably be removed from that store.
All new employees receive the Employer 's intro-
ductory booklets . These booklets contain the fringe
benefits granted to all employees and Employer's
rules and regulations throughout its chain . They also
receive training manuals for the various jobs, and
these are used in the training of new employees. The
Employer has also developed a series of cassette
tapes which are also used in training employees. The
new employees are expected to read and follow the
booklets and use the tapes but are also trained by the
store supervisors and experienced employees. The
District Manager has a checker working under him
and the District Food Manager has a training
,supervisor . These employees visit stores throughout
the District and aid in training new employees;
however , they visit each store about once a month
for several days, and it therefore appears that most of
the training is done by the store employees. The
Employer's general rules provide that any employees
who take leave of more than 30 days without
approval from the District Manager are considered
as leaving employment , and if they are again
employed, they will be treated as new employees. If
an employee seeks a leave of more than 30 days, he
may seek authorization which must be first approved
by his store or grill manager and then by the District
Manager . Any time off for less than 30 days is
considered temporary and may be granted by the
store supervisors at their discretion.
The store located at 12295 Biscayne Boulevard was
opened on July 7, 1971. For several months prior to
the opening , the store was stocked and prepared for
opening, and many employees , a majority of whom
are supervisors , were transferred to the store during
this period. When the store opened , it appears that
all supervisors and several of the employees were
transferred from other stores , but most of the unit
employees were newly hired . The Employer has
presented an exhibit showing transfer of employees
between this store and others in the District , through
the payroll period of January 28, 1972. A majority of
these transfers involved temporary assignments of
head cashiers . The Employer had not decided on
who would fill this position, and it therefore
alternated a number of head cashiers on a temporary
basis until it finally permanently transferred Mrs.
Meyers during the payroll period of December 17,
1140 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
1971. There were no further transfers of head
cashiers to and from this store since that date, and it
therefore appears that the earlier transfers were
merely part of the Employer's original staffing of this
store. An analysis of the remaining transfers show
that during the 28-week period from the time of
opening to the payroll period of January 28, 1971,
there were less than 10 employees in the bargaining
unit transferred into or out of this store.
While many of the Employer's operations, includ-
ing payroll, purchasing, and merchandising, are
centralized, the Board has noted that these are not
significant in determining the appropriate bargaining
unit. The Grand Union Company, 176 NLRB 230.
With regard to the Board's general policy, a single
store operation is presumptively appropriate when
the day-to-day work is under the local store manager.
Haag Drug Company, Incorporated, 169 NLRB 877;
The Grand Union Company, supra; Hochschild, Kohn
& Co., Incorporated, 184 NLRB No. 76; Angelus
Furniture Manufacturing Co., 192 NLRB No. 137.
Upon consideration of the above facts and entire
record, I find that the store employees are supervised
in their day-to-day operation by the store supervi-
sors, and do not have substantial interchange with
employees at the other Miami area stores. It is noted
that the District Store Manager and Food Manager
visit each store about once a month and do not,
therefore, regularly supervise the store employees.
The other Miami area stores range from 3 to more
than 15 miles from the store sought by Petitioner,
and most of these stores are further than 10 miles
away. I therefore find that the single store unit
sought by Petitioner is appropriate for collective
bargaining. There is no bargaining history for any of
Employer's Miami stores. While the employer has a
history of collective bargaining on a metropolitan
basis in several cities, these units were apparently
established by mutual agreement and this history
does not establish that a metropolitan area is the only
appropriate bargaining unit. The Grand Union Com-
pany, supra.
The store and grill managers and their assistants
have the authority to hire and fire employees, or
responsibly direct their work. In accord with the
stipulation of the parties, I find them to be
supervisors within the meaning of the Act.