The Russel Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Dec 31, 1953

107 N.L.R.B. 668 (N.L.R.B. 1953)

668 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
THE RUSSEL COMPANY and LOCAL UNION NO. 891, INTER-
NATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, CHAUF-
FEURS, WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS OF AMERICA,
AFL, Petitioner
HATTIESBURG GROCERY COMPANY and LOCAL UNION NO.
891, INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS,
CHAUFFEURS, WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS OF
AMERICA, AFL, Petitioner
THE RUSSEL COMPANY, INC. and TEAMSTERS LOCAL
UNION NO. 5, INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAM-
STERS, CHAUFFEURS, WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS
OF AMERICA, AFL, Petitioner. Cases Nos. 15-RC-1002,
15-RC-1003, and 15-RC-1004. December 31, 1953
DECISION, ORDER, AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
Upon separate petitions duly filed' under Section 9 (c) of the
National Labor Relations Act, a consolidated hearing was
held before John H. Immel, Jr., hearing officer. The hearing
officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial
error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in this consolidated proceeding, the
Board finds:
1. The Employers are severally engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the Act, and we find that it will effectuate
the policies of the Act to assert jurisdiction in these cases.!
2. The Petitioners claim to represent certain employees
of the Employers.
3. Questions affecting commerce exist concerning the rep-
resentation of employees of the Employers named in Cases
Nos. 15-RC-1002 and 15-RC-1003, within the meaning of
Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
No such question affecting commerce exists concerning
the representation of employees in Case No. 15-RC-1004,
for the reasons set forth below.
4. The three Employers severally concerned in this con-
solidated proceeding are engaged in the wholesale grocery
business . Their business operations are centered in ware-
houses where orders from customers are received and filled
and from which goods are dispatched to their customers.
Facilities for cash-and-carry operations, if afforded, are
located at or near the warehouses. The operations of each
Employer are closely integrated and subject to unified over-
all supervision and common labor and operational policies.
Employees in the warehouses and cash departments are inter-
1 Tlh. several petitions were amended at the hearing to show the correct name of the Em-
ployer designated therein.
2N. L. R. B v. Townsend. 185 F. 2d 378, 383 (C. A. 9); Huleston Drug Stores v. N. L. R. B ,
187 F. 2d 418 (C A 9)
107 NLRB No 147
THE RUSSEL COMPANY 669
changed . Materials , received and stored by warehouse em-
ployees, are dispatched to cash outlets and customers by
company trucks . These material -handling employees include,
principally , warehousemen and truckdrivers , together with
helpers, checkers , stock clerks, etc ., who perform the duties
normally associated with such work classifications.
The principal issues in the first two cases concern the
inclusion in the proposed warehousemen -truckdriver unit of
certain inside clerical workers, and of salesmen whose work-
ing interests are alleged to be clearly distinguishable from
those of material handlers , as such. The issue in the third
case concerns the extent of the appropriate unit.
A. Case No. 15 -RC-1002, The Russel Company,
( Jackson, Mississippi).
The Petitioner seeks to represent truckdrivers , helpers,
and warehousemen at the Employer ' s warehouse at South
Gallatin Street, Jackson , Mississippi , including repairmen
and employees at its cash store on South State Street,' but
excluding the stock clerk , the cashier , salesmen, office
clerical employees, guards, and supervisors as defined in
the Act . 4 The Employer objects to the exclusion of the stock
clerk and salesmen.
The stock clerk , concerning whose unit placement the
parties disagree , is a warehouse employee who works in close
cooperation with the Employer ' s 3 buyers. Engaged in main-
taining current inventory of stock, he spends 5 or 6 hours
per day in the warehouse proper , counting stock and making
entries on inventory cards, and the remainder of his time in
the warehouse office, transferring this information from the
cards to office records. Because the stock clerk is primarily
.a plant clerical employee , we will include him in the unit
with material handlers.'
Salesmen are classified as outside or inside salesmen.
Outside salesmen solicit orders in designated territories.
They are paid a guaranteed salary, a car allowance., and a
commission . They attend sales meetings with the credit and
office managers . The inside salesman, working at an hourly
rate, generally takes orders over the telephone . Credit for
his sales is allotted to the outside salesman covering the
territory in which such customers conduct their operations.
All salesmen spend little time in the warehouse proper. We
will exclude all salesmen from the warehouse unit because
they have little in common with material handling employees.'
3 The cash store is otherwise called the "Cash Outlet" or "State Cash Wholesale Company."
4 The Petitioner would also include checkers . Because the Employer lists no employees
in this category, we make no finding as to the unit placement of checkers.
5Greenbrier Dairy Products Company 100 NLRB 432 , 434; East Texas Steel Castings
Company, Inc ., 95 NLRB 1135 , 1136; Wm. P. McDonald Corporation , 83 NLRB 427, 433-4.
6 Cf. Hannaford Bros. Co., 78 NLRB 869, 871 ; Greenbrier Dairy Products Company, supra.
The inside salesman in the instant case is differentiated on the facts from inside salesman
in the cited cases.
337593 0 - 55 - 44
670 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
We find that truckdrivers, helpers, and warehousemen at
the Employer's warehouse at South Gallatin Street, Jackson,
Mississippi, including repairmen, stock clerks, and employees
at its cash store at South State Street, but excluding office
clerical employees, cashier, outside and inside salesmen,
guards,7 and supervisors as defined in the Act, constitute a
unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining
within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
B. Case No. 15-RC-1003, Hattiesburg Grocery Company,
(Hattiesburg, Mississippi)
The Petitioner seeks to represent truckdrivers, helpers,
warehousemen, and checkers at the Employer's grocery
warehouse at Hattiesburg, Mississippi, including repairmen
and cash department employees, but excluding office clerical
employees, outside salesmen, and supervisors as defined in
the Act. The Employer would include outside salesmen in the
warehouse unit.
Because the Employer's outside salesmen have interests
similar to those of employees employed by The Russell Com-
pany and were excluded from the unit in Case No. 15-RC-1003,
discussed above, we will exclude them from the warehouse
unit in this case.
We find that all truckdrivers, helpers, warehousemen, and
checkers at the Employer's grocery warehouse operations in
Hattiesburg, Mississippi, including repairmen 4nd cash depart-
ment employees, but excluding office clerical employees, out-
side salesmen, guards, $ and supervisors as defined in the
Act, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective
bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
C. Case No. 15-RC-1004, The Russell Company, Inc.,
(Bogalusa, Louisiana)
The Petitioner seeks to represent truckdrivers, helpers,
and warehousemen at the Employer's warehouse at Bogalusa,
Louisiana, excluding office clerical employees, guards, and
supervisors as defined in the Act. The Employer contends that
the appropriate unit for its Bogalusa employees should also
include employees at its Franklinton warehouse, urging that
the one-plant unit sought by the Petitioner is inappropriate.
The Employer operates one warehouse at Bogalusa,
Louisiana, where it employs truckdrivers, warehousemen,
salesmen, and office clerical employees. At Franklinton, 20
miles away, the Employer operates another warehouse with
employees in like classifications. The local managers of the
7 We exclude from the unit as a guard the watchman who guards the plant from fires and
theft Walterboro Manufacturing Company, 106 NLRB No. 241.
8 The Employer carries on its payroll for its pro rata share a watchman who guards 15 or
20 stores in the neighborhood of the Employer's operations. We exclude the watchman from
the unit as a guard
F. W. WOOLWORTH COMPANY 671
warehouses , who are responsible to the common owner, work
out between them labor policies , wages, benefits , and person-
nel policies applicable to both warehouses . Merchandise for
the warehouses is purchased in carload lots . Deliveries to
the Employer ' s customers may be made from the warehouse
most conveniently situated . Employees are commonly ex-
changed between the warehouses , as necessary . The twoware-
houses are presently absorbing between them employees and
customers from a former branch operated by the Employer
at Covington , Louisiana.
In view of the uniform and integrated operation of the two
warehouses under common management , we find that the
unit sought by the Petitioner , restricted to employees at the
Bogalusa warehouse , is not appropriate .' Because the Peti-
tioner has not made a sufficient showing of interest in the
larger unit to justify an election , we will dismiss the petition.10
[The Board dismissed the petition filed in Case No. 15-RC-
1004 by Teamsters Local Union No. 5, International Brother-
hood of Teamsters , Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers
of America, AFL.]
[Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication in
this volume.]
9 Ross Lumber Company , 94 NLRB 636; Liebmann Breweries , Inc., 92 NLRB 1740.
10 For this reason we find it unnecessary to consider in this decision the placement of
salesmen in the unit proposed by the Petitioner.
F. W. WOOLWORTH COMPANY, Compton , California and
VARIOUS EMPLOYEES OF F. W. WOOLWORTH COM-
PANY, 166 E. Compton Blvd., Compton , California, Peti-
tioners and RETAIL CLERKS UNION, LOCAL NO. 324,
AFL. Case No . 21-UD - 13. December 31, 1953
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (e) (1) of the
National Labor Relations Act, a hearing in this case was
held before Irving Helbling , hearing officer . The hearing offi-
cer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial
error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds:
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the mean-
ing of the National Labor Relations Act.
2. The labor organization involved claims to represent em-
ployees of the Employer.
3. On May 1, 1952, the Employer and the Union entered into
a 2-year collective -bargaining contract expiring April 23,
1954, which contains a union-security provision in the nature
107 NLRB No. 145.