Crockett & Jones

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 22, 1950

88 N.L.R.B. 1360 (N.L.R.B. 1950)

In the Matter of WALTER A. JONES &.VERNON W. CROCKETT D/B/A
CROCKETT & JONES, EMPLOYEE and SEAFOOD WORKERS LOCAL UNION
#462 AMALGAMATED MEAT CUTTERS &, BUTCHER WORKMEN OF NORTH
AMERICA, AFL, PETITIONER
Case No. 5-RC-41-53.-Decided March. 22,1950
DECISION
AND
ORDER
Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before Charles Hewes,
hearing officer. 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
this case to a three-member panel [Chairman Herzog and Members
Houston and Murdock].
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
The Employer is a partnership engaged in shucking, packing, and
selling oysters at its Irvington, Virginia, plant. The Employer pur-
chases oysters in their natural state from oystermen, who take the
oysters'exclusively from the waters of Virginia.
During 1949, the Employer's purchases of raw materials, supplies,
and equipment totaled approximately $30,000, of which $400 repre-
sented purchases from points outside the State. During the same
period, the Employer's gross sales, all made within the State, exceeded
$50,000, of which approximately 40 percent, or $20,000, represented
sales to local purchasers who, in turn, resold the bulk of their products
to customers outside. the State:
The Employer contends that it is not engaged in commerce within
the meaning of the Act. While we do not find that the operations of
the Employer are unrelated to commerce, we are of the opinion that
the enterprise is essentially local and the effect of such operations on
interstate commerce is so insubstantial that to assert jurisdiction in
this case would not effectuate the policies of the Act.,, Accordingly,
we shall dismiss the petition.
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition herein be , and it hereby is,
dismissed.
I Oscar Ashburn & Son, 88 NLRB 266; and cases cited therein.
88 NLRB No. 249.
1360