Claffey's Beauty Shoppes

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Oct 28, 1954

110 N.L.R.B. 620 (N.L.R.B. 1954)

620 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
material issues affecting the results of the election and recommended
that the objections be overruled and that the results of the election
be certified . Thereafter, the Petitioner filed timely exceptions to the
Regional Director 's report.
We have considered the Petitioner's objections and exceptions, the
Regional Director 's report, and the entire record in the case, and
find that the exceptions do not raise substantial and material issues
with respect to the election . Accordingly , for the reasons stated by
the Regional Director in his report , we hereby overrule the objections.2
As the Petitioner failed to receive a majority of the valid ballots
cast , we shall certify the results of the election.
[The Board certified that a majority of the valid ballots was not
cast for the Petitioner , Office Employees International Union, Local
No. 8, AFL, and that the Petitioner is not the exclusive represeritba=
tive of the employees employed at the Employer 's Seattle, Washington,
establishment in the unit heretofore found by the Board to be
appropriate.]
MEMBER PETERSON took no part in the consideration of the above
Supplemental Decision and Certification of Results of Election.
2 Cf. F 7P Woolworth Co ,109 NLRB 1446.
SHIRLEY D. CLAFFEY & FLORENCE CLAFFEY, CO -PARTNERS D/B/A CLAF-
FEY'S BEAUTY SHOPPES and BARBERS AND BEAUTY CULTURISTS UNION
OF AMERICA, LOCAL 7, CIO, PETITIONER. Case No. 2-RC-6804. Oc-
tober 28, 1954
Decision and Order
Upon a petition duly filed, under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a hearing was held before Max Dauber, hearing officer.
The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from preju-
dicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
The Employer, with its principal office and warehouse at Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania, operates 13 beauty shops, of which 4 are located in
Pittsburgh and 1 shop each in Homestead, Braddock, E. Pittsburgh,
Wilkenburg, and York, Pennsylvania, and in Schenectady, Albany,
Troy, and Jamaica, New York.
During 1953, the Employer purchased supplies for use in its busi-
ness valued in excess of $34,500, of which, approximately $4,600 repre-
sents purchases made for its Jamaica store, employees of which are
concerned in the instant petition. Of the total purchases of,supplies
110 NLRB No. 97.
OSWEGO FALLS CORP. 621
and equipment for all stores, purchases valued at approximately $16,-
500 originated in the State of New York, and purchases valued at
approximately $18,100 originated outside the State of New York.
Of the latter, purchases valued at approximately $9,000 originated
outside the State of Pennsylvania. Shipments to all the Employer's
stores are made directly by suppliers or by the Employer from its
Pittsburgh warehouse.
During 1953, the Employer received $563,000 in gross revenue from
services performed at all its stores. From the Jamaica store during
that period, the Employer received $93,000 in gross revenue. The
Employer sells no products that cross State lines.
Neither the Employer's multistate chain of service establishments
nor the operations of its Jamaica store covered in this case meet the
jurisdictional standards established in our recent decision of Hogue
and Knott Supermarkets.' Under these circumstances, and for the
reasons set forth in the cited case , we dismiss the instant petition.
[The Board dismissed the petition.]
1 110 NLRB No. 68.
OSWEGO FALLS CORP.' and SYRACUSE PHOTO ENGRAVERS UNION,
LOCAL 20, INTERNATIONAL UNION OF PHOTO ENGRAVERS OF NORTH
AMERICA, AFL, PETITIONER
OSWEGO FALLS CORP. and GEORGE TROMBLAY, PETITIONER and FULTON
OswEGo-FALLS SEALRIGHT LOCAL No. 54, INT'L. BRO. OF PULP,
SULPHITE & PAPER MILL WORKERS, AFL. Cases Nos. 3-PC-1398
and 3-RD-92. October 28,1954
Decision and Order
Upon petitions duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a consolidated 2 hearing was held before John W.
Irving, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the
hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
T'pon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the Act.
2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent certain em-
ployees of the Employer.
i The name of the Employer appears as amended at the hearing.
2 As consolidation is a matter for administrative discretion, we find no merit to the
contention of the Employer and Union that the proceedings herein were improperly con-
solidated . Pacific Metals Company, Ltd., 91 NLRB 696 , footnote 2; Pacific Maritime
Association, 100 NLRB 1259 , footnote 7.
110 NLRB No. 99.