Coastal Property Services, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 16, 1990

299 N.L.R.B. 106 (N.L.R.B. 1990)

106 DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Coastal Property Services, Inc. and Service Employ-
ees International Union, Local 32B-32J, AFL-
CIO. Case A0-276
July 16, 1990
ADVISORY OPINION
BY CHAIRMAN STEPHENS AND MEMBERS
CRACRAFT, DEVANEY, AND OVIATT
Pursuant to Sections 102 98(a) and 102 99 of the
National Labor Relations Board's Rules and Regu-
lations, on April 30, 1990, Coastal Property Serv-
ices, Inc (the Petitioner) filed a petition for an ad-
visory opinion as to whether the Board would
assert jurisdiction over its operations
In pertinent part the petition alleges as follows
1 There is currently pending before the New
York State Labor Relations Board (the State
Board) a representation petition in which Service
Employees International Union, Local 32B-32J,
AFL-CIO (the Union) seeks to be certified as the
collective-bargaining representative of an employee
of the Petitioner at its 50 Park Terrace West, New
York, New York location'
2 The Petitioner is a cooperative management
company The Petitioner manages and controls the
residential condominium located at 50 Park Ter-
race West, New York, New York, which generates
$1 million or more per year in income The Peti-
tioner's out-of-state purchases exceed $50,000 per
year
1 Although the Petitioner's name in this proceeding differs from that in
the State Board proceeding (Coastal Marimar Corp ), the petition alleges
that both proceedings involve the same parties
3 The Union has neither admitted nor denied
the aforesaid commerce data and the State Board
has made no findings with respect thereto
4 There is no representation or unfair labor
practice proceeding involving the same dispute
currently pending before the Board
Although all parties were served with a copy of
the petition for an advisory opinion, none has filed
a response thereto as permitted by Section 102 101
of the Board's Rules and Regulations Having duly
considered the matter, the Board is of the opinion
that it would assert jurisdiction over the Petitioner
The Board has established a $500,000 discretionary
standard for asserting Junsdiction over condomin-
iums and cooperatives 2 As the Petitioner alleges
that its total annual income from the residential
condominium it manages and controls equals or ex-
ceeds $1 million, the Petitioner clearly satisfies the
Board's discretionary jurisdiction Further, as the
Petitioner's alleged $50,000 per year out-of-state
purchases is more than de minims, it also satisfies
the Board's statutory standard for asserting Juris-
diction
Accordingly, the parties are advised that, based
on the foregoing allegations and assumptions, the
Board would assert jurisdiction over the Petition-
er 3
2 See Imperial House Condominium, 279 NLRB 1225 (1986), affd 831
F 2d 999 (11th Cu. 1987)
'The Board's advisory opinion proceedings under Sec 102 98(a) of the
Board's Rules and Regulations are designed primarily to determine
whether an employer's operations meet the Board's "commerce" stand-
ards for asserting Junsdiction Accordingly, the instant Advisory Opinion
is not Intended to express any view as to whether the Board would certi-
fy the Union as representative of the petitioned-for unit under Sec 9(c)
of the Act See generally Sec 101 40(e) of the Board's Rules and Regula-
tions
299 NLRB No 15