Car City, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Nov 14, 1956

116 N.L.R.B. 1571 (N.L.R.B. 1956)

CAR CITY, INC. 1571
Car City, Inc.' and Retail Clerks International Association, Local
No. 692, AFL-CIO, Petitioner . Case No. 5-R.C-2004. November
14, 1956
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Robert W. Knadler,
hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are
free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. The Employer's
motions to dismiss the petition are denied for the reasons indicated
below.
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. Prior to May 28, 1956, Worden-Young, Inc., herein called
Worden, was engaged in the sale of Plymouth and Dodge automobiles
in Baltimore, Maryland, under a franchise from Chrysler Corpora-
tion. During the year 1955, Worden's purchases of such automobiles
from outside the State amounted to $1,698,984.86. On or about May 26,
1956, Worden surrendered its franchise to Chrysler Corporation. On
May 28, 1956, a new franchise was issued to the Employer to sell the
same automobiles. On that same date, Worden sold to the Employer
its new car stock of 153 cars, its parts and accessories inventory, its
equipment, and its furniture and fixtures, and also leased its building
to the Employer. On the same date, the Employer commenced opera-
tions at the same location, with 37 of the 38 employees previously
employed by Worden. During the month of June 1956, the Em-
ployer sold 58 of the 153 cars, which 58 cars cost the Employer over
$100,000.
In view of the immediate issuance of a new franchise to the Em-
ployer when Worden surrendered its franchise, the fact that there was
no interruption in business,' the Employer's purchase of Worden's
inventories, equipment, and furniture and fixtures, and the fact that
the Employer commenced similar operations at the same location with
almost all of the same employees, it appears that for all practical
purposes the Employer is a successor of Worden. Moreover, it is a
reasonable assumption that the business done by the Employer, in-
cluding its out-of-State purchases, will be substantially equivalent
to that done by Worden, as is indicated by the Employer's sales dur-
ing its first month in business. Accordingly, as Worden's direct in-
, flow was nearly $1,700,000 a year, and it is reasonable to assume that
the Employer's direct inflow during its first year will be at least
$1,000,000, we shall assert jurisdiction over the Employer 3
2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain em-
ployees of the Employer. In view of our unit finding herein, we
1 The name of the Employer appears as amended at the hearing.
' worden ceased doing business at the close of business on Saturday,'May 26, and the
Employer commenced doing business on Monday morning, May 28.
' See Wilson - Oldsmobsle, 110 NLRB 534; Miller Container Corporation , 115 NLRB 509.
116 NLRB No. 225.
1572 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
reject the Employer's contention that the Petitioner's showing of
'interest is insufficient.
3. A 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.
4. The Petitioner seeks a unit of new and used automobile sales-
men, excluding all other employees. The Employer contends that
only a unit of all its employees is appropriate, on the grounds that
it is a comparatively small integrated operation and all employees
are intimately connected with its sales operation.
In support of its contention, the Employer points to the fact that
all employees are urged to secure prospective purchasers of cars and
receive bonuses for securing such prospects, and special bonuses are
paid to service and parts employees for selling additional service and
parts. The Employer also contends that the duties of new-car and
used-car "get-ready" men, and those clerks handling new- and used-
car titles, applications, warranties, etc., are all an intimate part of its
sales operation. The record shows, however, that the Employer con-
ducts a typical retail automobile operation, consisting of salesmen,
office clerical employees, mechanics, service salesmen, and parts and,
accessories salesmen, all of whom perform the usual duties of such
employees. Moreover, the salesmen sought herein work solely on
commission unlike any other employees, have different hours of work,
use demonstrator cars, and attend sales meetings not attended by any
other employees. We find that all new- and used-car salesmen 4 at
the Employer's Baltimore, Maryland, establishment, excluding all
other employees, and supervisors as defined in the Act, constitute a
unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the
meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.'
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
4 The record does not show whether one part-time used-car salesman is a regular part-
time employee. If he is a regular part -time employee , this employee is included in the
unit ; otherwise , he is excluded.
5 See Weaver-Beatty Motor Co., 112 NLRB 60.
Windolph Pontiac, Inc. and Automotive, Garage & Service Sta-
tion Employees , Local 255, International Brotherhood of Team-
sters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America,
AFL-CIO, Petitioner. Case No. 36-RC-1219. November 14,1956
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND CERTIFICATION OF
RESULTS OF ELECTION
On September 19, 1956, pursuant to a Decision and Direction of
Election issued herein on September 7,1956,' the Regional Director for
I Not reported in printed volumes of Board Decisions and Orders.
116 NLRB No. 223.