Montgomery Ward & Co., Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Feb 2, 1951

92 N.L.R.B. 1846 (N.L.R.B. 1951)

In the Matter Of MONTGOMERY WARD & CO., INCORPORATED, EMPLOYER
and GENERAL DRIVERS, WAREHOUSEMEN & HELPERS, LOCAL No. 421,
A. F. OF L., PETITIONER
Case No. 18-RC-881.-Decided February 2, 1951
DECISION AND ORDER
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a hearing was held before Clarence A. Meter, 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.
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 retail and mail order store in Dubuque,
Iowa. In connection with its merchandising operations, the Em-
ployer uses two warehouses located in Dubuque.
The Petitioner requests a unit composed of truck drivers and ware-
housemen at the Employer's Dubuque, Iowa, stores, excluding all
other employees. The Employer opposes the petition on the ground
that the unit sought is inappropriate.
At the time of the filing of the petition herein, the Employer em-
ployed two truck drivers to move merchandise between the warehouses
and the stores and to make deliveries to customers. A few days before
the hearing, the Employer discharged the truck drivers, discontinued
the use of its trucks, and transferred its trucking operations to a com-
mercial trucking firm. As the Employer does not expect to resume its
92 NLRB No. 270.
1846
MONTGOMERY WARD. & CO., INCORPORATED 1847.
own trucking operations, the unit sought by the Petitioner must be
limited to warehousemen.
The Petitioner classifies as warehousemen two employees employed
at one of the Employer's warehouses,' and the shipping and receiving
clerk and his two helpers at the Employer's retail store.
The warehouse employees. One of the employees employed at the
warehouse assists in the loading and unloading of merchandise, sees
that the merchandise is filed neatly, enters new merchandise on the
proregister, and prepares trip sheets for deliveries. He also delivers
equipment to customers who call for it at the warehouse. This em-
ployee is under the direct supervision of the head receiving clerk at
the retail store.
The other warehouseman is classified as a merchandise assembler.
He assembles farm machinery and other heavy equipment received in
"knocked down" condition by the Employer. He is under the direct
supervision of the manager of the farm store. If the workload de-
mands it, the two warehouse employees assist each other in their re-
spective jobs.
The shipping and receiving clerk and his helpers. The fourth floor
of the Employer's store is devoted to receiving and storing the less
bulky merchandise received by the Employer. There are no partitions
on this floor. In addition to the shipping and receiving clerk and his
two helpers, one proregister girl and two markers work there. All
these employees work under the supervision of the head receiving clerk.
The shipping and receiving clerk and his helpers load and unload
merchandise and move it in place for storage. The proregister girl
lists all the merchandise that is delivered during the day and matches
the original order against the freight bills, which she receives from
the shipping and receiving clerk and his helpers. The markers check
the merchandise, mark its price, and assist in putting the merchandise
away and removing it from the stockroom.
All employees of the Employer, including those sought by the Peti-
tioner, go through the same training course. All the employees work
the same hours, are paid weekly, use the same facilities, and receive
the same life, health, and accident insurance benefits. A uniform
personnel, vacation policy, and grievance procedure is available to
all employees.
The employees sought by the Petitioner are not a skilled craft group.
As their work is closely integrated with that of the other stockroom
employees, and as their interests are so closely allied with those of the
1 No employees are employed at the other warehouse.
1848 DECISIONS. OF NATIONAL LABOR. RELATIONS BOARD
rest of the Employer's employees as to be almost indistinguishable,2
they cannot form an appropriate unit on any other basis. Accord-
ingly, we find that the unit sought by the petitioner is inappr cpriate.9
We shall, therefore, dismiss the petition.
ORDER
Upon the entire record in this case, the National Labor Relations
Board orders that the petition herein be, and it hereby is, dismissed.
2 In 1947, following a consent election, Retail Clerks Local No. 1578 was certified as•the
collective bargaining agent for all the employees of the Employer including those now sought
by the Petitioner. The Retail Clerks bargained with the Employer for all these employees
until January 1950, when its contract expired and was not renewed.
3 Montgomery Ward & Company, Incorporated, 78 NLRB 1070.