Charrette Drafting Supplies Corp.

1294 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Charrette Drafting Supplies Corporationr and Local 810, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, Petitioner. Case 2-RC-19674 • - 31 July 1985 DECISION ON REVIEW AND ORDER BY CHAIRMAN DOTSON AND MEMBERS -HUNTER AND DENNIS On 2 February. 1984 the Regional Director for • Region.2 issued a Decision and Direction of Elec- tion in the above-entitled proceeding in which he found appropriate a unit of all full-time and regular part-time operations employees employed by the Employer at its 215 Lexington Avenue, New York, New-York facility.' In so doing, the Regional Di- rector rejected the Employer's contention that a unit limited to such employees was inappropriate. In accordance with Section 102.67 of the Board's Rules and Regulations, the Employer filed a timely request for review of the. Regional Director's deci- sion. The Employer alleged that the Regional Di- rector's decision contained erroneous findings of fact and clearly departed from Board precedent and policy. - By telegraphic order dated 5 March 1984, the Board (former Member Zimmerman, dissenting) granted the Employer's request for review.2 There- after, the Employer filed a-brief on review. . The National Labor Relations Board has delegat- ed its authority in this proceeding to a three- member panel. The Board has reviewed the entire record in this case3 and makes the following findings.. The Employer is engaged in the retail sale of ar- chitectural , and engineering art supplies • at its 215 Lexington Avenue (33rd Street) and 212 E. 54th ' The specific unit the Regional Director found appropriate is as fol- lows All full-time and regular part-time operations employees employed by the Employer at its facility at 215 Lexington Avenue, New York, New York, including drivers, truck helpers, messengers, order pick- ers, general warehouse workers, receiving clerks, service representa- tives (repairmen), receiving/inventory coordinators, quality -control coordinators, order production coordinators, back order coordina- tors, maintenance employees (porters), excluding all other employ- ees, retail and sales clerks , service employees, field salesmen, tele- phone customer servile employees, guards, and supervisors as de- fined in the Act - Pursuant to the parties ' agreement, the Regional Director permitted the dispatcher to vote subject to challenge z An election was conducted 8 March 1984, and the ballots were im- pounded pending the Board's Decision on Review s The parties stipulated that the record consists of the evidentiary record in a prior, representation case, Case 2-RC-19171, including the prior case's transcripts , exhibits, briefs, memoranda , statements of posi- tion, motions, stipulations, and decisions of the Regional Director and the Board The parties also stipulated 'that there have been no significant changes in the Employer 's operation since the prior proceeding that would affect the unit determination in the instant case Street (54th Street) facilities in New York, New York. The Petitioner seeks to represent a unit limit- ed to the Employer's operations department _ em- ployees employed at the 33rd Street store' The Employer contends that such a unit is inappropri- ate because the 33rd Street store is a highly inte- grated operation in which the operations and sales employees share a community of interest, and be- cause of the centralized and integrated business re- lationship of the 33rd Street and 54th Street stores. There is no history of collective bargaining for the . petitioned-for employees. There are approximately 68 employees at the Employer's two New York stores, which-are locat- ed a little over. a mile apart. Until February 1981 the 54th Street store was the Employer's only New York store. The 33rd Street store was opened at that time and is now the Employer's main New York facility. The Employer is a subsidiary of Charrette Corporation of Woburn, Massachusetts, which establishes the minimum and maximum levels of stock to be carried by each store, sets standard prices throughout the Company, maintains formal records for the stores, negotiates leases, and sets store' hours. The merchandise the two .New York stores sell is sent from' Woburn to the 33rd Street'store. The 54th Street store receives its mer- chandise from the 33rd Street store. Henry Levy, the Employer's general manager, oversees both stores' operations, and acts as liaison with Char- rette Corporation in Woburn. Employees at the 33rd Street store are divided into five areas, including (1) operations;-which con- sists of approximately 20 inventory control, stock, receiving, order pulling, order packing, shipping and delivery employees; (2) retail sales (approxi- mately 11 employees); (3) telephone customer serv- ice employees (approximately 5 'employees); (4) outside sales representatives (approximately 3 em- ployees); and (5) office clericals.4 The 54th Street store employs approximately 13 retail sales employ- ees and 3 operations employees. Each store has a store manager and an assistant store manager who supervise the retail clerks. The operations manager supervises the operations em- ployees at the 33rd Street store as well as the pro- cedural work of the operations employees at the 54th Street store. The 54th Street. operations em- ployees are also under the onsite supervision of -the 54th Street store manager. The telephone customer service manager supervises the telephone customer service employees. at the 33rd Street store. A sales 4 The parties stipulated that office clerical employees should be ex- cluded from any unit found appropriate 275 NLRB No. 177 CHARRETTE DRAFTING SUPPLIES 1295 manager in Woburn supervises the outside salesper- sons. Bulk storage is located in the 33rd Street store basement . The basement also contains a soda ma- chine, a coffee dispenser, and an employee lounge and locker area. The street level contains the retail sales area and storage area for many small items. The loading dock is also on the street level. The second level contains the administrative offices and is the base of operations for the telephone sales em- ployees. 1. The Regional Director found a separate unit of the Employer's 33rd Street operations employ- ees appropriate. In concluding that this separate warehouse-type unit was appropriate, he found the evidence established that the operations employees are under the separate supervision of the operations manager, they punch in and work in the basement of the 33rd Street store, apart from other employ- ees, and there has been no interchange between op- erations employees and other employees since the 33rd Street store opened. The Regional Director found that "the degree of work contact between operations employees and other employees is in the main incidental to the performance of the primary duties of the operations employees in the basement, and of the other employees elsewhere." The Re- gional Director concluded that the operations em- ployees at the 33rd Street store share a community of interest distinguishable from the interests of the Employer's other employees and thus constitute an appropriate unit. We disagree. In A. Harris Co., 116 NLRB 1628 (1956), the Board set forth three conditions under which it would find separate warehouse units, as opposed to storewide units, appropriate in the retail industry: (1) the warehouse operation must-be geographical- ly separated from the retail store operations; (2) there must be no substantial integration of ware- house employees with other employees in perform- ing their ordinary duties; and (3) the warehouse employees must be supervised separately.5 In Roberds, Inc., 272 NLRB 1318 (1984), the Board stated that "[i]n our view the A. Harris con- ditions have continuing viability and we shall con- tinue to adhere to them."6 Analyzing this case under A Harris, we find none of its three,require- ments are met. - The Board in Roberds rejected a ,broad interpre- tation of geographic separation as meaning separate primary work areas within a,common facility, and - 5 In Sears Roebuck & Co, 117 NLRB 133 (1957), the Board stated that separate warehouse units in the retail store industry will be found appro- priate only when all three A Harris conditions are met 6 Accord Salem Furniture, 272 NLRB 1321 (1984), NAPA Columbus Parts Co, 269 NLRB 1052 (1984) stated that to be geographically separated within the meaning of A. Harris, warehouse employees must' perform substantially all their work tasks in buildings-- geographically removed from those in which the bulk of the other employees work.? In the instant case , the Employer's 33rd Street store consists of three floors. Although much of the op- erations employees' work is performed in the.base- ment, operations employees spend a, substantial amount of time on the street level. For example, order pickers, or pullers, spend more than a half hour each day -pulling stock to fill orders from both the basement and the street level, including the sales floor, where items such as pressure graph- ics materials are stored. They also occasionally go to the third floor to clarify orders. Inventory em- ployees spend about 1 to 2 hours each day working on the sales floor because many of the items are stored only in that area. The stock person works half his time in the basement and half on the street level sales floor, where, he organizes and fills in stock. Receivers occasionally go to the sales floor to deliver merchandise from the loading dock. The porter spends time in all, areas -performing mainte- nance functions. Drivers also occasionally go to the-main store to obtain cash from the store manag- er. Warehouse clericals work both in the basement and the third floor. There was -also , evidence that sales clerks, ex- cluded from the unit the Regional Director found appropriate, spend time in the basement pulling merchandise stored in the basement to fill customer orders or to fill in depleted stock on the retail sales floor. They also go to the basement to expedite customer pickup orders. Telephone sales employees also occasionally go to the basement to clarify orders. Outside sales employees also visit the base- ment about three times a week. Sales employees use the soda machine, coffee dispenser, lockers, and lounge located in the basement. The operations area is not geographically sepa- rate from the retail sales area within the meaning of A. Harris and Roberds. The operations area is not in a geographically distinct building as Roberds requires. The sales and operations departments are located in a- common facility. There is evidence that operations employees perform their job duties in other areas of the store and other employees perform some of their duties in the operations area. There is substantial integration of operations em- ployees with other employees in performing their duties.-, Operations. employees and sales employees have a great deal of interaction and communication both in person, as described above, and by tele- Roberds at 1319 1296 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD phone. Inventory clerks answer sales employees' questions concerning the availability and location of stock. Telephone sales employees call operations employees to ask about stock status. Pickers work with sales clerks concerning the location of mer- chandise. Operations employees assist outside sales representatives in pulling stock from the basement to use as samples or to give to customers. The stock person answers questions from sales clerks about the availability of merchandise. Shipping em- ployees discuss delivery scheduling with sales em- ployees. Operations employees assist the retail sales clerks by giving information about the arrival of merchandise. Operations and sales employees occasionally per- form each other's functions. For example, the stock person acts as, a sales person at least onc' a week, discussing merchandise with customers when the sales clerks are busy . Retail sales clerks act as pick- ers, pulling merchandise to fill customer orders, and operations employees assist in locating mer- chandise. According to the' Employer's general manager, "[e]verybody can do any job. They can go down and pull stock. They can go fill . orders." One of the sales clerks 'occasionally drives a truck. There were also five instances between, February 1981 and the hearing in October 1981 of employees transferring between operations and sales. General Manager Levy testified that he holds weekly meetings to discuss personnel matters with a random selection of operations and sales employ- ees from both the 33rd Street and 54th Street stores. The starting wage rate for telephone sales, retail sales, and most, of the operations employees is approximately the same. All employees receive the same benefits, such as holidays, vacations, life in- surance, and medical and dental plans. All employ- ees eat lunch and take breaks in the same lounge area in the basement. The record establishes substantial interaction among employees in different departments. It ap- pears that the Employer's operation is highly inte- grated, with employees in different departments as- sisting each other and overlapping in their job functions in order to serve the customers. Thus, the A. Harris condition requiring no substantial integra- tion has not been met in the instant case. Although the operations employees at 33rd Street are supervised by an operations manager, that operations manager , also supervises the proce- dural work of the operations employees at 54th Street. As the petitioned-for unit does not include the 54th Street operations employees, the A. Harris separate supervision requirement has also not been satisfied. Because none of A. Harris conditions for a sepa- rate warehouse-type unit in the retail industry have been met in the instant case , we conclude that the petitioned-for unit consisting only of operations employees is inappropriate. The operations depart- ment employees do not have a community of inter- est sufficiently distinct from other employees to warrant a separate operations unit. 2. The Regional Director also concluded that the evidence was' insufficient to overcome the pre- sumptive appropriateness of a single store unit, de- spite finding that the benefits for all employees are centrally determined and identical and wage rates are similar. He found no evidence of interchange between the operations employees at 33rd Street and those at 54th Street, and that interaction was limited to the shipping of items from 33rd Street to 54th Street. Although recognizing that the oper- ations manager supervises the two groups, the Re- gional Director found that the 54th Street oper- ations employees are also supervised by the 54th Street store manager. The Employer argues that a single store unit lim- ited to employees at the 33rd Street store is inap- propriate, because the 33rd Street store has no in- dependent identity and is completely integrated with the 54th Street store. We find merit in the Employer's contention. The Employer's general manager Henry Levy oversees the operation of both stores. All supervi- sory personnel of both stores report to him. Levy spends 2 to 3 mornings a week at the 54th Street store, and the remainder of his time at 33rd Street. Levy meets with the supervisors from both stores weekly. Levy meets with groups of employees from both stores to discuss personnel procedures. He also re- solves employee grievances at both stores. Levy determines the number of employees at each store in conjunction with the Woburn personnel depart- ment, after consultation with the store managers. Levy interviews all applicants for positions at both stores. The items the two stores sell are all shipped to 33rd Street from the parent corporation in Woburn. The 33rd Street employees unload the goods and reload the 54th Street items on a van which a 33rd Street driver drives to 54th Street: There the driver and 54th Street operations em- ployees unload the merchandise and reload other merchandise to be returned to 33rd Street or to Woburn. Drivers from 33rd Street also deliver bulk merchandise and mail to 54th Street. Employees from each store have frequent tele- phone, contact in performing their duties. For ex- ample, telephone sales employees at 33rd Street CHARRETTE DRAFTING SUPPLIES 1297 handle telephone orders for 54th Street. They then call 54th Street sales clerks or operations employ- ees to determine if an item is in stock at 54th Street. Sales clerks at both stores call each other to determine stock status. Retail sales clerks at 54th Street call -33rd Street 'operations employees to -de- termine delivery feasibility. Store managers have no authority to eliminate merchandise from inventory and must maintain stock within the minimum and maximum levels set at Woburn. The store manager cannot independent- ly increase the work force at his store, and pricing is standard throughout the Company. The hours of operation are set by the Company, as are the em- ployees benefits policies. As discussed above, the operations manager su- pervises the operations employees at both stores. The operations manager supervises the procedural work of the 54th Street operations employees, while the 54th Street store manager handles the ad- ministrative aspect. The shipping supervisor at 33rd Street has directed sales employees at 54th Street to check with him before promising a delivery time, and to write specific delivery information on the order form. Between March and September 1981, six em- ployees transferred from 54th Street to 33rd Street, and between March and October 1981, five em- ployees transferred from 33rd Street to 54th Street. Employees from each store may be temporarily assigned to the other store when needed. For ex- ample, an operations employee from 33rd Street was sent to work at 54th Street when a receiving clerk was on vacation. Employees from 33rd Street worked at 54th Street setting up shelves. Accord- ing to Levy, "[o]ur employees are free to go from one facility to another as we direct them." The employees at 33rd Street and 54th Street do the same work and receive identical wages and benefits. - - When making a unit determination in a multifaci- lity operation in the retail industry, the Board finds a single-facility unit presumptively appropriate.8 This presumption, however, may be overcome by a showing of substantial functional integration which negates the separate identity of the single -facility unit, based on an examination of factors such as central control over daily operations and labor re- lations, the employees ' skills and functions, work- ing conditions , employee interchange , and geo- graphic proximity of the facilities.9 We find, based on the above facts, that the single-facility presumption has been rebutted in the instant case. There is a high degree of functional integration between the two facilities; the employ- ees interact with each other in performing their duties; the employees have the same skills and per- form identical functions under similar working con- ditions; they receive identical wages and benefits; there is,some interchange of personnel and transfer between the two facilities; and the two facilities are only about 1 mile apart. Furthermore, General Manager Levy oversees both facilities, and the wages, benefits, hours of store operation, and stock levels are centrally controlled. We therefore con- clude, for the additional reason that the single-store presumption has been rebutted, that the petitioned- for unit is inappropriate. - We shall therefore vacate the election conducted 8 March 1984, and dismiss the petition. ORDER The election conducted 8 March 1984 is vacated. The petition is dismissed. 8 Haag Drug Co, 169 NLRB 877 (1968) e See NAPA Columbus Parts Co, 269 NLRB at 1054, Orkin Extermi- nating Co , 258 NLRB 773 (1981)