Budget Ranch Market

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Sep 29, 1964

148 N.L.R.B. 1469 (N.L.R.B. 1964)

BUDGET RANCH MARKET 1469
customarily posted . Reasonable steps shall be taken to insure that said notices are
not altered, defaced, or covered by any other material.
(b) Notify the Regional Director for Region 26, in writing, within 20 days from
the receipt of this Decision, what steps Respondent has taken to comply herewith.12
It is further recommended that the election conducted in the appropriate unit of
Respondent's employees on January 21, 1964, be set aside and a new election directed
at an appropriate time.
It is further recommended that the complaint be dismissed insofar as it alleges vio-
lations of the Act not specifically found herein.
la In the event that this Recommended Order be adopted by the Board, this provision
shall be modified to read: "Notify said Regional Director, in writing, within 10 days from
rhn date of this Order, what steps the Respondent has taken to comply herewith."
APPENDIX
NOTICE TO ALL EMPLOYEES
Pursuant to the Recommended Order of a Trial Examiner of the National Labor
Relations Board, and in order to effectuate the policies of the National Labor Rela-
tions Act, as amended, you are notified that:
WE WILL NOT create an impression among employees that their union activities
are under surveillance; threaten employees that the job performance of union
employees will be more strictly evaluated than nonunion employees; threaten
employees with discharge or other reprisals if they support or assist the union;
threaten employees that the plant will be closed and their jobs will be lost if
they vote for or assist the union; interrogate employees in a manner constituting
interference , restraint , or coercion ; or promulgate and maintain any unlawful
rule concerning solicitation.
WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner interfere with, restrain, or coerce
our employees in the exercise of their rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act.
CRIBBEN AND SEXTON COMPANY, D/B/A WASTE
KING-UNIVERSAL PRODUCTS,
Employer.
Dated------------------- By-------------------------------------------(Representative ) ( Title)
This notice must remain posted for 60 consecutive days from the date of posting,
and must not be altered, defaced, or covered by any other material.
Employees may communicate directly with the Board's Regional Office, 746 Fed-
eral Office Building, 167 North Main Street, Memphis, Tennessee, Telephone No.
534-3161, if they have any question concerning this notice or compliance with its
provisions.
Budget Ranch Market, Petitioner and Dalmar Ranch Market,
Petitioner and Retail Clerks Union Local #1428, AFL-CIO.
Cases Nos. f21-RM-1021 and 21-RM-1022. September 29, 196 .
DECISION, DIRECTION OF ELECTION, AND ORDER
Upon petitions duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a hearing was held before Hearing Officer Max Stein-
feld. 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 National Labor
Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with
these cases to a three-member panel [Chairman McCulloch, and
Members Leedom and Jenkins].
148 NLRB No. 144.
1470 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Upon the entire record in these cases, the Board finds :
1. It is conceded, and we find, that Budget Ranch Market is en-
gaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act and that it will
effectuate the purposes of the Act to assert jurisdiction with respect
to its operations.
The Union contends however, that the operations of Dalmar Ranch
Market do not meet the Board's discretionary jurisdictional require-
ment for the retail industry of gross volume of $500,000 per year.
The Employers contend that they constitute a partnership whose
total receipts should be considered as an entity, but that in any event
Dalmar's gross receipts are sufficient. We agree with the Union that
there is no partnership here but only a loose arrangement for co-
operation in certain aspects of business. We note particularly that
no partnership income tax returns were filed, nor do any other re-
quired tax forms reflect the existence of the alleged partnership. We
agree with the Union that the operations of Dalmar, considered
alone, are insufficient to warrant the assertion of jurisdiction. The
Union would exclude from Dalmar's gross receipts which would, on
the basis of Dalmar's contentions, amount to $504,343.41, the amount
of $219,244.10, which is not derived from the retail sale of goods
owned by Dalmar, but rather represents the face value of money
orders issued on behalf of a bank. We agree. See James A. Deveney,
d/b/a Devco Diamond Rings, 146 NLRB 556. The Union would also
exclude the gross income of a leased meat department, totalling
$88,854.21, from which Dalmar received $6,219.79. Whether or not
the meat department revenue is to be included and added to Dalmar's
other sales of $278,879.52, it is clear that the total is insufficient to
meet our retail standard. Accordingly we shall dismiss the petition
filed by Dalmar.
2. The labor organization involved has presented to Budget Ranch
Market a claim to represent certain employees.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of certain employees of Budget Ranch Market within the mean-
ing of Sections 9(c) (1) and 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The following employees constitute a unit appropriate for the
purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b)
of the Act:'
All employees of Budget Ranch Market, Fifth Avenue, Pomona,
California, excluding office clerical employees, meat department em-
ployees, bakery employees, restaurant employees, cafe employees,
store managers, guards, professional employees, and supervisors, as
defined in the Act.
' This unit , the Union agrees, is appropriate.
METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY 1471
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
[The Board dismissed the petition filed by Dalmar Ranch Market.]
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and Insurance Workers
International Union , AFL-CIO. Case No. 13-CA-6367. Sep-
tember 30, 1964
DECISION AND ORDER
On July 21, 1964, Trial Examiner William F. Scharnikow issued
his Trial Examiner's Decision in the above-entitled proceeding, find-
ing that the Respondent had engaged in and was engaging in certain
unfair labor practices and recommending that it cease and desist
therefrom and take certain affirmative action, as set forth in the
attached Trial Examiner's Decision. Thereafter, the Respondent
filed exceptions to the Trial Examiner's Decision.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the National Labor
Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with
this case to a three-member panel [Chairman McCulloch and Mem-
bers Leedom and Brown].
The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner made
at the hearing and finds that no prejudicial error was committed.
The rulings are hereby affirmed. The Board has considered the In-
termediate Report and the entire record in the case, including the
Respondent's exceptions, and hereby adopts the Trial Examiner's
findings, conclusions, and recommendations.
ORDER
Pursuant to Section 10(c) of the National Labor Relations Act
the Board adopts as its order the Recommended Order of the Trial
Examiner, with the following modifications :
1. Add the following paragraph 1(b) to the Recommended Order :
"1 (b) Interfering with the efforts of the Insurance Workers Inter-
national Union, AFL-CIO, to negotiate for or represent the employ-
ees in the said appropriate unit as the exclusive bargaining agent."
2. Add the following as the third indented paragraph of the notice
in the Appendix to the Trial Examiner's Decision.
WE WILL NOT interfere with the efforts of the Insurance Work-
ers International Union, AFL-CIO, to negotiate for or represent
as exclusive bargaining agent the employees in the bargaining
unit described above.
148 NLRB No. 145.