Meier & Frank Co., Inc.

In the Matter Of MEIER & FRANK COMPANY, INC. and BUILDING SERv- ICE EMPLOYEES UNION, LOCAL No. 49, A. F. L. Case No. 19-R-1230-Decided February 28,1944 Mr. Abe Eugene Rosenberg, of Portland, Oreg., for the Company. Mr. Herbert B. Galton, of Portland, Oreg., for the Union. Miss Frances Lopinsky, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION STATEMENT OF THE CASE Upon a petition duly filed by Building Service Employees Union, Local No. 49, A. F. L. herein called the Union, alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation, of em- ployees of Meier & Frank Company, Inc., Portland, Oregon, herein called the Company, the National Labor Relations Board provided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice before Joseph D. Holmes, Trial Examiner. Said bearing was held at Portland, Oregon, on Decem- ber 22, 1943. The Company and the Union appeared and partici- pated. All parties were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to ex- amine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues. The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. All parties were afforded an opportunity to file briefs with the Board. Upon the entire record ,in the case, the Board makes the following : FINDINGS OF FACT . THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY Meier & Frank Company, Inc., an Oregon. corporation, operates a large department store and a warehouse in Portland, Oregon. At the retail store practically all types of merchandise are sold. The Com- pany obtains about 50 percent of the merchandise it buys for resale, from points outside the State of Oregon. Its annual sales amount to 55 N. L. R. B., No. 18. 101 102 DECISONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD $25,000,000, 1 percent of which represents mail order sales to points outside the State of Oregon. In addition to the mail order business, the Company maintains a regular delivery service within the City of Vancouver, Washington. Th Company denies the Board's jurisdiction generally, and specif- ically as concerns its elevator operators. Both phases of its objection have been the subject of judicial review wherein the Board's jurisdic- tion was affirmed.' We find, therefore, that the Company is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED Building Service Employees Union, Local No. 49, affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, is -a labor organization admitting to membership employees of the -Company. III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION The Company has refused to grant recognition to the Union as the exclusive bargaining representative of its elevator operators unless the Board finds that elevator operators constitute an appropriate unit and certifies the Union in the unit. - A statement of. a Board agent, introduced into evidence at the hearing, indicates that the. Union represents a substantial number of employees in the unit hereinafter found appropriate.2 We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the representation of employees of the Company , within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT On March 5, 1943, the Company, by stipulation signed in settlement of a charge filed by the Union against it, r cognized the Union as bargaining representative for the janitors, janitresses, and watchmen, excluding maids and elevator operators, in its retail store. The Union now requests a separate unit of passenger elevator operators. The Company insists that elevator operators should be represented in a unit composed of all maintenance employees at the store. There are 20 passenger elevators and- 8 freight elevators in the store. The passenger elevators are divided into banks of 5 each. The I See N. L. R. B . v. J. L. Hudson Co., 135 F. (2d) 380. See also N. L. If. B. v. Virginid Electric Power Company, 115 F. ( 2d) 414, aff'd. in this point, 314 U. S. 469 ; Butler Bros. v. N. L. R. B., 134 F. (2d) 981. 'The Field Examiner reported that the Union submitted 31 authorization cards all of which bore apparently genuine original signatures ; that the names of 28 persons .appearing on the cards were listed on the Company 's pay roll of November 8, 1943, which contained the names of approximately 50 employees in the appropriate unit ; and that the cards were dated in September , October, and November 1943. MEIER , & FRANK COMPANY, INC. 103 operation of each bank is controlled by a dispatcher.. The, operators of the passenger elevators must have a general knowledge' of every department in, the store. They, are often transferred to the sales force if, they so desire., For these reasons the qualifications of persons chosen for positions as elevator, operators, and. the training given them differ greatly from, the characteristics and training necessary to qualify one for other; maintenance jobs, in the store. These factors, together with the specialized character of their work . mark , elevator operators, including freight, elevator operators,3,as a distinct occupa- tional group separable, from other maintenance employees, appropriate for purposes of collective bargaining. • - , , . , We find that all elevator operators in the Company's retail store including dispatchers' but excluding all supervisory employees with authority to hire, promote, discharge,' discipline ; or ,otherwise effect changes in the status of employees or effectively recommend such action 5 constitute a unit ap'pr'opriate' for'the purposes, of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 '(b)' of the Act. v. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES We shall direct that the question concerning representation which has arisen be resolved by an election by secret ballot among the employees in the appropriate unit who were employed during the' pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of the Direction of Election herein, subject to"the limitations and additions set forth in the Direction. DIRECTION OF ELECTION By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National Labor Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Rela- tions Act, and pursuant to-Article III, Section 9, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3, it is hereby DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa- tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Meier & Frank Company, Inc., Portland, Oregon, an election by secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than thirty (30) days from the date of this Direction, under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Nineteenth Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Article III, Sections 10 and 11, of said Rules and Regulations, a We do not subscribe to the Union's attempted distinction between freight and passenger 'elevator operatois 4 All parties agreed that dispatchers are not supervisory employees 6 Miss Ball, supervisor of elevator operators, falls within this description an l is, thei e- fore, excluded. 104 DECISONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD among the employees in the unit found appropriate in Section IV, above, who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of this Direction, including employees who did not work during the said pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation or temporarily laid off, and including employees in the armed forces of the United States who present themselves in person at the polls, but excluding those employees who have since quit or been discharged for cause and have not been rehired or reinstated prior to the date of the election, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented by Building Service Employees Union, Local No. 49, A. F. L., for the purposes of collective bargaining. CHAIRMAN MILLIS took no part in the consideration of the above Decision and Direction of Election. [See infra, 55 N. L. R. B. 1148 for Supplemental Decision and Cer- tification of Representatives.]