House of Values

656 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Payless Drug Store of Aberdeen, Inc. d/b/a House of Values, Employer-Petitioner and Retail Clerks Un- ion Local No. 629, Retail Clerks International Asso- ciation, AFL-CIO. Case 19-RM-823 February 23, 1971 DECISION AND ORDER BY MEMBERS FANNING, BROWN , AND JENKINS Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, a hearing was held before Hearing Officer John M. Cronin on October 15, 1970. Thereafter, on October 21, 1970, the Regional Director for Region 19 transferred this case to the National Labor Relations Board for decision. Briefs have been timely filed by the Employer and the Union. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the Na- tional Labor Relations Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member panel. The Board has reviewed the Hearing Officer's rul- ings made at the hearing and finds that they are free from prejudicial error. They are hereby affirmed. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds: 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. 2. Retail Clerks Union Local No. 629, Retail Clerks International Association, AFL-CIO, and Teamsters Union Local No. 699, affiliated with the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehouse- men and Helpers of America, are labor organizations within the meaning of the Act. 3. No question affecting commerce exists concern- ing the representation of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Sections 9(c)(1) and 2(6) and (7) of the Act for the following reasons: The Employer's store involved in this case opened on or about September 28, 1969. At the same time, pickets from Retail Clerks Union Local No. 629 be- gan picketing the store with informational picket signs; i.e., "This Store does not have a Union Agree- ment-Please Do Not Patronize." The Clerks informed the Employer and other unions in the area of their intent to engage in informational picketing. At vari- ous time the Clerks pickets were joined by members of other unions carrying signs in support of the Clerks. This picketing continued without incident or stop- pages until March 10, 1970. On March 10 members of Teamsters Union Local No. 699 set up picket lines at the entrances to the shopping center, and began stop- ping deliveries. The Clerks continued to picket peace- fully at the entrances to the Employer's store. On that same day, the Employer filed a charge 1 alleging a violation of Section 8(b)(7)(C) of the Act and the instant petition. Thereafter, the Regional Di- rector for Region 19 conducted an investigation and determined that an election was appropriate. Follow- ing the Employer's withdrawal of its charge on March 23, 1970, the Regional Director issued his direction of election on March 25, 1970. Thereafter, the Union ceased picketing and informed the Regional Director that it disclaimed any interest in representing the em- ployees covered by the petition. On this basis the Re- gional Director informed the parties, by telegram dated March 27, 1970, that the election was post- poned indefinitely, contingent on no further action being taken inconsistent with the disclaimer. On April 9, 1970, the Employer filed a request for special permission to appeal Regional Director's in- definite postponement of election, which was denied by the Board on April 14, 1970. On June 9, 1970, the Board, having sua sponte reconsidered its denial, re- scinded it and granted the Employer's request for spe- cial permission to appeal. Briefs were filed by the Employer and by the Union, and on August 6, 1970, the Board issued an Order Directing Hearing to re- solve the issues raised by the Employer's appeal of the indefinite postponement of election. On August 19, 1970, the Employer filed a motion to revoke Order Directing Hearing and for Other Re- lief, which was denied on August 21, 1970. The hear- ing was held on October 15, 1970. On October 21, 1970, the Regional Director transferred the case to the Board, following which the parties submitted briefs to the Board in support of their positions. The Employer contends that the Clerks' object in picketing was to force the Employer to recognize that Union and to sign a contract covering the Employer's employees; that the Clerks' "informational" picket- ing" was a charade; and that when this charade proved ineffective the Clerks openly accepted the in- creased economic pressure of delivery and service in- terruption by the Teamsters, with the hope that this pressure might accelerate the securing of a labor con- tract. The Employer's contentions fail to consider the proviso to Section 8(b)(7)(C) which allows informa- tional picketing, unless an effect is to induce a stop- page in pickup, delivery, or transport of any goods, or in performance of any services. The Clerks picketed the Employer's entrances from September 28, 1969, to March 26, 1970, and there is no evidence that this picketing resulted in any stoppages. However, on March 10, 1970, the Teamsters began picketing which did result in stoppages. The record fails to establish any connection between the picketing of the Clerks and that of the Teamsters. The Employer's apparent 1 Case 19-CP-138 188 NLRB No. 103 HOUSE OF VALUES 657 contention that the Clerks was under some duty to persuade the Teamsters to cease their stoppages of deliveries is without merit? Since no connection was shown between the infor- mational picketing of the Clerks, and the separate picketing of the Teamsters, we find that the Clerks' picketing did not have the "effect" proscribed by Sec- tion 8(b)(7)(C), and it was therefore legitimate proviso picketing? In view of the above finding, there were no grounds for direction of an expedited election under Section 8(b)(7)(C). Since no demand was made of the Em- ployer for recognition of the Clerks.as representative of the employees involved, and since the Clerks, which was engaged in informational picketing, dis- claimed any interest in the employees involved, no question concerning representation exists, and we shall dismiss the petition. 2 The Clerks had taken the precautionary measure of notifying the Team- sters that the picketing's purpose was informational and not intended to interfere with pickups and deliveries 3 Retail Clerks Union Local 324 and Retail Clerks Union Local 770 (Barker Bros.), 138 NLRB 478. ORDER It is hereby ordered that the petition filed herein be, and it hereby is, dismissed.