Bauer Lumber Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 31, 1950

90 N.L.R.B. 11 (N.L.R.B. 1950)

In the Matter of BAUER LUMBER COMPANY, EMPLOYER and MILLMEN'S
.LOCAL No. 2020, UNITED BROTHERHOOD OF CARPENTERS AND JOINERS
OF AMERICA, A. F. of L., PETITIONER
Case No. 21-RC-1174.-Decided May 31, 1950
DECISION AND ORDER
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a hearing was held before Ben Grodsky, hearing officer.
The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from preju-
dicial 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 Reynolds and Styles].
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The labor organization involved claims to represent employees
of the Employer.
2. 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 Employer is a partnership consisting of E. L. Bauer and A. L.
Bauer, engaged in the retail lumber business, under the name of
Bauer Lumber Company, at Compton and Carlsbad, California.
During the 12-month- period ending December 30, 1949, the Em-
ployer's total purchases consisting of lumber, hardware, and allied
building materials approximated $175,000. Purchases outside the
State of California amounted to $17,500, and materials costing $78,750
were bought locally, but originated outside the State. During the
same period, the Employer's sales amounted to $200,000. All were
made locally, and only 5 percent of these were to customers selling a
substantial amount of their products outside the State.
Although the operations of the Employer are not wholly unrelated
to commerce, they are essentially local in character and we believe
that it will not effectuate the policies of the Act to assert jurisdiction
in this case?
'Las Vegas Lumber Company, 88 NLRB 9; Everett Stein Company, 89 NLRB 496;
Hawkeye Lumber Company, 89 NLRB 1515. Our decision as to the local character of
90 NLRB No. 18.
11
12 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Accordingly, we shall dismiss the petition.
ORDER
. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition filed in the instant proceeding
be, and it hereby is, dismissed.
MEMBER REYNOLDS, dissenting :
For reasons set forth in the dissenting opinion in Cordele Sash,
Door & Lumber Company, 79 NLRB 578, I would assert jurisdiction
in this proceeding.
the Employer ' s business is based on its total operations. It may be noted , however, that
at its Carlsbad lumberyard , whose employees are the only ones Petitioner seeks to repre-
sent, the amount of materials purchased directly , or originating, outside the State, was
even less than for the total operation.