Gulf States Optical Laboratories

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Feb 9, 1949

81 N.L.R.B. 510 (N.L.R.B. 1949)

In the Matter of ADOLPH C. HuBER, D/B/A GULF STATES OPTICAL
LABORATORIES,l EMPLOYER and OPTICAL AND INSTRUMENT WORKERS
ORGANIZING COMMITTEE, CIO, PETITIONER
Case No. 15-RC-95.-Decided February 9, 1949
DECISION
AND
ORDER
Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before a hearing
officer of the National Labor Relations Board. 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-man panel consisting of the undersigned Board
Members.*
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the National Labor Relations Act.
2. The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress
of Industrial Organizations, claiming to represent employees of the
Employer.
The Petitioner herein is the same petitioner involved in Matter of
American Optical Company.2 Because the Congress of Industrial Or-
ganizations is not in compliance with Section 9 (f), (g), and (h) of the
Act, and in accordance with the principle announced in the American
Optical case, we find that the Board lacks the power to investigate the
question concerning representation raised herein by the Petitioner.3
Accordingly, we shall dismiss the petition.
ORDER
IT Is HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for the investigation of rep-
resentatives of employees of Adolph C. Huber, d/b/a Gulf States
Optical Laboratories, New Orleans, Louisiana, filed by Optical and
Instrument Workers Organizing Committee, CIO, be, and it hereby
is, dismissed.
1 The Board , on its own motion, hereby amends the caption in order to reflect a more
accurate description of the Employer.
* Houston, Reynolds , and Murdock.
2 81 N. L. R. B. 453.
8 Although Member Houston dissented in the American Optical case, he considers him-
self bound by the decision of the majority in that case.
81 N. L. R. B., No. 94.
510