Hart's Food Stores, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 13, 1952

99 N.L.R.B. 735 (N.L.R.B. 1952)

HART ' S FOOD STORES, INC.
Appendix J
NOTICE TO ALL EMPLOYEES
735
Pursuant to the recommendations of a Trial Examiner of the National Labor
Relations Board, and in order to effectuate the policies of the National Labor
Relations Act, we hereby notify our employees that :
WE WILL NOT engage in any acts in any manner interfering with the efforts
of TEXTILE WORKERS UNION OF AMERICA, CIO, to negotiate for or represent
the employees in the bargaining unit described below.
WE WILL bargain collectively upon request with the above-named union
as the exclusive representative of all employees in the bargaining unit
described below with respect to wages, rates of pay, hours of employment,
and other conditions of employment and if an understanding is reached,
embody such understanding in a signed agreement . The bargaining unit is :
All our production and maintenance employees , including watchmen
and firemen , but excluding guards, clerical employees , time and fre-
quency checkers , employees hired for and employed solely in connection
with a specific construction or installation job of limited duration and
not a. part of the employer's regular production or maintenance opera-
tions, executives, supervisors with the rank of second hand or higher,
and all other supervisors as defined in the Act.
HUNTSVILLE MANUFACTURING COMPANY,
Employer.
By -------------------•----------------------
(Representative) (Title)
Dated -----------------
This notice must remain posted for 60 days from the date hereof, and must
not be altered, defaced, or covered by any other material.
HARTS FOOD STORES, INC. and LOCAL 95, AMALGAMATED MEATCUTTERS
& BUTCHER WORKMEN OF NORTH AMERICA, AFL, PETITIONER. Case
No. 3-RC-925. June 13, 1952
Decision and Order
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before John Weld, hearing
officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from
prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, the Board
has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member
panel [Members Houston, Murdock, and Styles].
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds:
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the
Act.
2. The labor organization involved claims to represent employees
of the Employer.
99 NUB No. 109.
736 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
3. No question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9
(c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act, for the following
reasons:
The Employer operates a chain of 98 food stores in Rochester, New
York, and in surrounding towns within a 50-mile radius of Rochester.
There are 2 divisions of these stores. One, known as Star Super
Markets, consists of 28 so-called "super markets;" all of which' have
meat departments.' The other, known as Hart's Food Stores, com-
prises 70 small grocery stores, 20 of which have meat departments.2
The Petitioner seeks a unit of the meat department employees 3 in
one Star Super Market in Rochester. The Employer contends that
this unit is inappropriate because it embraces only one small segment
of its organization, and that an appropriate unit should be much
larger in Scope.4
The operation of all the Employer's stores, both Star and Hart, is
very closely controlled from a central office in Rochester. The central
office handles the buying and delivery of merchandise, the merchandis-
ing an'd'sales policy, and the advertising, for all stores. At the central
office there is a supervisor of the meat departments of all stores, a
supervisor of the grocery departments of all stores, and a supervisor
of the produce departments of all stores. Under these supervisors are
field supervisors who travel from store to store in the more immediate
supervision of these respective operations. The meat department in
each Star Market is a separate entity from the rest of the store, and
has a head meatcutter, but this employee is acknowledged by both
parties not to be a supervisor. Moreover, the store manager of a Star
Market has no direct responsibility for the meat department as such,
because the head meatcutter reports to his field supervisors rather
than to the store manager.
The central office handles the hiring, discharging, and grievances of
all employees, and the paying of all Star employees. All Star em-
ployees, except for the head meatcutter, are paid a straight salary, and
all Hart employees are on an incentive basis. There is some inter-
change of meat, grocery, and produce employees, respectively, from
store to store, and from the Hart to the Star division, and vice versa.
The unit sought by the Petitioner finds no support in the nature of
the operations of the Employer or in its organizational structure, and
8 Twenty of these "super markets" are in Rochester, and the rest are in surrounding
towns.
E Forty-five of these stores are in Rochester, and the rest are in surrounding towns.
Of the 20 with meat departments, 6 are in Rochester and 14 are in the outlying areas
8 Journeymen meatcutters, meat apprentices, meat-counter men, meat wrappers, and
head meatcutters.
4 The Employer took no definite position on the composition of an appropriate unit,
but did indicate that it should include all employees, grocery and produce as well as
meat, in all Star stores, or all employees in all Star stores and Hart stores. , .
NATIONAL MALLEABLE AND STEEL CASTINGS COMPANY 737
no other basis appears for establishing such a unit. We.find, therefore,
that the unit petitioned for is inappropriate, and that no question
affecting commerce exists concerning the representation of employees
of the Employer 5
Order
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact, and upon the entire
record, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that the
petition filed herein be, and it hereby is, dismissed.
5 See Schafer Stores Co, Inc., 88 NLRB .4446; -Kroger Company, 88 NLRB 194; The
Grand Union Company, 81 NLRB 1016.
NATIONAL MALLEABLE AND STEEL CASTINGS COMPANY and PATTERN
MAKERS' LEAGUE OF NORTH AMERICA , A. F. OF L., PETITIONER. Case,
No. 35-RC-673. June 13, 1952
Decision and Direction of Election
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a hearing was held before Richard C. Curry, hearing
officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from
prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, tlie•.Board
has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member
panel [Chairman Herzog and, Members Houston and Murdock].
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the Act.
2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent certain em-
ployees of the Employer.
3. The Employer and the Intervenor herein, International Union,
United Automobile, Aircraft and Agricultural Implement Workers of
America, CIO, Local 761, contend that their current contract consti-
tutesca bar to this proceeding. The Petitioner argues that the contract
contains an illegal union-security clause and, therefore, cannot operate
as a bar.
The contract, which covers all production and maintenance em-
ployees, was executed August 28, 1950, to remain in effect until July
24, 1953, with provision for annual automatic renewals thereafter.
The contract provides :
Article II. RECOGNITION
Section 2.
(a) Each employee who, on,the effective date of this agree-
ment is a member of the Union in good standing . . . shall,
99 NLRB No. 114.