1025-45 Associates

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Sep 17, 1991

304 N.L.R.B. 1004 (N.L.R.B. 1991)

1004
304 NLRB No. 128
DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
1 See, e.g., International Bureau for Protection & Investigation, 236 NLRB
1356 (1978), and cases cited there.
1025-45 Associates and Hagar Management Co., Pe-
titioners and Local 32B-32J, Service Employees
International Union, S.E.I.U. Union. Case AO–
289
September 17, 1991
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR
ADVISORY OPINION
BY CHAIRMAN STEPHENS AND MEMBERS
DEVANEY AND OVIATT
Pursuant to Sections 102.98(a) and 102.99 of the
National Labor Relations Board’s Rules and Regula-
tions, on July 18, 1991, 1025-45 Associates and Hagar
Management Co. (Petitioners) filed a petition for an
Advisory Opinion as to whether the Board would as-
sert jurisdiction over their operations.
In pertinent part, the petition alleges as follows:
1. An unfair labor practice proceeding, Case SU–
57941, is currently pending before the New York State
Labor Relations Board (SLRB) in which Local 32B–
32J, Service Employees International Union, S.E.I.U.
(the Union) is alleging that Petitioner Associates dis-
charged two employees because of their membership in
and activities on behalf of the Union.
2. Petitioner Hagar is a corporation engaged in, inter
alia, the business of performing the services of a man-
aging agent for residential apartment buildings in the
City of New York, including a building known as
1025-45 St. Johns Place, Brooklyn, New York (the
subject building). Petitioner Hagar is a joint employer
with the owners of the apartment buildings, and is the
joint employer along with Petitioner Associates of the
employees at the subject building.
3. During the 12 months preceding the filing of the
instant petition, the gross rent revenues of the apart-
ment buildings managed by Petitioner Hagar was in
excess of $500,000. During the same period, Hagar
purchased over $50,000 worth of goods, supplies, com-
modities, and services which originated outside the
State of New York.
4. The Union neither admits nor denies the afore-
mentioned commerce data, and the SLRB has not
made any findings in that respect.
Following the filing of the instant petition for Advi-
sory Opinion, on August 5, 1991, the Regional Direc-
tor for Region 29 of the National Labor Relations
Board advised the Board that a representation petition
had recently been filed by another union, Factory and
Building Employees Union, Local 187, seeking to rep-
resent the employees at the subject building. There-
after, on August 25, 1991, the Regional Director also
filed a motion to intervene in the instant Advisory
Opinion proceeding. The Regional Director advised the
Board in its motion that he had recently issued an un-
fair labor practice complaint against Petitioners Hagar
and Associates at the subject building, alleging that
they had violated Section 8(a)(1) and (3) of the Act in
various respects.
Having duly considered the matter, we grant the Re-
gional Director’s motion to intervene and find that the
petition for Advisory Opinion should be denied. The
Board’s longstanding policy, based on sound principles
of administrative efficiency and economy, is that a pe-
tition for advisory opinion will not be entertained
where, as here, a statutory representation and/or unfair
labor practice proceeding is pending in which the juris-
dictional question may be addressed.1 Accordingly, as
there is no indication in the instant proceeding that a
more expeditious jurisdictional determination is need-
ed, we deny the petition for Advisory Opinion.