Gordon's Jewelry Co. of Baton Rouge, Inc.

GORDON'S JEWELRY CO. OF BATON ROUGE, INC. 709 GORDON'S JEWELRY CO. OF BATON ROUGE, INC. and RE- TAIL CLERKS UNION, LOCAL NO. 1691, RETAIL CLERKS INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION, AFL, Petitioner. Case No. 15-RC-935. June 22, 1953 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 Paul A. Cassidy, 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 Murdock, Styles, and Peter- son]. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds: 1. Gordon's Jewelry Co. of Baton Rouge, Inc., hereinafter called Gordon's, and its subsidiary, Miller's Jewelry Company of Baton Rouge, Inc., hereinafter called Miller's, are retail jewelry stores located 1 block apart in the city of Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Both these stores annually receive merchandise from out-of- State sources in the aggregate value of $ 300,000. The Gordon family, which controls Gordon's and its subsidiary, Miller's, also controls about 20 other retail jewelry stores in Louisiana, Texas, Mississippi, and Arkansas. All the stores are under the ultimate supervision of Mr. Harry Gordon. Under these circumstances, we find that all these stores constitute a single, integrated interstate enterprise , and are a single employer, and that it will effectuate the policies of the Act to assert jurisdiction in this case. 1 2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain employees of the Employer. 3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representation of employees of the Employer within the mean- ing of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. 4. The Petitioner seeks a unit composed of all selling and nonselling employees of Gordon's only, and in the alternative seeks a unit of all such employees of Gordon's and Miller's which the Employer contends is alone appropriate. The 2 stores carry essentially the same merchandise which is frequently transferred from 1 store to the other . The em- ployees of both stores are hired and discharged by a manager, who is in charge of both stores. Theyhave essentially the same wages, hours, working conditions , and employee benefits, and are trained in 1 store by the manager for both stores. Tem- porary and permanent transfers of employees occur frequently between the 2 stores. In view of these circumstances and the geographic proximity of the 2 stores we findthat the 2-store unit is alone appropriate. 2 I See National Shirt Shops of Florida, Inc , 97 NLRB 924. 2See The Grand Union Company, 81 NLRB 1016. 105 NLRB No. 98. 7 10 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD The Petitioner would exclude employees working in the leased optical department. The Employer takes no position as to these employees. As the record shows that the hiring, discharge, payment, and supervision of these employees is done by the lessee, we shall exclude them from the units The Petitioner would exclude watchmakers and jewelers from the unit. The Employer takes no position with respect to the unit placement of these employees. The Petitioner presents no cogent reason for their exclusion and we shall therefore include these employees. Accordingly, we find that the following employees of the Employer constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act: All selling and nonselling employees of the Employer at its Baton Rouge, Louisiana, stores, including watchmakers and jewelers, but excluding employees of the leased optical department, guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act. [Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.] 3See The P. B. Magrane Store, Inc., 84 NLRB.345, 347. E. I. DUPONT DE NEMOURS & COMPANY, INC. CON- STRUCTION DIVISION, SAVANNAH RIVER PLANT and UNITED GAS, COKE AND CHEMICAL WORKERS OF AMER- ICA, CIO, Petitioner. Case No. 11-RC-477. June 22, 1953 SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES Pursuant to a Decision and Direction of Election issued by the Board herein on February 25, 1953,1 an election by secret ballot was conducted on March 17 and 18, 1953, under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Eleventh Region, among employees in the unit found appro- priate by the Board in its decision. F.llowing the election, a tally of ballots was furnished the parties. The tally shows that, of approximately 223 eligible voters, 212 cast valid bal- lots, of which 157 were for the Petitioner, 4 were for the Intervenor , 2 and 51 were against participating labor organi- zations. There were no void or challenged ballots. On March 23, 1953, the Employer timely filed objections to conduct assertedly attributable to the Petitioner which it alleged interfered with the election. In accordance with the Rules and Regulations of the Board, the Regional Director conducted an investigation of these objections and on April 24, 1953, issued and duly served upon the parties his report on 1 Not reported in printed volumes of Board decisions. 2 American Federation of Labor. 105 NLRB No. 104.