Clauson's Garage Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Dec 6, 1954

110 N.L.R.B. 1178 (N.L.R.B. 1954)

1178 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
from both groups all management personnel, office clerical workers,
guards, foremen, assistant foremen, and all other supervisors as defined
in the Act: Group (a) : All production and maintenance employees
(excluding the plant clerical employees in voting group (b) ). Group
(b) : All plant clerical employees (excluding those plant clericals,
if any, represented in the past as a part of the established production
and maintenance unit, voting group (a) ).
If a majority of the employees in voting group (b) vote against
both the Petitioner and Intervenor, they will be taken to have indi-
cated their desire to remain outside the existing unit, and the Re-
gional Director will issue a certificate of results of election to that
effect. If under these circumstances, the employees in voting group
(a) also vote for no union the Regional Director will issue a certifi-
cate of results of election to that effect. However, if, under these cir-
cumstances, the majority of the employees in voting group (a) vote
for either the Petitioner or Intervenor, the Regional Director is in-
structed to issue a certification of representatives to such union for a
production and maintenance unit, excluding the employees in voting
group (b), which unit the Board, under the circumstances, finds to
be appropriate for purposes of collective bargaining.
If, however, a majority of the employees in voting group (b) cast
their ballots for the Petitioner or Intervenor, they will be taken to
have indicated their desire to constitute a part of the existing produc-
tion and maintenance unit and will appropriately be included in the
same unit with the employees in voting group (a) and their votes will
be pooled with those in voting group (a). If a majority of the em-
ployees in the pooled voting group vote for either the Petitioner or the
Intervenor, the Regional Director conducting the elections is in-
structed to issue a certification of representatives to the labor organi-
zation selected by the majority in the pooled group, which the Board,
under such circumstances, finds to be a single unit appropriate for pur-
poses of collective bargaining. However, if a majority of employees
in the pooled group vote for no union, the Regional Director will issue
a certificate of results of elections to that effect.
[Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication.]
CLAusoN's GARAGE COMPANY and LOCAL 841, INTERNATIONAL BROTH-
ERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS , CHAUFFEURS , WAREHOUSEMEN & HELPERS OF
AMERICA , AFL, LODGE 1898 OF DISTRICT 38, INTERNATIONAL Asso-
CIATION OF MACHINISTS , AFL. Case No. 1-CA-1682. December 6,
1954
Decision and Order
On May 27, 1954, Trial Examiner Arthur E. Reyman, issued his
Intermediate Report in the above-entitled proceeding, finding that the
110 NLRB No. 184.
WAGNER TRANSPORTATION COMPANY 1179
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. Thereafter, the Respondent filed ex-
ceptions to the Intermediate Report and a supporting brief.
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
Intermediate Report, the exceptions and brief, and the entire record
in the case, and finds merit in the Respondent's exceptions.
In accordance with the Board's previous determination in the
representation case in which the Union was certified,' the Trial
Examiner recommended that the Board should assert jurisdiction
herein. The Respondent contends, among other things, that the Board
should decline jurisdiction because it is purely a local operation.
In the representation case, a majority of the Board followed the
then prevailing policy and assumed jurisdiction, over the Respond-
ent as a franchised Plymouth and Dodge automobile dealer. Recently,
the Board has considered this question and concluded that it will not
effectuate the policies of the Act to assert jurisdiction over an auto-
mobile dealer solely because it operates under a franchise from a
national enterprise but that it will take jurisdiction if the automobile
dealer satisfies some other criterion of the Board's revised jurisdic-
tional plan.2 As the Respondent is an independent retail establishment
which neither makes direct out-of-State sales in the amount of
$100,000 per year, nor purchases materials in the amount of $1,000,000
a year coming directly from outside the State or in the amount of
$2,000,000 coming indirectly from outside the State,' we find that it
will not effectuate the policies of the Act to exercise jurisdiction herein.
Accordingly, we will dismiss the complaint in its entirety, without
passing on any other question raised by the Respondent.
[The Board dismissed the complaint.]
Case No. 1-RC-3395, 107 NLRB 1499.
2 William T . Wilson and Mabel J. Wilson, a Partnership, d/b/a Wilson Oldsmobile, 110
NLRB 534. Member Murdock, who dissented in that case , considers himself bound by the
majority 's decision therein.
3 -William T. Wilson and Mabel J. Wilson, a Partnership, d/b/a Wilson Oldsmobile,
supra, and J. R. Knott and Hugh H. Hogue d/b/a Hogue and Knott Supermarkets, 110
NLRB 543. Members Murdock and Peterson, who dissented in the latter case , consider
themselves bound by the majority's decision therein.
ROSCOE WAGNER D/B/A WAGNER TRANSPORTATION COMPANY and GEN-
ERAL TEAMSTERS, WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS UNION, LOCAL No.
483, AFL. Case No. 19-CA-977. December 6, 1954
Decision and Order
On August 23, 1954, Trial Examiner Wallace E. Royster issued his
Intermediate Report in the above-entitled proceeding, finding that the
110 NLRB No. 192.