Sears, Roebuck & Co.

SEARS, ROEBUCK & COMPANY 665 neering aides. They have varying amounts of experience in the fields of electronics, radio, and television. Test engineers are salaried em- ployees; 5 engineering aides are hourly paid.6 These employees build, from blueprints prepared by professional engineers, electrical test equipment used in checking the Employer's product, repair such equipment after it is put into use, and inspect certain parts. Test engineers frequently make repairs on production machinery when the work cannot be handled by maintenance electricians. Although maintenance electricians may perform maintenance work on test equipment in use, the plant engineer testified that in 90 percent of the instances when such equipment breaks down it can be repaired only by test laboratory employees because the repair requires knowl- edge beyond the capacity of the maintenance electricians. He further testified that test laboratory employees could probably perform the work assigned maintenance electricians but that the latter could not do the work of test laboratory employees. There have been no trans- fers between maintenance electricians and test laboratory employees. These facts indicate that although test laboratory employees perform electrical maintenance work, they have specialized electrical skills, are more closely associated with the engineering field than with the tra- ditional electrical craft, and are not a necessary part of the unit of maintenance electricians. Accordingly, we find that the following unit is appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act : All maintenance and/or construction electricians and regularly as- signed helpers at the Employer's plants at Los Angeles and Van Nuys, California, excluding all supervisors. [Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this volume.] , 5 Test engineers are not professional engineers. e Engineering aides earn approximately $1.45 to $2 per hour ; maintenance electricians receive from $1.85 to $2.30 per hour. SEARS, ROEBUCK & COMPANY and TRUCK DRIVERS, WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS LOCAL UNION #340, INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, CHAUFFEURS, WAREHOUSEMEN & HELPERS OF AMERICA, AFL, PETITIONER. Case No. 1-RC-2930. December 1,1952 Decision and Order Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before George A. Sweeney, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. 101 NLRB No. 136. 666 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Upon the entire record in this case, the Board 1 finds : 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. 2. The labor organization involved claims to represent employees of the Employer. 3. No 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, for the following reasons: The Petitioner seeks a unit of seven warehousemen at the Employer's warehouse in Bangor, Maine. The unit sought would exclude all de- partment store employees, clerical employees, the warehouse superin- tendent, and all supervisory employees, as defined in the Act. The Employer contends that all retail selling and merchandise handling functions performed in Bangor, Maine, are a single, integrated opera- tion and that the proposed unit is, therefore, inappropriate. The Employer is engaged in the retail department store business and operates, under one management, a store and a warehouse. The store building, located on Harlow Street, is 3 to 4 miles distant from the warehouse, which is located on Rice Street. All seven employees in the proposed unit are employed at the Rice Street warehouse and are engaged in receiving, shipping, warehousing, and servicing activities. In addition to the Rice Street warehouse, the Employer maintains stockrooms and storage space at the store building.2 Identical items of merchandise are stored at each location, and a shuttle bus regularly moves merchandise between the two points. Operations at both loca- tions are unified under the over-all control of the store general man- ager. An operating assistant, who serves under the general manager, is responsible for all nonselling functions at the store building and warehouse, including the lunch room, receiving and shipping, ware- house, service maintenance, telephone operators, cashiers, credit, etc. Employed at the store building are employees who have the same or similar classifications and perform the same or similar duties as em- ployees at the Rice Street warehouse. Thus, at the store building, as at the Rice Street warehouse, there are employees who perform receiv- ing, shipping, warehousing, and servicing functions. Approximately 90 percent of all incoming trucks unload merchandise at both loca- tions. All requests for service are handled through a customer service ' 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 [Chairman Herzog and Mem- bers Murdock and Peterson]6 Merchandise is stored at the store building in separate stockrooms on the first and second floors, in part of the basement, and in the subbasement, which is approximately 40 to 50 feet wide and approximately 240 feet long. The warehouse has between 20,000 and 24,000 square feet of storage space. THE COLEMAN COMPANY, INC. 667 desk in the store building. Five service men, headquartered at the store building, work at both locations and in customers' homes. A furniture refinisher, assigned to the warehouse, likewise works at both locations and in customers' homes. Temporary assignments and trans- fers from one location to the other are frequently made. Personnel matters for all employees are handled by one office located in the store building. The same vacation and holiday policy, hospitalization benefits, profit-sharing plan, and discount privileges apply alike to all •employees. All new employees are hired under the same procedure and are subjected to the same training program. In view of the foregoing, particularly the integration between the warehouse activities and the store, the similarity of functions per- formed at both locations, the mutuality of interests of all the employees in the terms and conditions of employment, we find that the requested unit is too limited to constitute a separate appropriate unit a Accord- ingly, we shall dismiss the petition. Order IT Is HEREBY ORDERED that the petition herein be, and it hereby is, dismissed. a Louis Pizitz Dry Goods Company, 99 NLRB 380 and 80 NLRB 1442; Miller and Rhoads, 80 NLRB 625; Marshall Field t Company, 90 NLRB 1; J. L. Brandeis & Sons, 82 NLRB 806. THE COLEMAN COMPANY, INC. and AMALGAMATED LITHOGRAPHERS OF AMERICA, PETITIONER. Case No. 17-RC-.M30. December 1, 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 David Kruger, hear- ing 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 [Chairman Herzog and Members 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. 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. 101 NLRB No. 123.