Brunswig Drug Co.

In the Matter of BRUNSWIG DRUG COMPANY, EMPLOYER and INTER- NATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, CHAUFFEURS, WAREHOUSE MEN AND HELPERS OF AMERICA, LOCAL 542, AFL, PETITIONER In the Matter of BRUNSWIG DRUG COMPANY, EMPLOYER and GROCERY WAREHOUSEMEN'S UNION, LOCAL 595, AFL, PETITIONER Cases Nos. P21-R-3394 and 21-R-3447, respectively.-Decided October 11, 1946 Latham & Watkins, by Mr. Richard W. Lund, of Los Angeles, Calif., for the Employer. Cllr. Charles C. Cross, of Los Angeles, Calif., for Local 542. Mr. David Sokol, of Los Angeles, Calif., for Local 595. Katz, Gallagher, and Margolis, by Mr. Victor E. Kaplan, of Los Angeles, Calif., for ILWU. .21[r. Bernard Dunau, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND ORDER Upon separate petitions duly filed a consolidated hearing in this case was held at Los Angeles, California, on July 30, 1946, before David Aaron, hearing officer. Thv hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations Board makes the following : FINDINGS OF FACT 1. THE BUSINESS OF TILE EMPLOYER Brunswig Drug Company, a California corporation with main offices at Los Angeles, California, is engaged in the business of whole- sale drug and liquor distribution. It operates branches at Los Angeles, California; Long Beach, California; San Diego, California; Phoenix, Arizona; and Tucson, Arizona. Its annual purchases of merchandise, consisting mainly of drugs, pharmaceutical items, drug sundries, and liquor, exceed $1,000,000, of which more than 80 percent originates at points outside the State of California. The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehouse- men and Helpers, Local 542, herein called Local 542, is a labor organi- 71 N L. R. B., No. 40. 309 310 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD zation affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, claiming to represent employees of the Employer. Grocery Warehousemen's Union, Local 595, herein called Local 595, is a labor organization affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, claiming to represent employees of the Employer. International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union, Local 26, Herein called the ILWU, is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, claiming to represent employees of the Employer. III. THE ALLEGED APPROPRIATE UNITS Local 595 requests a unit composed of all warehouse workers employed at the Employer's East Second Street warehouse located in Los Angeles, California. Local 542 requests a unit comprising all the warehouse workers employed at the Employer's Fifth Avenue warehouse located in San Diego, California. The Employer and the ILWU contend that the units are inappropriate because of a 9 year history of collective bargaining on a multiple warehouse, multiple employer basis. As part of its business, the Employer operates warehouses in Los Angeles, San Diego, Long Beach, Tucson, and Phoenix. Only the Los Angeles and the San Diego warehouses are involved in the present proceeding. In Los Angeles the Employer operates warehouses located at East Second Street, North Main Street, Azusa Street, and Sunset Boule- vard-New High Street, respectively. In these 4 warehouses, the Employer employs 223 warehouse workers, of whom the 20 workers employed at the East Second Street warehouse comprise the requested Los Angeles unit. The East Second Street warehouse is the Employer's sole liquor distribution center in Los Angeles, and the North Main Street warehouse is the Employer's principal drug dis- tribution point in that city. The Azusa Street warehouse, located one-half block from the East Second Street installation and manned by East Second Street workers, and the Sunset Boulevard-New High Street Warehouse, located one block from the North Main Street operation and serviced by the North Main Street workers; are both used to store drug merchandise with which to feed the North Main Street drug distribution activities. The warehouse working force at the East Second Street installation is composed of shipping clerks, receiving clerks, warehousemen, order fillers, order checkers, and order packers. On a tonnage basis, 70 per- cent of their work is devoted to liquor handling and 30 percent to sundry drug handling. The flow of work in the warehouse is the same whether liquor or drugs are handled, and consists in receiving, un- BRUNSWIG DRUG COMPANY 311 packing, and shelving merchandise, and in filling, checking, packing, and shipping customer's orders. Primarily, however, the drugs and kindred items at this warehouse are shipped to the North Main Street warehouse. Six employees in the basement concern themselves ex- clusively with liquor handling; the remaining 13 or 14 employees on the main floor handle either drugs or liquor as need requires. The Second Street warehouse is under the supervision of a foreman who has considerable discretion. He is responsible for liquor handling to a, general liquor manager, and for drug handling to a superintendent of operations. Both these individuals are located at the North Main Street offices, and are in turn responsible to a general manager and vice president. Hiring of employees at the East Second Street ware- house is effected by the liquor general manager; all East Second Street personnel records are kept at the North Main Street warehouse; and wage rates in all the Los Angeles warehouses are identical. in January, 1947, at Vernon, Los Angeles, the Employer will com- plete construction of a warehouse, consisting of 2 buildings divided by a spur track, to which will be moved all its present Los Angeles activities. One building will house all liquor operations; the other will house all drug operations. The 20 employees at the East Second Street warehouse presently engaged in joint drug-liquor distribution will be reduced to about 12 engaged solely in liquor warehousing, and the remaining employees will be absorbed into drug warehousing. Turning to the Employer's San Diego activities, the, Employer operates a warehouse at Fifth Avenue in San Diego at which wholesale drug distribution is conducted along hues similar to those in Los Angeles. The 36 warehouse workers employed at this installation com- pose the requested unit. The San Diego and Los Angeles operations are 125 miles apart; there is no interchange of personnel; and hiring and discharge is effected on a local level. However, San Diego per- sonnel records are kept in Los Angeles; pay-roll checks are drawn i n Los Angeles; the same wage scales prevail at both locations; the major personnel policy is evidently formulated in Los Angeles. For about 9 years the ILIVU has represented the employees in the requested units as part of a broader bargaining unit. Following separate informal checks by the Employer of the IL\VU's majority status among its Los Angeles and San Diego warehousemen, the Em- ployer and the ILWVU entered into a collective agreement on July 16, 1937, embracing within a single unit all warehouse employees of McKesson & Robbins, Inc., and the Employer in Los Angeles and San Diego. Five successive contracts through May 31, 1946, covering the same employees in the broader unit were negotiated. A contract cur- rently in effect for the period between July 1, 1946, and Time 30, 1948, un] ess automatically renewed thereafter, provides that its applicability 312 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD to the employees here involved shall be held in abeyance pending the settlement of the present representation question. The contracting parties to this last agreement are the ILAVU, the Employer, McKesson & Robbins, Inc., Morgan and Sampson, and J. S. O'Callaghan & Sons. The record does not disclose when the latter two employers joined in common negotiations. The operations of the Employer and McKesson & Robbins, Inc., parallel each other, both maintaining warehouses in Los Angeles and San Diego, but the operations of the remaining em- ployers are confined to Los Angeles. These agreements have resulted in substantial economic benefits to the Employers' warehousemen. The Employer's San Diego warehousemen are members of Local 29 of the ILWU, but they have delegated to Local 26 of the ILWU, the intervenor herein, the authority to bargain on their behalf in the belief that more effective representation could be procured by joint action of San Diego and Los Angeles warehousemen through a common agent. They share in the negotiations by the designation of a repre- sentative who participates in the bargaining as a member of a common negotiating committee. Grievances among San Diego warehousemen that cannot be settled on the steward level are processed through Local 29. Local 26 intercedes in grievance matters when the situation is grave involving, for example, the interpretation of a contractual provision. Such considerations as may be validly urged to sustain the propriety of the requested units in the absence of a history of collective bargain- ing lose their cogency where, as here, an effective bargaining relation- ship on a more comprehensive unit basis has existed for a number of years.' The disaffection of some employees from the contract unit is insufficient to justify its impairment when its feasibility has been demonstrated by the achievement of substantial economic benefits and uniform employment conditions. In view of the existing bargaining history on a broader basis, we find that the separate units sought by the Petitioners are inappropriate, and we sliall therefore dismiss the petitions. ORDER Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact, and the entire record in this proceeding, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that the petitions for certifications of representatives of em- ployees of Brunswig Drug Company, Los Angeles, California, filed by International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehouse- men and Helpers of America, Local 542, AFL, and Grocery Ware- housemen's Union, Local 595, AFL, be, and they hereby are, dismissed. ' See Matter of P. Lorillard Company, 5S N L. R. B. 1112 ; Matter of Bethlehem-Fair- field Shipyard, Incorporated, 58 N.,L R B. 579