Dorn's House of Miracles, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Oct 3, 1950

91 N.L.R.B. 632 (N.L.R.B. 1950)

In the Matter of DORN's HousE OF MIRACLES, INC.," EMPLOYER and
BROADCAST, TELEVISION RECORDING ENGINEERS, LOCAL UNION 45,
INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, A. F. OF L.,
PETITIONER
Case No. RI-RC-1253-Decided October 3, 1950
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 James W. Cherry, Jr., hear-
ing officer . The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free
from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer operates five stores and a warehouse in and around
Los Angeles, California. This case involves only the employees at
the warehouse. The Employer sells at retail television sets, radios,
stoves, refrigerators, and other household appliances. During the
year 1949, the Employer's total purchases of merchandise amounted
to more than $2,000,000.
Of this amount, $192,000 represents the value of materials shipped
directly to the Employer from out-of-State sources, and $1,707,000
represents the value of materials shipped from points outside the
State to local distributors and resold by them to the Employer. Dur-
ing the same period, the Employer sold about $3,000,000 worth of
merchandise, all within the State. During the first quarter of 1950
the Employer's total purchases of merchandise amounted to $421,000.
Of this amount, $17,000 represented the value of materials shipped
to the Employer directly from out-of-State sources, and $353,000
represented the value of materials shipped from points outside the
State to local distributors and resold by them to the Employer. Dur-
ing the first quarter of 1950, the Employer's total sales approximated
$700,000, all of which were made locally.
On these facts, we find that the Employer is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the Act. The Intervenor,2 however, contends
'The Employer's name has been amended to conform with the evidence in the record.
2 New Furniture and Appliance Drivers, Warehousemen & Helpers Local 196, Inter-
national Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers of America,
A. F. of L.
91 NLRB No. 82.
632
DORM ' S HOUSE OF MIRACLES INC. 633
that in the exercise of its discretion, the Board should not assert
jurisdiction over the Employer's operations. The Petitioner and the
Employer, on the other hand, urge the assertion of jurisdiction. In
the past, the Board has in some cases refused to assert jurisdiction
over certain retail enterprises where the sole basis for doing so would
be inflow. After full reexamination and consideration, we have con-
cluded that a labor dispute at an establishment having an indirect
inflow of as much as $1,000,000 annually would tend to have such a
substantial effect upon interstate commerce as to warrant our asser-
tion of jurisdiction on that basis alone in order to effectuate the poli-
cies of the Act. Hereafter, in the interest of certainty, regardless of
the nature of the enterprise, where the indirect inflow totals at least
$1,000,000 annually, we shall treat that factor alone as a sufficient
basis for asserting jurisdiction.
2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent certain em-
ployees of the Employer.
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 consisting of all employees at the
Employer's warehouse engaged in installation and service work in
connection with television receivers, radio, receivers, record players,
and associated apparatus and antennae, including the warehouse jani-
tor and cabinet finisher; but excluding office and clerical employees,
professional employees, guards, and supervisors.
The warehouse contains a stockroom, a service shop, and an office.
Except for the specifically excluded categories, the proposed unit em-
braces all the employees at the warehouse. The Employer objects
only to the inclusion in the proposed unit of the warehouse janitor
and the cabinet finisher. The Intervenor has no objection to the in-
clusion of these two employees.
The cabinet finisher refinishes damaged television and radio cabi-
nets. The warehouse janitor moves television receivers from the ware-
house and helps the installation men to load them on trucks. He also
unloads new merchandise from trucks, moves it into the warehouse
and unpacks it, and moves merchandise from the stockroom in the
warehouse to the service department. In addition, he spends about
half his time in sweeping the warehouse and cleaning the office and
rest rooms. All the employees sought by the Petitioner, including
the warehouse janitor and the cabinet finisher, are under the super-
vision of the service manager.
In addition to the warehouse janitor and cabinet finisher, the pro-
posed unit includes the following :
634 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
The henchmen, who repair television receivers in the service shop
in the warehouse, and who are required to have some experience and
training in electronics; the outside servicemen who repair television
receivers in the customer's home; the antenna installers who install
antennae for television receivers at the customer's home; the installa-
tion helpers, who assist in the installation of television receivers and
antennae; the driver and installation man, who is employed primarily
to drive a truck which delivers television receivers to the Employer's
retail stores, but who also assists occasionally in installation of such
receivers in customers' homes; the stock clerk, who works in a room
adjacent to the service department; the head technician, who assists
in the repair of television receivers and radios.
We find that the interests and duties of the cabinet finisher 'and
warehouse janitor are sufficiently allied with those of the other em-
ployees in the proposed unit to warrant their inclusion.3 For this
reason and because no other union is seeking to represent them in a
different unit, we shall include them in the unit. We find, therefore,
that the unit sought by the Petitioner, as defined above, is appro-
priate for purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of
Section 9 (b) of the Act.4
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this
volume.]
8 See Jordan Marsh Company, 78 NLRB 1031, where the Board found appropriate a unit
of warehouse and service employees.
' See General Electric Supply Corporation, 83 NLRB 1135.