Sparkle-McCann Markets

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Nov 25, 1952

101 N.L.R.B. 586 (N.L.R.B. 1952)

586 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
that represented by the Petitioner without first granting the former
group an opportunity, by means of a separate election, to express its
desires on the question e We shall, therefore, make no final unit de-
termination at this time, but, shall first ascertain the desires . of these
employees as expressed in the election hereinafter directed. We shall
direct that an election be held among all tool planners, tool designers,
tool liaison employees, fabrication specification planners, and tool.
service liaison men "A" and "B" T at the Employer's Fort Worth,
Texas, division, not performing manual work, excluding all other
employees, confidential clerks, foremen , assistant foremen, and all
other supervisors as defined in the Act.
If a majority of the employees in this voting group vote for the
Intervenor, they will be taken to have indicated their desire to con-
stitute a separate appropriate unit, and the Regional Director con-
ducting the election directed herein is instructed to issue a certification
of representatives to the Intervenor for a unit consisting of the em-
ployees in the foregoing voting group, which the Board, under such
circumstances, finds to be appropriate for purposes of collective bar-
gaining. In the event a majority of the employees in the foregoing
voting group vote for the Petitioner, they shall be represented by the
Petitioner as part of the existing unit of installation planners, plan-
ning control men, and planning requirements clerks, and the Regional
Director will issue a certificate of results of election to that effect.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this
volume.]
Merck & Co., Inc., 98 NLRB 372; Valley Motor Company, 96 NLRB 1416.
* In amending its petition , the Petitioner sought to include in the requested unit the
employees classified as tool service liaison men "A" and "B." These classifications were
established in the Intervenor's unit subsequent to the filing of the instant petition. None
of the parties objects to the inclusion in the unit of the employees covered by these
classifications.
JEFFERSON GROCERY COMPANY OF PITTSBURGH, OPERATING AS SPARKLE-
MCCANN MARKETS and AMALGAMATED MEAT CUTTERS & BUTCHER
WORKMEN OF NORTH AMERICA, LOCAL 424, AFL, PETITIONER. Case
No. 6-RC-1094. November 25, 1952
Decision and Direction of Elections
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a hearing was held before Joseph C. Thackery, hearing
officer. The hearing officer's rujings made at the hearing are free from
prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
101 NLRB No. 124.
SPARKLE -MCCANN MARKETS 587
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, Styles , and Peterson].
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 Intervenor contends that its contract with a previous owner
of the stores involved herein, which contract allegedly was adopted by
the Employer and covers all employees except the meat department
workers, is a bar to this proceeding. That contract extended from No-
vember 1, 1951, to November 1, 1952. Apart from any other considera-
tions, as the contract expired by its terms on November 1, 1952, we
find that it is not a bar to this proceeding?
Accordingly, we find that a question affecting commerce exists con-
cerning the representation of employees of the Employer within the
meaning of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The Petitioner seeks a unit composed generally of all meat de-
partment and grocery department employees in the Employer's Down-
town , East Liberty, Wilkinsburg, Mount Lebanon, and Bellevue,
Pennsylvania, retail grocery stores formerly operated by McCann &
Company. The Intervenor contends that the unit sought is inappro-
priate because of the history of bargaining for these departments on a
separate basis. Alternatively, it urges that there should be two sep-
arate units , one for meat department employees and one for the grocery
department employees. The Employer takes no position on the unit
question.
The stores involved are divided into two principal departments, a
self-service grocery department which handles the usual line of food-
stuffs , such as produce and canned goods , and a service meat depart-
ment which handles meats , poultry, and fish.' While each of the stores
is under the general supervision of a store manager, the meat depart-
ment is under separate immediate supervision of a meat manager who
supervises the meat cutting and works along with the meat cutters,
countermen, and apprentices. Meat cutters are skilled employees who
are required to serve a 2-year apprenticeship before being eligible to
become journeymen meat cutters. All employees in the meat depart-
ments wait on customers, weigh, wrap, and price the merchandise
sold. There is no interchange of employees between meat and grocery
1 Retail Clerks International Association , Local 1407 , AFL, herein called the Intervenor,
was permitted to intervene at the hearing upon the basis of an adequate interest showing.
' See National Clay Products Company , et at., 98 NLRB 137 ; Twentieth Century-Fos
Film Corporation, 96 NLRB 1052 ; and Sylvania Electric Products Inc., 89 NLRB 398.
* There are also restaurants in the Downtown and East Liberty stores.
588 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
departments except in cases of emergency, and all employees use com-
mon facilities in the stores.
The Employer purchased the five stores in question on January
2, 1952, from McCann & Company. During a period of about the last
10 years while the stores were operated by McCann, bargaining was
conducted on the basis of separate units of meat department and groc-
ery department employees, the former being represented by the Peti-
tioner and the latter by the Intervenor. There is some doubt as to
whether the most recent contracts were adopted by the Employer after
purchase of these stores, although the terms of the existing contracts
were generally followed. Bargaining with respect to other stores
operated by the Employer has been on the basis of meat department
and grocery department employees in a single unit. In the western
Pennsylvania area where the present stores are located, bargaining for
some retail chain grocery stores has been conducted on the basis of
meat and grocery employees in a single unit, and in other chain stores
in separate units for each department.
Under all the circumstances, including the bargaining history for
the stores involved and the nature of their employment, we believe
that the employees of the five stores may function either in one unit
of both meat department and grocery department employees or in
separate units of meat department and grocery department employees.'
Accordingly, we shall direct that separate elections by secret ballot
be held among employees in each of the following voting groups in
the Employer's Downtown, East Liberty, Wilkinsburg, Mount
Lebanon, and Bellevue, Pennsylvania, retail grocery stores formerly
operated by McCann & Company, including regular part-time em-
ployees, but excluding restaurant employees in the Downtown store
and employees engaged in the preparation of produce for sale but who
do not sell or participate in the actual sale of such produce at the
Downtown store, casual employees, maintenance employees, ware-
housemen and truck drivers, guards, professional employees, store
managers, and other supervisors as defined in the Act : 5
Group 1. All meat department employees.
Group 2. All grocery department employees.
We shall make no final unit determination at this time but shall first
ascertain the desires of the employees as expressed in the elections
hereinafter directed. If a majority of the employees in both voting
groups select the Petitioner, they will be taken to have indicated their
desire to constitute a single unit, and the Regional Director conducting
the elections is instructed to issue a certification of representatives to
+ American Stores, Inc., 80 NLRB 126.
5 Although, as previously indicated, the Petitioner and Intervenor disagree as to the
scope of the voting groups, the parties are in agreement as to the composition of these
groups.
NEWSPAPER AND MAIL DELIVERERS ' UNION 589
the Petitioner for such unit which the Board in that event finds to be
appropriate for purposes of collective bargaining. In the event that a
majority of the employees, in group 1 select the Petitioner and a
majority of the employees in group 2 select the Intervenor, the em-
ployees in each will be taken to have indicated their preference for a
separate bargaining unit, and the Regional Director is instructed to
issue a certification of representatives to the Petitioner or Intervenor,
as the case may be, for the separate unit which the Board finds in such
.circumstances to be appropriate for purposes of collective bargaining.
[Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication in this
volume.]
NEWSPAPER AND MAIL DELIVERERS' UNION OF NEW YORK AND VICINITY
and ARTHUR FINKELSTEIN, ALFRED FRANKEL, CARL GALDSON, THEO-
DORE GERSHOWITL , MARTIN IOOE, EDWARD JOHNTRY, NICHOLAS LAU-
LETTI, PATRICK LEONARD, WILLIAM MCCLOSKEY, FRANCIS MEADE,
JOHN MINOGUE AND EUGENE ROSE
NEWSPAPER AND MAIL DELIVERERS' UNION OF NEW YORK AND VICINITY
and BENNIE IZZI, ON BEHALF OF HIMSELF AND OTHERS AND SIDNEY
ROSENTHAL, JOSEPH RILEY, JOHN NICOLINI AND CARL CITRANO,
EDWARD JOSEPH GuERIN AND MEYER SACKS . Cases Nos. 2-CB-185,
2-CB-145, 2-CB-870, and 2-CB-381. November 26, 1952
Decision and Order
On November 30,1951, Trial Examiner Horace A. Ruckel issued his
Intermediate Report in the above-entitled proceeding, finding that
the Respondent had engaged in and was engaging in certain unfair
labor practices, and recommending that it cease and desist therefrom
and take certain affirmative action, as set forth in the copy of the
Intermediate Report attached hereto. The Trial Examiner also found
that the Respondent had not engaged in certain other unfair labor
practices alleged in the complaint. Thereafter, the General Counsel
and certain of the charging parties filed exceptions and supporting
briefs. On February 8, 1952, the Board granted permission to New
York Mirror Division-the Hearst Corporation to intervene and to
file exceptions.
The request of the charging parties for oral argument is hereby
denied, as the record and the briefs and exceptions, in our opinion,
adequately present the issues and the positions of the parties.
The Board has reviewed the rulings made by the Trial Examiner
at the hearings and finds that no prejudicial error was committed.
101 NLRB No. 128.