Bruno's Food Store, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 6, 1961

131 N.L.R.B. 1023 (N.L.R.B. 1961)

BRUNO'S FOOD STORE, INCORPORATED 1023
and Surveyors' and Calumet Contractors Association.' We find that
the rule stated in those cases is inapplicable to the facts in the instant
case. In those cases, the Board expressly found that no other union
was seeking to represent employees on a single-employer basis. Here,
however, at the hearing, the Intervenor expressly asked the Board, in
the event it did not dismiss the petition, to direct elections in the single-
store units. The Intervenor also asked to appear on the ballot, if such
elections were directed, and it has made a showing of interest sufficient
to support a representation petition as to three drugstores which are
members of the Employer.' Moreover, in the summer of 1960, the
Intervenor demanded recognition as representative of the employees
of Murdale Drugs and Lawrence Drugs, and when such recognition
was refused, it commenced to picket these stores, and this picketing
continued, except for a brief period, at least until the time of the hear-
ing. In view of the affirmative efforts by the Intervenor to represent
employees of members of the Employer on a single-store basis,1° we
find the fact that the Petitioner and the Employer agree to multiem-
ployer bargaining is insufficient basis to establish the appropriateness
of the multiemployer unit. Accordingly, under all the circumstances,
we find that the multiemployer unit is inappropriate. As the multi-
employer unit is inappropriate and as the individual employers do
not meet the Board's jurisdictional standards, we shall dismiss the
petition.
[The Board dismissed the petition.]
4101 NLRB 64.
8121 NLRB 80
9 Lawrence Drugs, Murdale Drugs, and University Drugs.
10 We find no merit in the argument, implicit in the Employer ' s brief, that the multi-
employer unit is appropriate under the circumstances here in view of the fact that the
individual drugstores do not meet the Board ' s jurisdictional standards and thus the
Intervenor could not obtain , through Board processes , representation of the employees on
a single-store basis. As the Intervenor has actively attempted to represent employees on a
single-store basis and could achieve such recognition by means of voluntary agreement or
through whatever State processes exist, it is immaterial that the Board would not direct
elections in the single -store units.
Bruno's Food Store, Incorporated and Local 1657, Retail Clerks
International Association , AFL-CIO and Local No. 442, Amal-
gamated Meat Cutters and Butcher Workmen of North
America, AFL-CIO, Petitioners . Cases Nos. 10-RC-4909 and
10-RC-49921. June 6, 1961
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
Upon petitions duly filed under Section 9(c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a consolidated hearing was held before Kathryn M.
Rossback, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the
hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
131 NLRB No. 136.
1024 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
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 Leedom, Fanning, and Brown].
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. A 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.
The Petitioner in Case No. 10-RC-4909, Local 1657, Retail Clerks
International Association, AFL-CIO (hereinafter referred to as the
Retail Clerks), contends that the only appropriate unit is a unit of all
employees, including meat department employees, at the Employer's
retail grocery stores in the Birmingham, Alabama, metropolitan area.
It would exclude the meat department managers as supervisors. The
Intervenor agrees with the unit requested by the Retail Clerks.
The Petitioner in Case No. 10-RC-4921, Local No. 442, Amalga-
mated Meat Cutters and Butcher Workmen of North America, AFL-
CIO (subsequently referred to as the Meat Cutters), contends that
the meat departments at the Employer's stores in the Birmingham
metropolitan area constitute an appropriate unit, and it would include
the meat department managers in the unit.
The Employer operates 10 retail grocery stores in the metropolitan
area of Birmingham, Alabama. All these stores' employees are under
the control of a central office where a uniform policy for all stores
with respect to labor relations and management matters is maintained.
The central office does all the purchasing for the meat department and
stock, produce, and dairy departments of all the stores. All employees
have similar working conditions, wages, hours, and privileges.
Each store has a separate meat department with its own meat counter
and cutting room under the supervision of a meat department man-
ager. Meat department employees do not interchange with other
store employees. Meat department employees perform work which is
largely that of cutting meat to order, a minor portion' of their work
being devoted to the wrapping of prepackaged meat. The meat de-
partment employees in each store work in a place that is separate from
the rest of the store. There is no bargaining history affecting any of
the employees involved.
Upon the entire record, including the request for separate repre-
sentation of the meat department employees and the absence of a
bargaining history on a storeswide basis, we find that separate units
of the employees in the meat departments and the remaining employees
i Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union, AFL-CIO, intervened at the hearing
in Case No 10-RC-4909.
BRUNO'S FOOD STORE, INCORPORATED 1025
in the other departments may be appropriate 2 However, the stores-
wide unit, including the meat department employees, which is also
sought herein would be appropriate too. Accordingly, we shall make
no final determination at this time, but shall first ascertain the desires
of the employees expressed in the elections directed below.
There remains for determination the status of the meat department
managers who work on a salary basis. They "supervise" meat cutting,
prepare work and vacation schedules, effectively recommend the hire
and discharge of meat department employees, and maintain discipline
in their department. We find that meat department managers are
supervisors within the meaning of the Act, and therefore exclude them
from any voting groups in the elections which will be directed herein.'
We shall direct separate elections in the following voting groups in
the Employer's retail stores in the Birmingham, Alabama, metropoli-
tan area, excluding all warehouse employees, truckdrivers,4 profes-
sional employees, guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act:
Group 1.-All meat department employees.
Group 2.-All other employees.
We shall place the names of the Meat Cutters, Retail Clerks, and
Intervenor on the ballot in the election among the employees in group
1, and the names of the Retail Clerks and Intervenor on the ballot in
group 2.
If a majority of the employees in group 1 select the Meat Cutters,
they will be taken to have indicated their desire to constitute a separate
bargaining unit, and the Regional Director conducting the election is
instructed to issue a certification of representatives to the Meat Cut-
ters for such unit which, under the circumstances, we find appropriate.
However, in the event a majority of the employees in group 1 does not
vote for the Meat Cutters, those employees will appropriately be in-
cluded with the employees in group 2 and their votes will be pooled
with those in group 2.5 The aforesaid Regional Director is instructed
to issue a certification of representatives to the labor organization
selected by the majority of the employees in group 2 or in the pooled
group, as the case may be, which the Board, in such circumstances,
finds to be a unit appropriate for purposes of collecting bargaining.
[Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication.]
2 The Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea Company, Inc ., 128 NLRB 342 ; Schaeffers Prospect
IGA Store, 124 NLRB 1433.
3 Wtinn -Dixie Stores , Inc and its subsidiary Wsnn-Dixie Greenville, Inc, 124 NLRB
908; Food Haven, Inc, 126 NLRB 666
4 The warehouse employees and truckdrivers are represented by a labor organization
not a party to this proceeding
If the votes are pooled , they are to be tallied in the following manner The votes
for the labor organization seeking a separate unit in group 1 shall be counted as valid
votes , but neither for nor against the labor organizations seeking to represent the overall
unit. All other votes are to be accorded their face value, whether for representation by
the unions seeking the more comprehensive group or for no union.
59919 '8-62--v of 131 66