White Cross Discount Centers, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Oct 12, 1972

199 N.L.R.B. 721 (N.L.R.B. 1972)

WHITE CROSS DISCOUNT CENTERS, INC. 721
White Cross Discount Centers, Inc. and Retail Clerks
Union Local 770, affiliated with Retail Clerks Inter-
national Association, AFL-CIO. Case 21-RC-
12434
October 12, 1972
DECISION ON REVIEW AND DIRECTION OF
ELECTION
BY CHAIRMAN MILLER AND MEMBERS FANNING,
KENNEDY, AND PENELLO
On January 31, 1972, the Regional Director for
Region 21 issued a Decision and Order in the above-
entitled proceeding dismissing the petition based on
his conclusion that various alternative units sought by
Petitioner among 11 of the Employer's 30 southern
California stores were inappropriate. Thereafter, in
accordance with Section 102.67 of the National Labor
Relations Board's Rules and Regulations, Series 8, as
amended, the petitioner filed a timely request for re-
view of the Regional Director's decision on the
grounds that the Regional Director's findings were
erroneous; Petitioner repeats, essentially, all of its al-
ternative unit positions to the Board. The Employer
filed a statement in opposition to the request for re-
view.
On April 19, 1972, the National Labor Relations
Board granted the request for review. Thereafter, the
Employer filed a brief in support of the Regional
Director's decision.
The Board has considered the entire record in
this case and makes the following findings:
The Employer operates a chain of 30 retail stores
spread across southern California, and is engaged in
the sale of health and beauty aids, nonprescription
drugs, and sundry items. The central office and ware-
house is located in South El Monte, California. The
Employer has eight stores in downtown Los Angeles.
In addition to these eight stores, the Employer has
nine other stores which are within the geographic lim-
its of Los Angeles County. Outside Los Angeles
County, the Employer has 13 stores in the-southern
California area located as far north as Oxnard and as
far south as Calexico.
As is common in retail nonprescription drug
chains, there is a high degree of centralized adminis-
tration in the functioning of all of the Employer's
outlets. Thus, the merchandise is the same in all stores
except for a few items; the price structure is uniform;
and the layout of the stores is, insofar as possible,
identical.
The central office, in addition to handling pur-
chase and distribution of merchandise, determines
whether the stores will have sales or other types of
special promotions. All newspaper advertisements to
promote business are prepared by the central office,
with ads placed in the media which advertise chain-
wide prices and products. The central office also han-
dles the purchase of parts and equipment for the
stores and arranges for services (e.g., janitorial serv-
ices) for the various stores.
All personnel files, pay records, records of daily
business, inventory records, and accounts payable
and receivable are kept in the central office. The prof-
it-sharing plan, pension plan, and employee benefits
plans are handled in the central office. Paychecks are
issued on the same day for all employees, are sent out
from the central office, and are drawn on a single
corporate account. The store managers are required
to deposit daily receipts at various branch banks near
their stores. The store managers generally do not write
checks, make incidental purchases, or authorize re-
pairs.
Applications for employment are sometimes tak-
en at the central office, but hiring may also be done
at the local stores. Store managers have the authority
to conduct interviews, but often consult their supervi-
sors from the central office during the process. Store
managers may initiate the discharge of employees, but
may take no final action without the written approval
of the supervisor on the termination form. Store man-
agers also make recommendations to the central of-
fice regarding individual wage increases, promotions,
and terminations.
With respect to working conditions and benefits,
it appears that regular full-time employees work the
same number of hours per week although store hours
vary to meet the competition. Holidays are apparently
identical, and the Employer apparently maintains
uniformity in its various benefit plans. The employees
wear jackets or smocks and a name tag which iden-
tifies them as employees of White Cross.
The total employee complement of the chain is
approximately 240. While the figures for the individ-
ual store complements are somewhat disputed, these
complements range from at least 1 to as many as 12
regular and part-time employees. There is testimony
of a practice of temporary and permanent transfers of
employees, managers, and assistant managers among
the stores.
The Employer attempts to maintain uniformity
in certain aspects of its business operations in a num-
ber of ways. In addition to regular telephone commu-
nications between the central office and the stores, the
199 NLRB No. 98
722 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Employer has standardized guides for various posi-
tions at the local store level, has uniform moneyhan-
dling procedures, and controls sales plans and
advertisements in the central office. Although there
are some standardized training procedures, the store
manager has discretion to determine how such rules
and regulations are carried out. The store managers
also instruct new employees concerning their jobs and
ordering supplies. Generally, store managers are re-
sponsible for assigning and directing work, routine
discipline of employees, and sending sick or injured
employees home. They also have control over the
store building itself and the handling of bank ac-
counts.
In order to further insure standardization, the
Employer's operations manager maintains contact
with individual stores through its field supervisors.
These field supervisors are each assigned from three
to eight stores to oversee. These field supervisors visit
their stores once each week, receive reports from the
store managers, help with special problems, and assist
in making out work schedules. For instance, the eight
stores in downtown Los Angeles are supervised by
two supervisors who supervise no other stores.' They
report, along with other supervisors, to the operations
manager concerning the stores within their jurisdic-
tion.
The supervisors travel in Econoline vans provid-
ed by- the Employer and often transfer merchandise
from one store to another during their rounds. While
in the stores, these supervisors assist the managers
with special problems, arrange display materials, and
handle personnel problems. These supervisors must
approve firings, transfers, overtime, and vacations.
They are consulted about hiring, assist in drawing up
work schedules, and may transfer employees without
notice to either employee or store manager. Supervi-
sors often replace store managers in case of illness or
vacation, particularly in those stores which do not
have a head cashier.
The Petitioner urged the Regional Director and
now urges the Board to find any of the following 4
alternative units to be appropriate: (a) 11 stores in a
single unit, including the 8 downtown Los Angeles
stores (numbers 1, 2, 9, 14, 16, 17, 19, and 26) plus the
stores in Inglewood, Huntington Park, and San Fer-
nando; (b) the 8 downtown stores as a single unit plus
i As mentioned , the Employer's usual practice is to have one supervisor
supervise three to eight stores, with the stores selected on the basis of proximi-
ty However, the eight downtown Los Angeles stores have two supervisors
who share responsibility equally. These two supervisors visit the eight stores
regularly, with a supervisor being in any one store 10 hours or more per week.
In fact, it is not uncommon for one of these eight stores to have the two
supervisors present at the same time
single-store units at Inglewood, Huntington Park, and
San Fernando; (c) 11 single-store units; or (d) a single
8-store unit of the 8 downtown stores.
The Regional Director concluded that none of
the alternative units sought was appropriate and
therefore dismissed the petition.
For the reasons stated by the Regional Director
as set forth in his Decision and Order (the pertinent
parts of which are attached as an appendix), we agree
that the Petitioner's alternative units (a), (b), and (c)
are inappropriate. We disagree, however, with his
conclusion that the eight downtown Los Angeles
stores unit is likewise inappropriate?
Where there has been no bargaining on a broader
basis, the Board has found appropriate a geographic
grouping of retail chain stores 3 less than chainwide in
scope,4 particularly where such grouping coincided
with an administrative division within the Employer's
organization.5 Here there is a distinct cluster of eight
stores which are all situated within a radius of one-
half mile and which serve the area of greatest pedestri-
an traffic in downtown Los Angeles. Further, these
same eight stores constitute in effect an administrative
division within the Employer's organization in that
they are supervised collectively by two supervisors
who oversee no other stores. These two supervisors
visit these eight stores regularly, provide assistance
and counsel to the store managers, and provide the
autonomy lacked by the store managers in matters of
hiring, discharge, and transfer of employees. Thus ge-
ographic proximity and concentration as well as the
Employer's organizational structure compel the con-
clusion that the employees working in these eight
stores share a community of interest separate and
apart from the community of interest of other em-
ployees working in the chainwide unit.
In view of the foregoing, we find that the follow-
2 Member Fanning agrees with his colleagues that the grouping of eight
stores in the city center, with common supervision, sought by the Petitioner
is an appropriate unit for bargaining However, unl ike his colleagues, he
would also grant the three single-store units at Huntington Park , Inglewood,
and San Fernando. In Sav-On Drugs, Inc, 138 NLRB 1032 , and again in
Haag Drug Company, Incorporated, 169 NLRB 877-upon thorough review
of the policy-the Board found that single-store units in a retail chain were
presumptively appropriate bargaining units, dust as in multiplant or multdo-
cation enterprises generally This presumption is, of course, rebuttable de-
pending upon the factors present in each case Based on the record here,
Member Fanning is not persuaded that this presumption has been rebutted
as to these three individual store units.
3 The Board's recognition that more than one unit may be appropriate
among the employees of a particular enterprise has been followed a number
of times with the approval of the courts . See Molts Shop Rite of Springfield,
Inc and Molts Shop Rite of Chicopee, Inc, 182 NLRB No 19, and cases cited
therein at In 3
4 U-Tote-Em Grocery Co, 185 NLRB No . 6, Drug Fair-Community Drug
Co, Inc, 180 NLRB 525
5 State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, 158 NLRB 925; Met-
ropolitan Life Insurance Company, 156 NLRB 1408
WHITE CROSS DISCOUNT CENTERS, INC.
ing unit is appropriate for purposes of collective bar-
gaining within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act:
All full- and regular part-time employees includ-
ing clerks and cashiers employed by the Employ-
er at stores 1, 2, 9, 14, 16, 17, 19, and 26 but
excluding all other employees, guards and super-
visors within the meaning of the Act.
Accordingly, we hereby remand the case to the
Regional Director in order that he may conduct an
election pursuant to this Decision.
[Direction of Election and Excelsior footnote
omitted from publication.]
APPENDIX
The record discloses that the Employer's 30 stores,
all of which are situated in southern California, range
in location geographically from Oxnard in the north,
Calexico in the south, Ridgecrest in the east, and San
Clemente-Long Beach in the west. The number of
nonsupervisory employees per store ranges from a low
of 1 to a high of approximately 20. The central area
of Los Angeles comprises the highest density of pe-
destrian traffic within the Employer's geographical
boundaries, and thus, the eight stores which Petitioner
would group together as part of its principal alterna-
tive unit are situated within a radius of one-half mile
of each other. Although these eight stores represent
the largest cluster of stores throughout the chain,
there are smaller clusters in other areas throughout
the chain and it appears that, each individual store is
relatively close to another store. Consequently, no
store is geographically isolated.
None of the stores is independently incorporated, sep-
arately owned, nor subject to any type of license or
franchise agreement, and all of them have the same
general exterior appearance, interior design, and fix-
tures. The employee dress code and cash handling
procedures are determined at the central office, and
the Employer supplies employees with similar jackets
for the men and smocks for the women. All employees
wear similar name tags. Three of the stores use the
name "Green Cross," but this is occasioned merely by
historical reasons, and one of the stores located in the
central Los Angeles cluster, in which Petitioner seeks
an election, uses the name "Solo" because of its close
proximity to one of the other White Cross stores in
that area. Except for the names under which these
four stores operate, everything else about them is
uniform in every respect with all the other stores in the
chain.
723
There are six area supervisors, each of whom supervis-
es from three to eight stores. Although the same two
supervisors are in charge of the eight stores in the
central Los Angeles area, a different supervisor super-
vises the Inglewood and Huntington Park stores as
well as other stores in the chain, and the San Fernan-
do store is supervised by yet another supervisor who
also supervises other stores in the chain. Area supervi-
sors transfer employees between stores on both a tem-
porary basis, in the event of such matters as illness,
and also on a permanent basis. A 2-week sampling
taken by the Employer showed that 15 to 20 percent
of its employees transferred between stores on a tem-
porary basis, and that 10 percent of those employees
transferred on a permanent basis. Although these per-
centages may include managers, who are supervisors
within` the meaning of the Act, managers do move
about between stores frequently, and the record dis-
closes the existence of more than an insignificant
number of transfers of nonsupervisory employees be-
tween stores and also between the stores and central
office or warehouse. Seniority is companywide and is
not affected by transfers between stores. Moreover,
the same job classifications are used throughout the
chain, and the duties and wage rates within the classi-
fications are the same in each store.
Merchandise is freely transferred between stores as
the need arises and is commonly transported by the
area supervisors, all of whom drive Econolines, or a
truck from the central office. The Employer's opera-
tions are highly centralized in that accounting, adver-
tising, store planning, payroll functions, personnel
policies, and training procedures for all the
Employer's retail stores are performed at the central
office in South El Monte. Moreover, employee vaca-
tion policy, pension plan, profit-sharing plan, and
health benefits are uniform throughout the entire sys-
tem and are administered centrally. As Petitioner
points out in its brief, the Board has held that the
degree of centralized administrative control is of little
significance in determining whether or not the em-
ployees in a single location comprise an appropriate
unit for bargaining, and it has also held that it is more
significant whether or not the employees perform
their day-to-day work in circumstances where sub-
stantial autonomy is invested in the supervisor of the
facility in which an election is sought. Haag Drug
Company, Incorporated, 169 NLRB 877. However, the
record discloses that the authority of the store manag-
ers is quite limited. In this respect, the record discloses
that although all the employees working in each of the
Employer's 30 stores are subject to supervision by the
store manager of the store in which they work, the
724 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
central office determines the number and classifica-
tions of employees to be employed in each store. The
store managers are guided closely by the area supervi-
sor in implementing company personnel policies and
merchandising practices at the store level. Managers
take applications for employment but often consult
with the area supervisor before hiring new employees,
and although managers have the power to reprimand
employees, they must obtain the approval of the area
supervisor before discharging employees. While man-
agers may recommend wage increases, the central of-
fice must approve all such increases after reviewing
the circumstances in each case with the area supervi-
sor, and in some cases the employees make requests
for wage increases directly to the central office. Man-
agers may not authorize overtime without first obtain-
ing the approval of the area supervisor and are subject
to discipline if they do not do so. Area supervisors
spend 1 full day per week in each store working jointly
with the store manager on such projects as setting up
merchandise displays and establishing weekly em-
ployee work schedules, one copy of which is posted on
the store bulletin board and another copy of which is
sent to the central office. Managers see to it that the
stores are opened and closed at times which have been
set by the central office and do not have authority to
alter the number of hours worked by employees with-
in their stores.
Store managers have no discretion in deciding which
product items will be carried in their stores, and each
store carries the same lines of items with only minor
variations based on the popularity of certain items
within a particular area . Any variation from the line
of items normally carried must be approved by the
central office. Managers must order all product items
through the central office from catalogs supplied by
that office, and all orders must be placed in maximum
and minimum amounts which have been established
by the central office. Managers are directed by the
central office as to the location and methods of dis-
playing specially featured or sale merchandise. Sim-
ilarly, managers have no authority in establishing or
altering the prices of product items, and 80 percent of
all items are priced the same throughout the chain,
with such prices having been determined by the cen-
tral office.
Each manager is required to call the central office
daily to report the volume of business for the prior
day, and managers converse weekly by telephone with
the operations manager , who in turn visits each store
at least once a month . Managers make deposits
through branch banks to the one central bank ac-
count used for the entire chain and are not authorized
to write checks . Managers play no part in providing
for the regular janitorial and maintenance services
and may not authorize emergency repairs without
first receiving permission from the central office.
On the basis of the facts as set forth above, it appears
that the central office and area supervisors play a
significant role in the day-to-day operations of each
individual store, resulting in a high degree of func-
tional integration among the individual stores as well
as with the central office . Consequently, so far as the
record discloses , the managers have virtually no dis-
cretion with respect to the operations of the stores and
are vested with only minimal discretion with respect
to labor relations matters . Twenty-First Century Res-
taurant of Nostrand Avenue Corp ., 192 NLRB No. 103
at 4-5.
While a single-store unit is presumptively appropriate,
Haag Drug Company, Incorporated, supra, that pre-
sumption may be overcome where it is shown that
there is functional integration of a sufficient degree
among the facilities to negate the separate identity of
a single-facility unit . Gordon Mills, Inc., 195 NLRB
771, 773; Haag Drug Company, Incorporated, supra. In
the instant case, the employees at all stores possess
similar skills and work in parallel classifications, and
all stores are subject to standardized policies and pro-
cedures. Operations at all stores are subject to close
centralized control of both methods of operations and
labor relations matters , and the store managers exer-
cise only minimal discretion with respect to both la-
bor relations matters and methods of operation.
Although the chain covers a rather wide geographic
area, the record discloses a significant degree of em-
ployee interchange between stores , both on a tempo-
rary and permanent basis , as well as frequent
exchange of merchandise between stores. Thus, al-
though there is no showing that employees in the units
petitioned for share a community of interest separate
and distinct from that of employees in the other
stores, there is substantial evidence that the commu-
nity of interest of employees at each of the stores is
merged with and is inseparable from that of the em-
ployees at the other stores in the chain . Accordingly,
I find, based upon the record in its entirety, that the
units in which Petitioner seeks elections are not ap-
WHITE CROSS DISCOUNT CENTERS, INC. 725
propriate units . Twenty-First Century Restaurant of election in any other unit found appropriate, I shall
Nostrand Avenue Corp., supra. Inasmuch as Petitioner dismiss the petition.
has stated that it does not desire to participate in an