Bonwit Teller & Co.

358 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD tail outlet employees, salesmen, advertising employees, window trim- mers, clerical employees, and supervisors as defined in the Act, con- stitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining. [Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this volume.] BONWIT TELLER & COMPANY and RETAIL CLERKS INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION, LOCAL No. 1390, AFL, PETITIONER. Case No. 4-RC- 1669. November 18, 1952 Decision and Direction of Election Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Ramey Donovan, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. 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, Murdock, and Styles]. 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 organization involved claims 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. 4. The Employer, a Pennsylvania corporation, is engaged in oper- ating a specialty shop at its principal place of business in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, for the retail sale of women's wear and accessories, and of men's and children's wear. The parties agree, with the exceptions noted below, that a unit of all regular full-time and part-time selling and nonselling employees is appropriate. There is no history of col- lective bargaining affecting these employees. "Contingent employees" and "extras": The Employer would include and the Petitioner exclude the "contingent" employees. Among the Employer's part-time employees are "contingent" selling and non- selling employees who are not employed on a regular schedule, but who are called to work as needed. The record reveals that they work from 1 to 4 days each week for a period of from 6 to 7 months a year, and that there is relatively little turnover among them. These em- ployees perform the same duties and work under the same conditions as do the regular and regular part-time selling and nonselling em- 101 NLRB No. 90. BONWIT TELLER & COMPANY 359 ployees. We therefore find that these "contingent" employees are properly a part of the unit and are eligible to vote.' The parties agree to exclude the "extra" selling and nonselling em- ployees who work part time during the peak rush seasons. Although these employees are necessarily a part of the unit in which they work,2 we find, in view of the agreement of the parties, that they are ineligible to votes Merchandise and buyers' clericals : The Petitioner would include and the Employer exclude the merchandise and buyers' clerical employees. The record shows that these employees gather data and keep records pertaining to purchases and sales. As they do not assist in the formu- lation of labor relations policy, they are not confidential employees and are properly included in a unit consisting, in part, of office and clerical employees.4 Merchandise statistical clerk: The parties agree to exclude the mer- chandise statistical clerk as a confidential employee. The record, however, reveals that the employee in question gathers, compiles, and analyzes the data received from the merchandise and buyers' clericals. As the data handled by the merchandise statistical clerk is confidential ,only as a matter of business competition, we will not deprive him of his right to collective bargaining and include him in the Unit .5 Personnel department: Although the parties agree to exclude the employees in the personnel department, only three of these employees, the secretary to the personnel director, the training director, and an employment interviewer, are confidential employees. There are, how- ever, three payroll clerks within the department who handle payroll records only. In accordance with established precedent we will ex- clude the confidential employees.6 The payroll clerks are, however, included.' We find that all regular and regular part-time selling and nonselling employees, whether employed at wages, salaries, commissions, or any combination thereof, employed at the Employer's Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, store, including the following : "Contingent employees" and "extras," inside delivery and package employees, telephone opera- tors, millinery workroom employees, wrappers, electricians, maids, porters, decorator and sign shop employees, marking room employees, receiving department employees, fur storage employees, service desk employees, stockroom employees, adjustment employees, supply de- partment employees, sales clerks, payroll clerks in the personnel 1 Franklin Simon A Co., 96 NLRB 671. 2 J. C. Penney Company, 86 NLRB 920. • Cf. Silverwood's, 92 NLRB 1114. 4 Cf. Chrysler Corporation, 76 NLRB 50. ' Cf. Southern Alkali Corporation, 84 NLRB 120. ' Bonwit Teller, Inc., 84 NLRB 414. 'Ibid. 360 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD department, office and clerical employees , and the merchandise sta- tistical clerk ; but excluding buyers, assistant buyers, leased depart- ment employees , alteration department employees , heads of stock," technical employees, confidential executive employees, and all super- visors as defined in the Act, constitute a unit appropriate for purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act. [Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this volume.] g The parties agree, and we find, that the heads of stock are supervisors as defined is the Act. PHELPS DODGE COPPER PRODUCTS CORPORATION and LOCAL No. 441, INTERNATIONAL UNION OF ELECTRICAL, RADIO & MACHINE WORB.ERs, CIO. Case No. 2-CA-1529. November 19, 1952 Decision and Order On February 29, 1952, Trial Examiner Ralph Winkler 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. Thereafter the General Coun- sel, the Union, and the Respondent filed exceptions to the Intermediate Report and supporting briefs. On October 7, 1952, the Board heard oral argument at Washington, D. C., in which the General Counsel, the Union, and the Respondent participated. The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner made at the hearing and finds that no prejudicial error was committed. The rulings are hereby affirmed. The Board has considered the Inter- mediate Report, the exceptions and briefs, the oral argument, and the entire record in the case and hereby adopts the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the Trial Examiner with the following addi- tions, modifications, and exceptions. 1. The Trial Examiner found that the Respondent refused to bar- gain on the subject of group insurance, and refused to furnish the Union with the information it requested respecting the existing group insurance plan, in violation of Section 8 (a) (5) and (1) of the Act. The Respondent excepts to these findings on the grounds that it dis- cussed the Union's proposal that the Respondent absorb the cost of the employees' insurance contributions, that it proposed "alter- 101 NLRB No. 103.